Curtin Student Guild submission opposes NDIS reforms impacting participant access (Individual advocacy) | External submission

Submission 765

Acknowledgement of Country

The Curtin Student Guild pays respects to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of our communities. It acknowledges the Wadjuk people of the Noongar Nation and the Wongutha people of the North Eastern Goldfields, the first peoples of the land where the Student Guild operates. This is stolen land that was never ceded.

Alternative Formats

This submission can be made available in alternative accessible formats upon request to hello@guild.curtin.edu.au

Summary of recommendations

The Bill should not proceed in its current form and should be amended to ensure NDIS sustainability is pursued through provider regulation, fraud prevention, transparency and investment in supports, not cuts to participant access.
1. The Government should extend consultation on the Bill and associated rules,
instruments, assessment tools and implementation frameworks, with specific

consultation for disabled people, NDIS participants, students with disabilities, families, carers and disability organisations.

The Bill should require full public release of information about proposed NDIS changes, including eligibility changes, assessment tools, transitional arrangements, cohort impacts, and the operation, funding, regulation and accessibility of replacement supports.
The Bill should prevent broad ministerial powers from being used to reduce funding, alter eligibility, restrict categories of support or change participant rights without parliamentary scrutiny, transparent evidence and disability community consultation
The Bill should protect social and community participation supports as essential supports that allow disabled people, including students with disabilities, to access education, employment, community life and public life.
The Bill should ensure any functional capacity assessment process is transparent, independently evaluated, rights-based, appealable, and capable of assessing

dynamic, invisible, psychosocial, intellectual and developmental disabilities as well as multiple disabilities.

The Bill should prohibit automated decision-making from determining access, plan budgets, support reductions and participant exits without meaningful human review, professional judgement, reasons for decisions and the right for participants to review decisions.
The Bill should ensure people with disabilities are not penalised for their inability to access treatment options due to personal and environmental circumstances, including financial and geographical circumstances.
The Bill should ensure disabled people are not prevented from accessing the NDIS because of treatments that cannot cure their disability, but can improve their symptoms and quality of life.
The Bill must uphold the fundamental human right of bodily autonomy by allowing people with disabilities to refuse treatments on their own bodies, particularly if the treatments are high-risk
The Bill should ensure that all participants are not required to undergo unnecessary mandatory reassessment before 2030, and that reassessment only occurs when requested, required or clearly justified with participant safeguards.

Submission 765

Children and young people should not be moved from the NDIS into Thriving Kids or any foundational support program until that program is established, funded, evaluated and nationally consistent.
The Bill should require baseline registration for all NDIS providers, supported by tiered, risk-proportionate requirements, and strengthen enforcement against providers who defraud, exploit or endanger NDIS participants.

Introduction

The Curtin Student Guild was established in 1969 to provide essential services, represent the interests of and advocate on behalf of the students at Curtin University. In 2026, the Curtin Student Guild will represent the common interests of around 60,000 students in Perth, Kalgoorlie and worldwide.

The Curtin Student Guild’s Accessibility Department, which supports and represents students with disabilities, is led by the elected Accessibility Officer, who is a student with a disability. The Department works to improve accessibility, inclusion and support across the University, including by raising student concerns, campaigning for systemic change and ensuring students with disability have a voice in decisions that affect them.

The Guild and the Curtin Student Guild’s Accessibility Department, welcomes the opportunity to submit to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into the National

Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill

The National Disability Insurance Scheme is one of the most important social reforms in Australian history. It was created to ensure that disabled people could access the supports

they require regardless of their location  , and  it helped to move Australia away from the

previous systems that isolated, institutionalised and excluded disabled people from community life. For students with disabilities, the NDIS can be the difference between being able to attend university and being forced out of higher education. Support workers, assistive technology, transport assistance, social and community participation supports and other individualised support are not optional extras. They are the infrastructure that allows many disabled students to study, work, participate and live with dignity.

The Guild recognises the importance of the NDIS and supports strong action against provider fraud which harms participants and the exploitation of participants. Public money that is intended to support people with disabilities must be spent on the needs of disabled individuals. Providers who defraud the scheme, overcharge participants, operate unsafely or exploit participants should be investigated, regulated and prosecuted. However, fraud prevention and scheme sustainability must not be used as political cover for cuts to disabled people’s support.

The Guild is deeply concerned that the Bill would enable significant changes to participants access to the NDIS, funding, reassessments, social and community participation supports, provider regulation, ministerial powers and automated decision-making without sufficient transparency, consultation or safeguards. The Bill is being considered on an unacceptably compressed timeline. The disability community has not been given a meaningful opportunity to scrutinise hundreds of pages of legislative change. For university students with disability, this consultation period falls directly around exams, when many students already have limited time, energy and capacity to participate in parliamentary processes.

