Submission 636
Request: Name Withheld I request that my name and business name be withheld from public publication of this submission. I am comfortable for the committee to know my identity as an Occupational Therapist and small business owner operating in regional NSW (Bega, Eurobodalla and Cooma areas). This request is made to protect client confidentiality and my professional practice in a small regional community.
Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the National
Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submitted by: Position:
Location: Bega, Regional NSW
Date: 30.5.26
Introduction
I am an Occupational Therapist with over 11 years experience supporting both children and adults with disabilities. In 2020 I established a sole trader business, which has grown, due to demand, to a small multidisciplinary allied health business in Bega, Regional NSW. We deliver early intervention, occupational therapy, play therapy, physiotherapy, functional assessments, capacity-building supports, and adult rehabilitation across a vast geographic area, including clients in Eurobodalla and Cooma.
Our caseload is diverse and includes neurodivergent children and adults, people with physical disabilities, complex trauma, and those in out-of-home care. I support the goal of Scheme sustainability but am concerned that several provisions in the Bill will create significant unintended consequences for participants in regional areas, where access to services is already challenging.
Area of Concern 2: Tightening the Definition of “Permanent” Disability (Appropriate Treatment
Requirement)
The proposal that impairments are only “permanent” once all “appropriate treatment” has been undertaken risks delaying or denying access, particularly for children and those with neurodevelopmental or fluctuating conditions in regional NSW. Ongoing therapy is often required for maintenance and prevention of decline, not cure. Geographic and financial barriers to “appropriate treatment” are common in our service area.
Real-life examples (de-identified):
-
ASD & regional pain syndrome child (age 11) in the Eurobodalla area with recently diagnosed neurodevelopmental challenges: Significant delays in diagnosis are common in regional settings. The family is engaged in ongoing occupation therapy (often involving long travel) to support development. Ongoing treatment could be misinterpreted as evidence the impairment is “not permanent.”
-
Child who masks (age 6, ASD) from the Cooma region: Presents as relatively capable during short clinical sessions due to masking but experiences severe meltdowns, fatigue, and executive dysfunction at home and school. Ongoing OT and behavioural supports (delivered across large distances) are essential to sustain function.
Submission 636
-
Baby (under 12 months) in DCJ custody, living with auntie in the Bega Valley, with cortical dysfunction and undiagnosed suspected cerebral palsy: Requires intensive early intervention for motor development, positioning, and feeding. Kinship carers in regional areas already face high stress and limited local supports — treatment access barriers should not further delay NDIS.
-
Child (age 11) with undiagnosed genetic condition causing lifelong physical impairments similar to cerebral palsy: Needs ongoing therapy to manage tone, mobility, and prevent contractures. This is lifelong maintenance, not temporary treatment.
-
Adult with unilateral amputation and complex PTSD in our catchment: Requires ongoing AT reviews, pain management, mental health supports, and OT for daily function. Therapy manages fluctuating symptoms in a context of limited regional specialist access.
Recommendation:
-
Explicitly clarify that ongoing maintenance therapy, early intervention, and capacity- building supports do not disqualify a condition from being “permanent.”
-
Ensure financial, geographic, and diagnostic realities — especially for regional families and undiagnosed children — do not create additional barriers.
-
Recognise fluctuating, masking, and developmental presentations in eligibility decisions.
Area of Concern 9: Funding Cuts, Funding Caps & Ministerial Powers
Expanded Ministerial powers to apply percentage reductions, funding caps for cohorts or support types, and control plan inflation risk shifting the NDIS away from individualised planning toward standardised models. This is especially problematic in regional NSW, where client needs vary widely and service delivery is logistically complex.
Real-life examples (de-identified):
-
Adult with ASD in Bega valley on propery: Requires flexible funding for support workers and therapy to manage executive function, sensory needs, and community participation. Standardised caps would not account for fluctuating needs and isolation risks in regional settings.
-
Child with Down syndrome, ASD, and severe intellectual disability in Eurobodalla: Needs high-intensity multidisciplinary supports across home, school, and community. Cohort benchmarking would severely underfund this complexity.
-
Child with undiagnosed genetic condition (CP-like impacts): Relies on regular AT reviews, home modifications, and therapy. Percentage cuts to capacity-building supports would increase long-term health risks and travel burdens for families.
Business impacts: As a small business owner operating across a vast regional area, unpredictable funding changes and potential caps make it extremely difficult to retain experienced staff. Rising staffing costs (wages, travel time, supervision, and professional development) combined with funding uncertainty have already strained operations. We risk losing skilled clinicians who are willing to work rurally. This reduces service availability for vulnerable clients, including children in out-of-home care and adults with trauma, and limits our ability to maintain consistent supports across Bega, Eurobodalla, and Cooma.
Submission 636
Recommendation:
-
Prioritise individualised functional assessment over cohort caps or percentage reductions.
-
Include transparency, clinical consultation, and independent review in any Ministerial funding powers.
-
Protect early intervention, therapy, and participation supports for children and prevent shifting unsustainable burdens onto regional families and kinship carers.
-
Consider long-term system costs (health, education, out-of-home care) and the unique challenges of regional service delivery.
Conclusion
The children and adults I work with across Regional NSW demonstrate that disability is highly individual and often requires ongoing, context-sensitive supports. Changes to the NDIS must strengthen sustainability without undermining access for those with complex, undiagnosed, masking, or lifelong conditions — particularly in regional areas where supports are already harder to access and sustain.
I urge the Committee to amend the Bill to protect individualised planning, recognise real-world clinical and geographic realities, and safeguard early intervention for children.
Thank you for the opportunity. I am available to provide further evidence or appear at hearings.