Submission 513
Submission to Senate Community AƯairs Legislation Committee
Re: National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for
Future Generations) Bill 2026 24/05/2026
By
I am writing to express my concern about the changes that have been proposed to the NDIS, particularly regarding cuts to the support for participants.
I strongly believe the currently proposed legislation should not pass. Reform is needed, but this legislation has been rushed and will cause significant harm to vulnerable Australians.
My involvement in the disability sector began when my son, M was diagnosed with ASD at age 1. He is now 20 and has significant and permanent disabilities including ASD-Level 3, Severe Intellectual Disability, and a range of other co-occurring conditions. His complex disability requires individual (1:1) support and supervision (24 hours-7 days per week). He lives in SIL accommodation, but I am still deeply involved in his care as his mother, plan nominee and legal guardian.
Recent irrational bureaucratic cuts and support restrictions by the NDIA have already failed to fund supports he needs for basic safety and survival. I strongly believe that some of these decisions have violated M human rights.
Our experience of the NDIS was very good at the start (in 2015 when he was age 9) but over the past 11 years the NDIA has become more inconsistent, ineƯicient and irrational. The quality of service and support Plans has gradually declined to the point where the program is barely functional, and my son’s support needs simply are not being met.
The NDIS was clearly implemented in a rush with poor planning and a lack of foresight. The large number of participants joining (especially children), the loss of all other disability supports outside the NDIS, the huge increases in the cost of services, and the risks of fraud should have been foreseen and addressed from the start. This has been a major failure of governance.
The proposed changes are also being rushed. The Bill must be changed to protect participant safety, human rights and continuity of essential supports. Correcting this should not punish the people the NDIS was created to support better!
EƯects of proposed “reforms” on M
The proposed funding cuts will make it even harder for M to maintain abasic level of quality of life.
Page 1 of 3
Submission 513
M already does not have enough funds for any appropriate social and community access programs or for the level of capacity building support he needs to access mainstream community programs/locations. This is leading to M experiencing increased restrictive practices, including chemical restraint and confinement at home.
The proposed cuts and restrictions on supports could lead to M beingrelinquished into hospital care because his support providers and family cannot keep him safe. This would have happened already if his providers had not absorbed significant losses by caring for M with no remuneration. Only by finally appealing to the ART have we been able to keep him in his home (temporarily; a final decision has not been made).
It seems likely that if these changes pass, M life will continue to bedisrupted in ways that will cause him significant harm.
Specific problems with the proposed reforms:
Not enough information has been given on the new more restrictive criteria/processes for entry to the NDIS or for assessing needs for a participant’s Plan. There is a total lack of transparency about how “functional capacity’ will be assessed for either of these purposes. The proposal for using one-size-fits-all computerised assessments administered by non-professional workers, is totally inadequate and ludicrous. The lack of quality human involvement in the assessment, planning and implementation processes has been a major flaw in the NDIS almost from the start. In our experience, Local Area Coordinators have been useless and Support Coordinators have been ignored by the NDIA planners. The lack of personal knowledge and monitoring of participants by the NDIA is a systemic problem that has led to neglect, ineƯicient use of funds and fraud. This in turn has led to the current cost blowouts. These reforms will make these problem worse. The idea that a person should not be supported if their disability is “treatable” is absurd and nonsensical. Many disabilities are permanent but also require treatment to keep the person alive and functioning at all! If a person’s disabilities must be “untreatable” does that mean that any person who needs medication or therapy to ameliorate their symptoms is ineligible for support? The plans to cut certain supports across the board is a complete rejection of the individualised-funding approach the NDIS was founded on. The plan to further cut “community and social access” supports is an attempt to return to the bad old days when people with disabilities were segregated away from society.
Page 2 of 3
Submission 513
“Tighter criteria for unscheduled plan reassessments” will lead to participants being unable to access support in times of change or crisis when this is desperately needed. This will lead to increased hospitalisation, homelessness and police involvement/confinement. Tighter criteria for access to the NDIS are needed, but the proposed “Foundational Supports” do not exist and will need significant time to recreate. No one should be denied access to the NDIS under tighter criteria until the proposed “Foundational Supports” for both children and adults are up and running. They can start by providing services to those already excluded from the NDIS. It is not at all clear how people with disability will be consulted about the specific changes as they are developed. It sounds like the ability to appeal or contest bad decisions will be significantly restricted. There is a rumour that it will no longer be possible to access the ART. This is terrifying for people whose lives depend on consistent support.
The bottom line is that disabled people must not be the ones to pay for systemic government failures.
Page 3 of 3