This Bill directly goes against the Disability Rights slogan “nothing about us, without us”, which emphasises that groups that are affected by policy changes must be able to make decisions about the policies that will affect their lives. The changes proposed in this Bill are not supported

Submission 765

by the disability community, and there has been an astounding lack of consultation in its drafting. Disabled people, NDIS participants, students with disabilities, families, carers, support workers, disabilityled organisations, organisations that support disabled people, and state and territory governments must be meaningfully involved before changes of this scale are even considered.

In its current form, the Bill will reduce access to the NDIS, force participants through stressful

reassessment processes, cut essential  social  participation supports,  shift children  into

undeveloped and inconsistent alternative systems, and give Ministers excessive power over the lives of disabled people and the supports they receive. The Guild therefore submits that the Bill should not proceed in its current form.

Transparency, consultation and disability community control

The NDIS exists because disabled people, families, carers and advocates fought for a system that ensured that people with disabilities were able to receive support and live with dignity. Any reform to the NDIS must acknowledge that history and respect the lived experiences of disabled people and the collective expertise of the disability community.

The Guild is concerned that the Bill has been introduced without adequate consultation with the disability community. The consultation period is particularly inaccessible for students with disabilities because it falls around examination periods at universities across the country. Many disabled students are already managing assessment deadlines, disability-related fatigue, health needs, financial stress and administrative barriers. Expecting students with disabilities to read, understand and respond to a complex Bill in such a short timeframe is not meaningful consultation.

The lack of transparency surrounding the proposed changes has also created unnecessary fear and uncertainty. Participants have been told that major changes are coming, but key details remain unclear. This includes how eligibility will change, how the functional capacity assessment tool will work, how replacement services will operate, who will be eligible for those services, how those services will be funded, and what rights participants will have if their supports are reduced or removed.

Recommendation

The Bill should not proceed in its current form and should be amended to ensure NDIS sustainability is pursued through provider regulation, fraud prevention, transparency and investment in supports, not cuts to participant access.

Recommendation

The Government should extend consultation on the Bill and associated rules, instruments, assessment tools, and implementation frameworks, with specific consultation for disabled people, NDIS participants, students with disabilities, families, carers and disability organisations.

Recommendation

The Bill should require full public release of information about proposed NDIS changes, including eligibility changes, assessment tools, transitional arrangements, cohort impacts, and the operation, funding, regulation and accessibility of replacement supports.

Submission 765

Ministerial power and parliamentary accountability

The Guild is concerned that the Bill would give the Minister broad powers to alter key aspects of the NDIS, including funding for groups of supports, access requirements, assessment tools, and pricing Decisions of this kind directly affect whether disabled people can access education, employment, housing, community life and basic daily support. They should not be made through broad executive power without strong safeguards.

The NDIS is a rights-based disability support scheme that supports the lives of disabled people, families, carers, support workers, allied health professionals, service providers and business owners. Changes to eligibility, support categories and funding rules will remove practical freedom from disabled people’s lives. A reduction in a participant’s support can mean they cannot attend class, leave the house, participate in community life, work, study or maintain basic wellbeing.

Major changes should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, disability community consultation, public explanation and be supported by clear evidence. Participants who may be affected should be given advance notice, clear reasons for the decisions, an explanation of their rights and have clear pathways for support.

Recommendation

The Bill should prevent broad ministerial powers from being used to reduce funding, alter eligibility, restrict categories of support or change participant rights without parliamentary scrutiny, transparent evidence and disability community consultation.

Social and community participation supports

The Guild strongly opposes reductions to social and community participation funding. Social and community participation supports are often misrepresented as luxuries however these supports are essential in allowing people with disabilities to interact with society.These essential supports allow disabled people to participate in ordinary life, including grocery shopping, studying and attending doctors’ appointments

For students with disabilities, these supports ensure they can access further education. University campuses and student life are inaccessible for many students without support. Students rely on support workers, transport assistance, assistive technology, communication support and other assistance to attend classes, participate in clubs, engage in group work, access services and build the relationships and networks that are part of higher education.

Reducing this funding risks deepening isolation and exclusion. Students with disabilities are already struggling to receive the correct support to participate in higher education and do not have the same access to education as students without disabilities. Removing this funding will make it impossible for many students with disabilities to continue their degrees. It will increase pressure on families, carers, universities and underfunded community organisations. The NDIS should not treat social inclusion as a luxury. Social participation is fundamental to dignity, well-being, education, employment and community connection.

Submission 765

Recommendation

The Bill should protect social and community participation supports as essential supports that allow disabled people, including students with disabilities, to access education, employment, community life and public life.

Functional capacity assessments and automated decision-making

The Guild  is deeply concerned by the proposed  shift toward new functional capacity

assessment processes, particularly where these processes may rely on standardised or computerised tools.

