Concerns about eligibility interpretations disadvantaging Aboriginal participants (Individual advocacy)

‹ PrevPage 1 of 7 · Source p. 1Next ›

Submission 841

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: Pilbara Disability Network (PDN)

Introduction

The Pilbara Disability Network (PDN) welcomes the opportunity to provide a submission regarding the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

PDN is a regional disability-led network representing people with disability, carers, family members, Aboriginal community members, disability organisations, local government representatives, allied health professionals and community advocates across the Pilbara region of Western Australia.

Our membership includes lived experience representation across physical disability, acquired disability, neurological disability, autism, psychosocial disability, sensory disability, intellectual disability, developmental disability, family and carer experience, Aboriginal community leadership and disability service provision.

This submission focuses specifically on the provisions contained within the Bill and the likely impact of these changes on regional and remote communities across the Pilbara.

PDN acknowledges the need to ensure the long-term sustainability, integrity and effectiveness of the NDIS. However, we are concerned that several provisions within the Bill may disproportionately impact regional and remote communities where disability support systems, workforce capacity and mainstream service alternatives are already significantly limited.

Regional and Remote Context

The Pilbara covers over 500,000 square kilometres and includes major regional centres, smaller towns and remote Aboriginal communities.

People with disability in the Pilbara already experience significant barriers to accessing:

Allied health services Specialist assessments

Submission 841

Early intervention Mental health services Disability support workers Support coordination Specialist behaviour support Community participation opportunities Mainstream health and education supports

Many participants rely on limited local providers, outreach models and long-standing therapeutic relationships.

The impact of legislative change in regional communities is therefore significantly different to metropolitan Australia and should be specifically considered when assessing the practical effect of this Bill.

Schedule 1 – Eligibility, Access and Planning Reforms

Clarification of Functional Capacity and Eligible Impairment

Requirements

The Bill introduces a definition of functional capacity and strengthens requirements that support needs must be directly related to a participant’s eligible impairments.

PDN recognises the importance of consistency and clarity in decision-making.

However, we are concerned that a narrow interpretation of functional capacity may fail to adequately recognise the complexity of disability experienced by many participants in regional and remote communities.

Many people with disability experience overlapping impacts across:

Neurodevelopmental disability Mental health Trauma Communication disability Chronic health conditions Cultural and social disadvantage Geographic isolation

These factors often interact to create significantly greater functional impacts than would be identified through impairment alone.

We are concerned that stricter eligibility interpretations may disproportionately disadvantage:

Aboriginal participants

Submission 841

Participants with psychosocial disability Participants with multiple co-occurring disabilities Participants with limited access to specialist evidence

Many Pilbara families already face delays in obtaining diagnostic assessments due to workforce shortages.

Any reforms that increase evidentiary requirements risk creating additional barriers to access.

Recommendation

The Bill should include safeguards requiring decision-makers to consider the cumulative impact of disability, environmental barriers and regional disadvantage when assessing functional capacity and support needs.

Consideration of Other Service Systems

The Bill proposes greater consideration of whether a participant can access support through other service systems.

PDN is concerned that this provision assumes alternative systems are available, accessible and capable of providing equivalent support.

This assumption does not reflect the reality of many Pilbara communities.

Families consistently report barriers accessing:

Public allied health Mental health services Paediatric services School-based supports Early childhood intervention Community health programs

In many communities these services either do not exist locally or operate with extensive waitlists.

Community consultation responses repeatedly raised concerns that participants could lose NDIS supports based on theoretical access to systems that are not practically available.

Recommendation

The legislation should require evidence that alternative supports are genuinely available, accessible and timely before they can be relied upon when determining eligibility or funding decisions.

Submission 841

Clarification of Permanence and “All Appropriate Treatment”

The Bill introduces the concept of “all appropriate treatment” when considering whether a condition is permanent.

PDN is concerned that participants in regional and remote communities may be disadvantaged by this provision due to reduced access to treatment options.

Many Pilbara residents cannot readily access:

Specialist medical services Psychiatry Neurology Rehabilitation services Intensive therapy programs

Participants should not be excluded from NDIS access because geographic location has prevented access to treatment pathways that may be available in metropolitan centres.

