Submission 9
Dear Committee Secretary,
Please find below my submission on the National Disability Insurance
Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill
I request that my contact details are not published.
I am an NDIS participant, and I am writing because I am very concerned about how this bill could affect disabled people in real life.
I understand that the NDIS needs to be sustainable. I also understand that fraud and misuse of public money should be dealt with. However, sustainability should not come at the cost of disabled people losing essential supports, independence, safety, community access, or the ability to work and participate in everyday life.
My main concern is that this bill appears to focus heavily on reducing costs, but not enough on protecting disabled people from being left without the support they need.
I am especially concerned about any changes that could make it harder for people to stay on the NDIS or prove their disability needs again and again. Disabled people already go through stressful and exhausting processes to prove their support needs. A standard functional capacity assessment might sound fair, but it must not become a tick-box process that ignores real life.
A person might be able to do something once, but not safely, repeatedly, reliably, or without major exhaustion. Assessments must look at what life is like on bad days, what happens without support, and whether the person can function safely and consistently.
I am also very concerned about proposed reductions to social, civic and community participation supports. For many disabled people, community access is not a luxury. It is part of independence, safety, communication, employment readiness, confidence, wellbeing, and being able to live an ordinary life.
Calling a support “social” can make it sound optional, but for many people these supports are what stop isolation and help them access appointments, services, work, training and community life.
I am concerned that supports may only be funded if they are directly linked to the impairment that got someone onto the NDIS. Disabled people often have overlapping needs. Life is not neatly separated into disability, health, transport, employment, housing and community participation. If the NDIS says another system should help, but that system does not actually provide the support, the person can be left with nothing.
Submission 9
I am also concerned about making unscheduled plan reassessments harder to get. People’s lives can change quickly. Support needs can change because of health, housing, work, informal supports, safety, or daily living needs. If a person’s plan is not meeting their needs, they should be able to ask for help without being treated as if they are doing something wrong.
Unspent funds should also not automatically be treated as proof that support was not needed. Sometimes funds are unspent because providers are unavailable, services are inaccessible, the participant has difficulty organising supports, or NDIA processes have caused delays. Participants should not be punished for underspending when the reason was outside their control.
Accessibility must also be built into the whole process. Any NDIS reform must be accessible for blind and low vision people, people with intellectual disability, psychosocial disability, communication disability, and people who need help with forms, technology, phone calls, evidence and appointments.
Information must be provided in accessible formats. Participants should be able to use their preferred communication method. Processes should not depend on inaccessible websites, complicated forms, or being able to constantly chase the NDIA.
My recommendations are:
The bill should not pass in its current form.
Participants should be protected from automatic or blanket cuts to support categories.
Social and community participation supports should not be treated as optional luxuries.
Assessments must be fair, individual, accessible and based on real life functional impact.
Participants must not fall through the gaps between the NDIS and other service systems.
People should still have practical rights to request a reassessment when their plan is not meeting their needs.
Accessibility protections must be clearly built into the way any changes are implemented.
Disabled people must be properly consulted before major changes are made.
The NDIS is not just a budget line. It is what allows many disabled people to live safely, participate in the community, work, study, communicate, and have choice and control over their lives.
Submission 9
I support action against fraud and misuse of funds. I support clear rules. But I do not support reforms that make disabled people carry the burden of cost savings.
Thank you for considering my submission.
Kind regards,