Functional capacity is complex. It cannot be properly understood through a narrow, overly rigid process that relies on a singular assessment tool. Many disabilities are dynamic. A person’s capacity may vary significantly from day to day, week to week or across different

environments.  Invisible   disabilities,  psychosocial   disabilities,   intellectual   disabilities,

developmental disabilities, chronic illness, neurodivergence and multiple disabilities can all be poorly captured by simplistic tools.

Functional capacity assessments are usually most accurate when undertaken by qualified professionals over time, with an understanding of the participant’s context, environment, support needs and goals. The Guild is concerned that a short assessment, particularly one shaped by an algorithmic or computerised tool, will not be capable of properly capturing the complexity of many participants’ lives.

The Guild is also concerned about automated administrative decision-making. Automated systems can make errors, reproduce bias, rely on incomplete data and produce decisions that are difficult for participants to understand or challenge. When an automated system affects access, plan budgets, support reductions and participant exits, the consequences of failures and limitations of the system can be catastrophic.

Recommendation

The Bill should ensure any functional capacity assessment process is transparent, independently evaluated, rights-based, appealable, and capable of assessing dynamic, invisible, psychosocial, intellectual and developmental disabilities as well as multiple disabilities.

Recommendation

The Bill should prohibit automated decision-making from determining access, plan budgets, support reductions, and participant exits without meaningful human review, professional judgement, reasons for decisions and the right for participants to review decisions.

Permanence requirements for eligibility

The Guild strongly opposes the proposed changes to the meaning of permanence in this Bill. To have access to the NDIS, participants must prove that their disability is permanent. This currently requires that an impairment have no available treatment, which will likely remedy the impairment. The proposed changes will not classify a disability as permanent if there is any

Submission 765

other treatment that could noticeably or significantly improve, reverse or alleviate the impact of the impairment. This definition will cause many disabled people with lifelong and life-altering conditions to be ineligible for the NDIS. It will mean that people with disabilities who can receive treatment that can improve their symptoms a noticeable amount would be unable to receive assistance from the NDIS.

Many permanent life-long conditions have treatments which can improve symptoms; however, these treatments do not cure symptoms or the underlying condition. People with disabilities who receive treatment for their disabilities often do not have a reduction in the symptoms that they experience; instead, many have a reduction in the intensity and frequency of these symptoms. Therefore, the ability to receive treatment for a disability does not eliminate the disability’s impact on their lives. The Guild is deeply concerned that people will not be able to receive the support that they require for their disability because of the treatment that improves their quality of life.

Additionally, the Guild is also deeply concerned that individuals’ financial and geographical circumstances will not be considered relevant in their ability to access treatments. This means that people who are unable to access the treatment options that are available for their disability will still be ineligible for the NDIS. This will disproportionately impact students with disabilities, as they will not be able to afford these treatments and will not be able to travel to receive these treatments. Students’ health and well-being should not be penalised because they are unable to afford potential treatment for their disabilities.

The requirement that people with disabilities must undergo all available treatment options before joining the NDIS also removes their autonomy over their own bodies. The only requirements for appropriate treatment are that it is evidence-based and regularly undertaken in Australia. The definition of what constitutes a regularly undertaken treatment is not provided. This does not mention any risk factors associated with undergoing treatment, including the risk of death. This could mean that an individual is required to undergo a surgery that is incredibly high-risk, on the chance that it could improve symptoms. This directly goes against the fundamental human right to make decisions about one’s own body and health.

Recommendation

The Bill should ensure people with disabilities are not penalised for their inability to access treatment options due to personal and environmental circumstances, including financial and geographical circumstances.

Recommendation

The Bill should ensure disabled people are not prevented from accessing the NDIS because of treatments that cannot cure their disability, but can improve their symptoms and quality of life.

Recommendation

The Bill must uphold the fundamental human right of bodily autonomy by allowing people with disabilities to refuse treatments on their own bodies, particularly if the treatments are high-risk.

Plan reassessment and participant safeguards

The Guild opposes blanket reassessment of all NDIS participants as a mechanism for reducing the size or cost of the scheme. Reassessment is stressful, time-consuming and often traumatic for participants. Many disabled people already face significant administrative

Submission 765

burdens in proving and re-proving their disability, needs and eligibility. Forcing all participants

through  reassessment,  including  those who  clearly  continue  to  require  support,  is

unnecessary and a significant waste of time and resources.

Reassessment should not be used as a blunt instrument to reduce participant funding. Participants should have the right to request reassessment when their plan does not meet their current needs, and there should be pathways for reassessment when circumstances change. However, participants should not be forced through unnecessary reviews simply because the Government is seeking to reduce expenditure.