Recommendation

The legislation should explicitly recognise availability of treatment and geographic accessibility when considering whether all appropriate treatment has been explored.

Plan Reassessments, End Dates and Renewals

The Bill introduces plan end dates, renewal processes and limitations on unscheduled reassessments.

PDN acknowledges the intent to improve consistency and administrative efficiency.

However, many regional participants experience rapidly changing circumstances due to:

Workforce turnover Housing instability Health deterioration School transitions Service closures Family stress

The ability to respond quickly to changing circumstances is particularly important in remote communities where service disruption can have significant consequences.

Community consultation identified concerns regarding increased uncertainty, administrative burden and delays in accessing revised supports when circumstances change.

Submission 841

Recommendation

The legislation should preserve flexible review mechanisms for participants experiencing significant changes in functional capacity, support access or regional service availability.

Schedule 2 – Fraud Measures and Expanded Provider

Registration

PDN strongly supports measures aimed at reducing fraud, exploitation and poor-quality service provision.

People with disability deserve safe, accountable and high-quality supports.

However, the Bill’s expansion of mandatory provider registration raises significant concerns for regional and remote communities.

Across the Pilbara, many supports are delivered through:

Sole traders Small businesses Home-based providers Independent support workers Local Aboriginal organisations Community-led services

These providers often operate with substantially higher costs due to:

Travel requirements Accommodation costs Workforce shortages Professional supervision requirements Insurance costs Compliance obligations

Community consultation repeatedly raised concerns that additional registration requirements may cause providers to leave the market.

In many communities there is no alternative provider available.

Loss of even a small number of providers could result in complete service gaps.

Recommendation

The Bill should include regional implementation safeguards and flexible registration pathways that maintain participant protections without unintentionally reducing provider availability in regional and remote areas.

Submission 841

Schedule 2 – Record Keeping and Claims Requirements

PDN acknowledges the importance of appropriate record keeping and fraud prevention measures.

However, the Bill introduces stricter claims and record retention requirements that may create unintended barriers for participants and providers in remote communities.

Many remote communities experience:

Limited internet access Digital exclusion Low technology access Limited administrative support

Some Aboriginal families have limited access to email, computers, reliable phone services or postal infrastructure.

Implementation of these requirements must consider regional realities.

Recommendation

The Government should develop culturally appropriate and regionally accessible compliance pathways to ensure participants are not disadvantaged due to geographic isolation or digital exclusion.

Schedule 3 – Governance and Automated Decision

Making

The Bill expands the NDIA’s ability to automate administrative actions.

PDN recognises the potential administrative benefits of automation.

However, we are concerned that automated processes may fail to adequately recognise:

Regional disadvantage Cultural considerations Complex disability presentations Service market failure Local workforce shortages

Participants in regional and remote communities often require highly contextual decision making.

Submission 841

Automation should not replace meaningful human consideration where decisions impact access to essential supports.

Recommendation

The legislation should require human review safeguards for decisions affecting participant eligibility, funding reductions, plan renewals and access to supports.

Broader Regional Impact

Although the Bill focuses on scheme sustainability, integrity and governance, it is important that Parliament considers the downstream impact of these legislative changes.

Community consultation across the Pilbara identified concerns that reduced access to disability supports may increase pressure on:

Public health systems Mental health services Schools Early childhood services Family support services Community organisations

Regional communities do not currently have the infrastructure required to absorb additional demand if disability supports are reduced or become more difficult to access.

Conclusion

PDN supports efforts to strengthen the sustainability and integrity of the NDIS.

However, sustainability must not come at the expense of equitable access for regional and remote Australians.

The practical impact of the Bill will be experienced differently in communities where workforce shortages, service gaps and geographic isolation already create substantial barriers.

We urge the Committee to ensure that implementation of the Bill includes specific safeguards for regional and remote communities, recognises the realities of service delivery in the Pilbara and protects access to essential disability supports for some of Australia’s most geographically isolated participants.

The voices of our community are clear: legislative reform must be accompanied by regional investment, meaningful consultation and recognition that equality of policy does not always result in equality of access.