Submission 764
National Disability Insurance Scheme
Amendment (Securing the NDIS for
Future Generations) Bill 2026
Leanne Pearman
CEO
1st June 2026
Submission 764
About the Author and Organisation
Leanne Pearman has worked in the disability and community services sector for more than 35 years across direct support, service development, policy, leadership and system reform.
Throughout her career, she has supported people with disability and families through major periods of disability reform, including institutional devolution, community living transitions, individualised funding approaches, supported decision-making initiatives and the implementation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). Her experience includes working alongside people with disability, families, providers, governments and communities to advance inclusion, choice, control and self determination.
Leanne is currently CEO of the Australian Inclusion Group and leads Inclusion Solutions.
Inclusion Solutions is a disability inclusion and capacity-building organisation that works alongside people with disability, families, service providers, community organisations, sporting clubs, local governments and governments to strengthen inclusion and participation. The organisation delivers training, consultancy, community capacity-building projects, and social and economic participation programs and disability inclusion strategies.
Through its work, Inclusion Solutions engages with many people with disability, families, carers, service providers and community organisations each year. This submission is informed by direct experience supporting people with disability to exercise choice and control, build meaningful lives in their communities and access opportunities for social and economic participation.
Executive Summary
The intent of this submission is not to oppose reform or the development of Foundational Supports. Reform is necessary to ensure the long-term sustainability and eVectiveness of the NDIS for future generations. However, reforms should strengthen rather than weaken the rights, safeguards and inclusion outcomes that the Scheme was designed to achieve.
This submission raises concerns regarding:
- increased ministerial powers to alter funding and eligibility arrangements
- reduced access to review and appeal rights
- proposed reductions to social, civic and community participation supports
- assessment and eligibility changes without suVicient safeguards
- the risk of increasing reliance on congregate and group-based service models
- the removal of supports before replacement systems are operational.
Submission 764
The NDIS was established to shift power and decision-making towards people with disability. Several proposed amendments risk weakening the principles of choice, control, inclusion and self-determination that underpin the Scheme.
Key Recommendations
-
Extend consultation timeframes to allow meaningful participation by people with disability, families and representative organisations.
-
Require all significant eligibility and funding decisions to remain subject to parliamentary scrutiny.
-
Preserve review and appeal rights for all decisions aVecting participant funding, eligibility and supports.
-
Ensure no participant loses access to supports until replacement systems are fully operational and demonstrably eVective.
-
No reductions to social, civic, community participation or capacity-building supports should occur until Foundational Supports are fully operational, adequately funded, independently evaluated and demonstrated to meet the needs of people who would otherwise lose NDIS-funded supports.
-
Explicitly recognise that Foundational Supports are intended to complement, not automatically replace, individualised NDIS supports. Individualised social and community participation supports must remain available for people whose disability-related needs cannot reasonably be met through Foundational Supports or mainstream community services alone.
-
Require independent validation of any assessment tools used to determine eligibility or funding.
-
Include safeguards that prevent reforms from increasing reliance on congregate, segregated or group-based service models.
-
The NDIS Was Established to Shift Power to People with Disability The NDIS represented one of the most significant disability reforms in Australia’s history. It moved disability support away from traditional welfare and service-driven models and towards a rights-based framework built on choice, control, inclusion and self determination. For many people with disability, the NDIS created opportunities to make decisions about their own lives, pursue personal goals and participate in their communities in ways that had previously not been possible.
The proposed amendments raise concerns that decision-making power will once again become concentrated within government systems rather than remaining with people with disability.
The ability to alter funding arrangements through ministerial instruments without parliamentary scrutiny or meaningful review rights risks undermining one of the core principles upon which the NDIS was established. Many of the concerns raised by people with disability are not simply about budgets or funding levels. They are about retaining the ability to make decisions, challenge decisions and have genuine influence over the supports that shape their lives.
Submission 764
The proposed amendments create circumstances where broad categories of support may be reduced through ministerial instruments without parliamentary scrutiny, individual assessment or meaningful review rights.
For many people with disability, decisions about funding directly aVect opportunities for housing, employment, education, relationships, safety and participation in community life. Decisions of this significance should not be made without transparent processes and independent avenues for review.
Natural justice requires that when decisions significantly aVect a person’s life there is access to independent review.
- Ministerial Powers and the Removal of Review Rights The Bill proposes powers that would allow Ministers to reduce funding across support categories through legislative instruments without individual assessment or review rights. Such powers undermine transparency, accountability and participant confidence in the Scheme. Decisions that aVect a person’s housing, employment, safety, relationships and community participation should remain subject to independent review.
Review rights are a fundamental safeguard and an essential component of choice and control. Their removal risks weakening one of the key protections that underpins the NDIS.
- Social and Community Participation Supports are Essential Supports We support investment in Foundational Supports and broader community capacity building, recognising that stronger and more inclusive communities are essential to achieving the long-term vision of disability inclusion. However, our experience demonstrates that building genuinely inclusive communities takes time, investment and sustained eVort.