The Guild is also concerned that participants may be penalised for not using parts of their plans, even where underspending is caused by provider shortages, thin markets, inaccessible services, administrative barriers or an inability to find appropriate supports. A participant should not lose funding because the market failed to provide the service they were funded to access.

Recommendation

The Bill should ensure that all participants are not required to undergo unnecessary mandatory reassessment before 2030, and that reassessment only occurs when requested, required or clearly justified with participant safeguards.

Thriving Kids, foundational supports and early intervention

The Guild is deeply concerned by the proposal to move large numbers of children, including children with autism and developmental delay, out of the NDIS and into Thriving Kids or other foundational support systems before those systems are properly established.

Early intervention matters. Children who receive the right support early on are more likely to

develop  skills,  participate  in education, and  build independence. Reducing access  to

individualised early intervention risks causing long-term harm to children and families. If children who require early intervention do not receive enough support, they will require more support as adults, which will increase the pressure on the NDIS.

Thriving Kids has not been explained in sufficient detail. It is unclear how it will operate, who will be eligible, what supports will be provided, how it will be regulated, how families will access services, and how consistency will be maintained between states and territories. Foundational supports should add to the disability support ecosystem. They should not be used as a dumping ground for people removed from the NDIS.

Recommendation

Children and young people should not be moved from the NDIS into Thriving Kids or any foundational support program until that program is established, funded, evaluated and nationally consistent.

Provider registration, fraud and participant safety

The Guild supports stronger action against fraud, exploitation and unsafe providers. Money intended for disabled people should support disabled people, not dishonest providers.

Submission 765

Providers who defraud the NDIS, overcharge participants, provide unsafe services or exploit participants must face meaningful consequences.

However, the solution to fraud is not to cut participant supports. Fraud is a provider regulation, market design, enforcement and governance issue. Participants should not be punished because governments have failed to properly regulate the provider market.

The Guild supports a stronger registration system for NDIS providers, but it must be designed carefully. Many participants rely on smaller providers because they have had poor experiences with large registered providers or because smaller providers offer more flexible, culturally safe, local or person-centred support. A registration system that is too expensive or administratively burdensome could drive good small providers out of the sector and reduce participant choice.

The appropriate approach is a baseline registration requirement for all providers, combined with tiered, risk-proportionate obligations. Providers delivering high-risk supports should be subject to stronger requirements, audits, incident reporting and oversight. Lower-risk providers should still be visible to regulators, but should face requirements that are proportionate to the service they provide. Small providers should receive support to register and comply.

Recommendation

The Bill should require baseline registration for all NDIS providers, supported by tiered, risk-proportionate requirements, and strengthen enforcement against providers who defraud, exploit or endanger NDIS participants.

Impact on students with disability

The Guild urges the Committee to consider the specific impact of this Bill on students with disabilities. Higher education is already inaccessible for many disabled people. Students with disabilities face inaccessible campuses, inconsistent reasonable adjustments, financial pressure, transport barriers, housing stress, administrative burden, stigma and fatigue. Support provided as part of the NDIS can help reduce some of these barriers but that requires students to be able to access the scheme and receive adequate support.

Cuts to social and community participation supports will prevent students from attending campus, participating in student life, accessing services and maintaining the social connection necessary to remain engaged in study. Reassessment processes will force students to spend time and energy proving their disability during teaching and exam periods which will impact their studies. Reduced supports will significantly increase reliance on family, friends, carers, universities and student unions. Shifting people into underdeveloped foundational supports will leave students and young people without the adequate individualised support that they need.

Students with disabilities should not be an afterthought in NDIS reform. Education is one of the key pathways to independence, employment, community participation and long-term wellbeing. NDIS reforms that make it harder for disabled people to study will prevent disabled students from breaking the cycle of poverty that many people with disabilities experience.

Conclusion

Submission 765

The Guild supports the NDIS. The Guild supports strong action against fraud, unsafe providers and exploitation. The Guild supports reforms that improve the quality, safety, accessibility and sustainability of disability supports.

However, the Guild does not support reforms that make the scheme sustainable by cutting disabled people’s access to support, reducing social participation funding, forcing participants

through unnecessary reassessments,  relying on opaque assessment  tools, expanding

ministerial power without safeguards or moving children into programs that have not yet been proven to meet their needs.

The NDIS must be protected for future generations, but protecting the NDIS means protecting the people it exists to support. A scheme that is cheaper because disabled people have been pushed out of it is not a stronger scheme. A scheme that reduces individualised support and shifts responsibility to undeveloped systems is not more sustainable. A scheme that has not been designed with disabled people is not safe for disabled people.

The Curtin Student Guild therefore submits that the Bill should not proceed in its current form. The Committee should recommend significant amendments to ensure that NDIS reform is transparent, rights-based, disability-led, properly scrutinised and genuinely focused on supporting disabled people to live, study, work and participate fully in the community.