Submission 569
Submission to the Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.
I am writing to express my deep concern about the proposed changes to the NDIS. In the plainest of words: This Bill will kill people.
This Bill will kill people because it ignores the fact that disability exists within a social context. It cannot be removed from that social context. When the Bill states that functional capacity will be assessed “in a context that excludes, as far as possible, the impact of the person’s environmental and personal circumstances.” it ignores the fact that these environmental and personal circumstances are highly relevant to a person’s experience of disability, and moreover, that it is impossible to actually achieve this.
How do you assess the functional capacity of a disabled parent of disabled children outside of their “environmental and personal circumstances”? Caring for disabled children is work that impacts on someone’s own experience of disability – it takes energy and time that are less available to a disabled person than a non-disabled person. It is part of their functional capacity because you cannot remove their experience as a parent from the equation.
How do you assess the functional capacity of someone living below the poverty line outside of their “environmental and personal circumstances”? Living in poverty is often traumatic, impacting hugely on mental health, and exacerbating existing disabilities due to lack of access to healthcare, appropriate housing, and other basic needs. Attempting to assess what might be possible for someone if you removed poverty from the situation risks leaving them without necessary supports. For a large number of disabled people, poverty is mandated – either because despite federal laws, they are discriminated against in hiring decisions, or because there are no accessible jobs available to them, or because they are entirely unable to work due to their disability and are reliant on the Disability Support Pension, and/or because of the huge financial cost of disability that for many is even now not adequately covered by the NDIS.
How do you assess the functional capacity of someone living regionally or rurally, with minimal access to supports, outside of their “environmental and personal circumstances”? For example, a First Nations person living on Country, connected with their traditional culture, but disadvantaged by the lack of support resources available near them, may experience impacts to their functional capacity due to the lack of support resources. It is entirely unreasonable to expect First Nations people living on their traditional lands to give up a connection to their family and culture (including cultural responsibilities) to access care that should be available nationwide to all who need it. These are not just “environmental and personal circumstances” but a core part of someone’s personhood that cannot be separated from their experience of disability.
This Bill will also kill people because it expects disabled people to devote their entire lives to managing their conditions, and does not offer people the choice to refuse treatments that don’t work for them. From Section 9: For the purposes of paragraph (1)(b), an impairment or impairments are not permanent, or likely to be permanent, unless: (a) the person has undertaken all appropriate treatment for the impairment or impairments (if any); and
Submission 569
(b) any other treatment is unlikely to materially improve reverse, or alleviate the impact of, the impairment or impairments; and (c) the impairment or impairments are likely to persist for the person’s lifetime.
Taking “all appropriate treatment” is an unfair burden on disabled people. It assumes that disabled people want to be ill, and punitively withholds access to the NDIS if people are assumed to not be trying hard enough to alleviate their impairment/s. It also presupposes that available treatments are worth the risks and/or side effects to that individual person, and are possible for the person to undertake.
Some examples:
-
“All appropriate treatment” means that a disabled parent may need to relocate away from their dependent children to access treatment that is only available in another location, or only available as an inpatient. For disabled parents of disabled children, this leaves their children without vital support, and denies the parent the right to be a parent.
-
“All appropriate treatment” means that disabled people with jobs may need to take long-term unpaid leave and rely either on family, partners, or Centrelink payments to support them financially if the treatment does not allow them to concurrently work.
-
“All appropriate treatment” means that any time a new treatment is available for their disability, a person must pursue this treatment even if it is not practical, financially feasible, or personally acceptable for them to do so, or risk losing NDIS access.
-
“All appropriate treatment” means that many disabled people must juggle supporting themselves financially without adequate disability supports, while also attending expensive specialist care appointments, which often take years to access (especially if the person cannot afford to access private care). These appointments may often ultimately result in them being told, yes, your disability is permanent as suspected.
-
“All appropriate treatment” means that if an expert deems that the side effects or risks of a treatment are “appropriate”, then the opinion and lived experience of the disabled person who that treatment applies to are rendered irrelevant. If a treatment deemed “appropriate” impacts someone’s quality of life in a way that is not worthwhile to them, they may be forced to choose between losing access to all supports, or continuing with a treatment that they do not consent to.
As someone with many disabled loved ones who rely on the NDIS, as well as being a mental health professional who works with people receiving NDIS funding, I am deeply worried about my communities. I am also a disabled person who at this stage, has avoided accessing the NDIS even though it would likely improve my quality of life to do so. This is because the NDIS is already failing many disabled people. This Bill will only exacerbate these failures.
This Bill has me deeply worried about the future for all of us. I hear from clients and loved ones regularly that they are scared that they will lose their funding, end up in care/lose their independence, lose their children, lose the gains they have made in their physical and mental health, lose their long-term stability and hopes for a life worth living. I have heard from many people that they are suicidal due to the fear of what they will lose if this Bill goes through.
Submission 569
There are so many more things I could write about this Bill, but I will end with: We simply cannot do this to some of the most vulnerable people in our society, who we are already failing in so many ways. It is deeply unjust. We have to allow disabled people to live full, worthwhile lives.