Social, civic and community participation supports are often misunderstood as discretionary, or lifestyle supports. In reality, they are some of the most preventative and transformative supports funded through the NDIS.
These supports enable people with disability to build relationships, develop skills and confidence, access education and employment opportunities, contribute to their communities and maintain their wellbeing. They often provide the pathway to employment, volunteering, education and broader economic participation.
For many people, they are the primary means through which they achieve the objectives of the NDIS and exercise their rights to inclusion, participation, citizenship and community life. Without them, many people face increased isolation, reduced opportunities for employment and education, and diminished participation in community life.
Submission 764
The benefits also extend beyond the individual. These supports also enable parents, partners and family members to maintain employment, participate in their own communities and sustain caring roles over time.
While community-based and mainstream supports may assist some people to participate more fully in community life, they are unlikely to replace the need for individualised participation supports for many people with significant disability, complex support needs, communication barriers, psychosocial disability, cognitive disability or limited informal support networks.
There is currently insuVicient evidence that Foundational Supports will be available, accessible, adequately funded and capable of meeting the needs of those who may lose NDIS-funded participation supports. Reducing individualised supports before these systems are operational and independently evaluated creates significant risks for people with disability, families and communities.
Community capacity building alone will not remove the need for individualised supports. For many people, both will be necessary to achieve genuine inclusion and participation.
- Risks of Re-Segregation and Congregate Service Models The Disability Royal Commission documented the heightened risks of abuse, neglect, violence, exploitation and social isolation experienced by many people living or participating in congregate environments.
These risks are not solely a consequence of poor practice. They arise when people have reduced control over where they go, who supports them, how they spend their time and who they associate with.
History demonstrates that when funding systems prioritise eViciency over individualisation, service systems tend to move towards group-based and congregate responses because they appear more cost-eVective. There is a genuine risk that substantial reductions to individualised community participation supports will create financial pressures that encourage a return to these approaches.
Some people do choose shared and group arrangements. The significant concern arises when funding and policy settings reduce the availability of individualised alternatives. When this occurs, choice can become increasingly constrained and people may find themselves participating in group-based options not because they are preferred, but because they are the only supports available.
While modern congregate models may look diVerent from the institutions of the past, they can still result in people being grouped together because of disability rather than supported as individuals to participate in ordinary community life.
Submission 764
Individualised community participation supports are often the pathway through which people build relationships, develop skills, pursue employment, volunteer and contribute to their communities. If access to these supports is reduced, there is a risk that people become more isolated and less visible within community life, limiting both social and economic participation.
In Western Australia, having worked through institutional closure, devolution and community living reform, significant progress has been made over many decades in moving away from segregated approaches towards individualised supports that enable people to participate as valued citizens within their communities. These gains should not be taken for granted.
The NDIS and Australia’s obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities support individualised supports, community inclusion and the right to live as equal citizens within the community. Future reforms should strengthen these principles and ensure that sustainability measures do not inadvertently recreate the very conditions of segregation, dependency and reduced choice that disability reform has spent decades working to overcome.
- Assessment and Eligibility Concerns The proposed changes to assessment and eligibility arrangements require careful scrutiny. Many people with disability experience multiple impairments, fluctuating conditions, psychosocial disability or complex circumstances that cannot be accurately captured through a single assessment point or impairment category.
Any assessment framework used to determine eligibility or funding should be independently validated across disability groups, culturally appropriate and capable of accurately identifying support needs over time.
Assessments must also be capable of recognising the cumulative impact of multiple impairments, fluctuating conditions and environmental factors that aVect a person’s functional capacity and support needs.
- Supports Should Not Be Removed Before Alternatives Exist While Foundational Supports are intended to provide future support pathways, these systems are not yet fully operational. Removing supports before replacement systems are available creates unacceptable risks for people with disability and their families.
People will continue to require support regardless of whether the NDIS funds it. Without viable alternatives, unmet need will be transferred to families, carers and already overstretched service systems. For people with limited or no social capital, the consequences could be particularly significant.
Submission 764
Reform should occur in a planned and staged manner that ensures people do not lose supports before alternatives are in place and demonstrated to be eVective.
Conclusion
The NDIS was established to support people with disability to exercise choice and control, participate as equal citizens and live ordinary lives within their communities. While sustainability is critically important and something we all understand and support, it should not be pursued at the expense of the rights, safeguards and principles that distinguish the NDIS from the systems that preceded it.
This Bill requires significant amendment to ensure people with disability do not lose access to essential supports, meaningful review rights, individualised assistance and opportunities for inclusion, while ensuring the long-term sustainability of the Scheme.
Reform should build on the gains achieved through the NDIS, not risk reversing them. The rights, inclusion, participation and self-determination of people with disability must remain at the centre of any future changes to the Scheme.