Submission 753
PWDA Template: Submission to the
National Disability Insurance
Scheme Amendment (Securing the
NDIS for Future Generations) Bill
2026
Attention: Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs
Submitted by email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au
Date:01/06/2026
I welcome the opportunity to make a submission to the Senate Standing Committee
on Community Affairs about the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment
(Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.
I am a the Director of an NDIS provider – Territory Care and Support Services
I want to outline the harm this Amendment Bill will cause if it passes Parliament. This
Bill is too far-reaching to pass as it stands. I believe the Bill requires further scrutiny
and amendment before it proceeds.
Parliamentary Scrutiny and Transparency
The consultation period for the Amendment Bill is two weeks, which is insufficient to
allow for appropriate consultation, considering accessibility and communication
needs. The Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis says
consultation should occur for a minimum of 30 days where possible.
1
Submission 753
The short timeline impacts the organisation and our participants by limiting the scope
of individuals to seek advice and provide feedback on changes proposed. We were
only able to seek response and input from our participants and their families on
Thursday 28th May, leaving very limited time for their submissions.
Recommendation: Amend the consultation period for a best practice minimum of 30
days, or longer considering the delays expected for people with accessibility
concerns.
Key decisions left to ministerial instruments, not law
The issue: The Bill allows Ministers to change who gets NDIS support (Schedule 1
Parts 8 and 9) and how much funding people receive (Schedule 1 Part 4; Schedule
- by signing an instrument, without going back to Parliament. The rules that will determine critical eligibility thresholds (Schedule 1 Parts 1, 8 and 9) have not yet
been written.
How this affects participants: The decisions that shape the lives of participants,
whether they qualify for the NDIS and what supports they can access, could be
changed without parliamentary debate or public scrutiny. Participants may not know
supports or eligibility rules have changed until their plan is affected.
Each person with a disability in Australia must be considered on their individual
circumstances and abilities. The proposal allows powers to paint a generic picture
that may not be each persons reality. Transparency and clear communication is
critical to support individuals though these changes.
Recommendation: Require that all decisions affecting NDIS eligibility and funding
levels be made through primary legislation subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, with
mandatory advance notice to affected participants before any changes take effect.
2
PWDA Template: Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Submission 753
Existing participants face narrower criteria and fewer rights to challenge decisions
The issue: The Bill changes the rules for existing NDIS participants and makes it
harder to challenge some decisions about supports and funding. It also restricts
when you can request a reassessment, removes review rights for automatic plan
renewals, and makes funding reductions unreviewable (Schedule 1 Parts 1 and 8).
Combined with restrictions on reassessment requests (Part 2), automatic plan
renewals without review rights (Part 5), and unreviewable funding reductions (Part
4), existing participants face narrower criteria with significantly fewer avenues to
challenge decisions about their supports.
How this affects participants: This does not protect participants already on the
NDIS, who could be reassessed under stricter rules. If someone’s funding is reduced
or their plan renewed automatically, they may have limited or no ability to challenge
that decision. This could make it harder for people to get extra support when their
circumstances or disability change.
Our participants are likely to face further negative impacts under these changes,
particularly where existing plans are already inaccurate or significantly overdue for
review and reassessment. Introducing stricter eligibility and assessment criteria adds
an additional layer of unnecessary red tape to what is already a complex and
burdensome process. As a result, individuals may experience delays in accessing
appropriate supports or in having changes to their circumstances recognised. This is
especially concerning when reduced funding or automatic plan renewals can occur
without meaningful opportunities for participants to challenge decisions. In this
context, it is essential that the Agency is held accountable for adhering to
appropriate timeframes and ensuring fair, transparent decision-making processes
that genuinely reflect participants’ needs.
Recommendation: Require a “no harm” safeguard ensuring no current participant
loses access to supports unless equivalent supports are in place, with independent
3
PWDA Template: Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Submission 753
review rights before any exit decision and access to unscheduled reassessments
preserved.
Unreviewable ministerial power to cut funding across all support categories
The Minister can reduce funding for any support or group of supports by a specified
percentage through an instrument that cannot be challenged (Schedule 1 Part 4).
This applies across all budget categories. Unspent funds will no longer carry over at
plan renewal (Schedule 1 Part 5).
