National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 6 - Supplementary Submission
Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Committee National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submittedanonymously
- Introduction / My connection to this issue I am a disabled parent living in regional Western Australia and an NDIS participant with progressive neurological disability and complex medical needs.
I am a full-time wheelchair user and require high-level daily support to safely remain at home and care for my children. I require PEG feeding, Type 1 diabetes management, personal care support and assistance with all daily activities. I should clinically be transferred using a hoist with two support workers for safety.
The NDIS is not a luxury in my life. It is the reason I am alive, able to parent my children, remain in my community and continue contributing to society.
Before becoming disabled in my late 20s, I worked, paid taxes and independently supported my family. Disability can happen to anyone at any time. I am still the same person, parent and member of society that I was before becoming disabled.
I am writing this submission because I believe the proposed Bill risks causing serious harm to people with complex disabilities, particularly those living regionally and those with children.
- My overall position on this Bill I do not support this Bill in its current form.
I believe this Bill gives excessive power to government and administrative systems to make broad funding and support decisions without adequately considering individual human needs, medical complexity, family circumstances or safety.
I am deeply concerned about: • mass reductions to social and economic participation supports • reductions to capacity building supports such as physiotherapy • funding caps and standardised support models • increased automated or system-level decision making • reduced individualisation of disability care • the ability for Ministers and administrators to alter supports at scale without proper safeguards
Disability support cannot safely be managed through blanket systems or population-level cuts.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 6 - Supplementary Submission
People with disability are individuals with vastly different needs, risks, responsibilities and lives.
- My key concerns Loss of Individualised Care
The NDIS was originally designed around individualised supports.
This Bill moves the system toward standardisation, funding caps and broad administrative control over categories of support instead of properly assessing individual needs.
For people with complex disabilities, standardised care can become dangerous.
The consequences of reducing support are not inconvenience. The consequences can be injury, hospitalisation, pressure wounds, loss of muscle mass, respiratory decline, pneumonia, institutionalisation or death.
Cuts to Capacity Building Supports
The Government’s current reform direction includes approximately: • 30% reductions to social and economic participation supports • 10% reductions to capacity building supports
For people with progressive neurological conditions, physiotherapy and physical supports are not optional extras.
Loss of physiotherapy leads to: • muscle wasting • contractures • increased falls and injuries • reduced mobility • respiratory decline • pneumonia risk • preventable hospital admissions
Risk of Institutionalisation and Family Separation
If funding caps or staffing limitations prevent access to: • 1:1 care • 2:1 care • overnight supports • regional independent support workers
then people like me may no longer be able to safely live at home.
This would likely result in forced placement into residential or institutional care in my 30s purely because appropriate supports are unavailable.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 6 - Supplementary Submission
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities states:
“In no case shall a child be separated from parents on the basis of a disability of either the child or one or both of the parents.” — Article 23
Australia also has obligations under: • Article 19 — Living independently and being included in the community • Article 28 — Adequate standard of living and social protection • Article 10 — Right to life • Article 5 — Equality and non-discrimination
Excessive Ministerial and Administrative Power
I am deeply concerned about the increasing ability for broad categories of supports to be restricted, capped or altered at a system level rather than through individualised evidence- based assessment.
An unqualified or non-clinical decision-maker should not have the ability to effectively determine: • who can remain at home • who receives safe staffing • who loses physiotherapy • who loses community access • or which disabled parents can continue raising their children
without strong independent oversight and individual clinical assessment.
Regional Disability Disadvantage
Regional participants are disproportionately affected by these reforms.
In regional Western Australia: • registered providers are extremely limited • staffing shortages are severe • travel distances are large • support reliability is inconsistent
Independent support workers are often the only reason people can remain safely at home.
- What I believe this Bill gets wrong I believe this Bill treats disability support primarily as a budget issue instead of a human rights issue.
It assumes standardisation can safely replace individualised care.
It focuses heavily on reducing costs while failing to adequately recognise: • the economic contribution disabled people still make
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 6 - Supplementary Submission
• the unpaid labour performed by families • the cost of institutionalisation • the cost of preventable hospitalisation • the importance of keeping families together • Australia’s legal and moral obligations under disability and human rights law
- What needs to change or be protected I ask the Committee and Government to:
• protect truly individualised disability funding • protect participant choice and control • prevent blanket funding caps that ignore medical complexity • preserve access to 1:1 and 2:1 support where clinically required • protect physiotherapy and capacity-building supports • ensure disabled parents are not separated from children due to inadequate supports • strengthen safeguards against automated or broad administrative decision-making • recognise the unique needs of regional participants • uphold Australia’s obligations under the CRPD and Disability Discrimination Act 1992
Most importantly, I ask the Government to properly implement the recommendations of the Independent NDIS Review that it commissioned and funded instead of relying primarily on funding reductions and system restrictions.
- Final statement People with disability are not economic burdens.
We are parents, workers, volunteers, community members and human beings.
This Bill risks removing people from their homes, families and communities in the pursuit of administrative efficiency and budget reduction.
The true measure of a society is how it treats people when they are vulnerable.
I ask the Committee to consider my lived experience when reviewing this Bill.