How this affects participants: A participant’s community participation, capacity
building or assistive technology funding could be cut without warning and without any
right to appeal. Participants who save unspent funds across plan periods for high
cost items will lose that ability entirely.
his proposed change is likely to increase administrative burden and overall costs for
the Agency, as the requirement for repeated evidence and reassessment will
inevitably duplicate work for both participants and providers. Rather than
streamlining support, it risks creating inefficiencies and delays, particularly where
funding for community participation, capacity building, or assistive technology may
be reduced without clear notice or the ability to appeal. Additionally, removing the
flexibility for participants to carry forward unspent funds for high-cost items
undermines effective long-term planning and financial management. Changes to
funding and supports should be considered on an individual basis, ensuring they are
clearly communicated and supported by a transparent rationale that reflects each
participant’s unique needs and circumstances.
Recommendation: Require that unspent funds carry over at plan renewal for
participants saving for high-cost items and require independent review rights before
any funding reduction takes effect.
4
PWDA Template: Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Submission 753
Requirement to exhaust treatment options before eligibility
The issue: A person with disability will need to exhaust treatment options before
they can be eligible for the Scheme (Schedule 1 Part 8). There will also be a removal
of whole-of-person assessment, replaced by single eligible impairment consideration
(Schedule 1 Part 3). The note that previously acknowledged environmental factors
and other ineligible impairments could affect support needs will be removed
(Schedule 1 Part 3).
How this affects participants: People with disability will need to prove their
impairment cannot be treated before they access the NDIS. Once in the scheme,
their supports will only be assessed against a single eligible impairment rather than
their whole experience. A person’s individual circumstances will not be considered,
including ability to pay for treatment, where they live or whether treatment is actually
available to them.
As a provider in rural and remote areas, this requirement could further marginalise
our participants who do not have access to usually available services and therapies.
Recommendation: Do not proceed with a requirement to exhaust “appropriate
treatment” options – there are no safeguarding measures around participant harm
due to side effects or complications, a participant’s financial ability to pay, or their
geographic capacity to access treatments.
Unvalidated functional capacity assessment tool risks misidentifying need
The issue: The Bill shifts assessment from whole-of-person consideration to a single
eligible impairment (Schedule 1 Part 3). Read together with the eligibility thresholds
in Parts 8 and 9, the tool used to conduct functional capacity assessments must be
capable of sufficiently identifying whether a person meets the threshold for that
single impairment.
5
PWDA Template: Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Submission 753
The named assessment tool is the Instrument for Classification and Assessment of
Support Needs (I-CAN). I-CAN requires validation to ensure it will sufficiently identify
the needs of all people with disability, including those whose needs may be
fluctuating or episodic and may not be captured through a point-in-time assessment,
and to ensure it is culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.
How this affects participants: If the assessment tool does not accurately capture
the full extent of a person’s disability, including needs that fluctuate or vary over time,
a participant may be found ineligible or have their supports undercounted, with no
guarantee the result reflects their actual experience.
The new tool should be trialled with a range of participants in a range of
demographics and clearly communicated with participants and providers prior to roll
out. Legislating this recommendation prior to this is untimely and creates further
anxiety within our participant group.
Recommendation: Do not proceed with I-CAN as the functional capacity
assessment tool unless it has been demonstrably validated to identify the needs of
all people with disability, including those with episodic or fluctuating disability, and
demonstrated to be culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.
Supports cut before replacement system is ready
The issue: From 1 October 2026, the government has announced funding for social,
civic and community participation supports will be cut by 50 per cent and capacity
building daily activities by 10 per cent for all participants, reductions that will be
implemented through the ministerial instrument power in Schedule 1 Part 4. The
Foundational Supports system intended to fill that gap has no confirmed
implementation date and is not yet operational.
How this affects participants: Supports that help participants connect with their
community, build skills and maintain independence may be cut before anything
exists to replace them, leaving carers and families with greater responsibilities and
6
PWDA Template: Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Submission 753
no additional support. These supports are often what help people stay visible,
connected and safe.
As a provider in rural and remote settings, the access and communication around
community based programs needs to be in place prior to changes, failure to do so
puts participants and their families at risk
Recommendation: Require that no reductions to community participation or
capacity building supports take effect until Foundational Supports are fully
operational, adequately funded and demonstrably able to meet the needs of those
who will lose NDIS supports.
Keshini Bali Renilson
Director
Territory Care & Support Services
7