National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 956
I am writing to express my deep concern about the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, currently before the Senate. I am alarmed by the lack of consultation, the potential for harm to vulnerable people with disability, and the lack of transparency in the development of this Bill.
- No Plan for the 160,000 People Who Will Be Removed
The Bill’s stated intention to reduce the NDIS to approximately 600,000 participants (a reduction of 160,000 people) by the end of the decade is a cause of grave concern. The Bill contains no concrete plan for the 160,000 people who are set to be removed from the scheme. It is simply unacceptable to legislate mass removals without a detailed, funded plan for where these people will access support. Relying on under-funded state and territory systems that are already stretched to capacity places the lives of vulnerable Australians at unacceptable risk. This is a cruel and negligent policy approach.
- Algorithmic Assessments and the Demonisation of Invisible Disability
The Bill introduces support needs assessments that will be processed by computer-guided planning tools to generate individual budgets. This approach fundamentally fails to account for the complex, fluctuating, and often non-visible nature of many disabilities. Many people with disability ( including my friend’s daughter) are rightfully dreading that they will be removed from the scheme because their disability is “too invisible” for a one-to-three-hour assessment, or because a computer will predict they can manage without life-sustaining supports.
Instead of risk mitigation, these algorithmic systems create indirect discrimination and recall the failures of the Robodebt Royal Commission. The Bill paves the way for a simplistic, cost- cutting system that prioritises budget targets over the lived experience and wellbeing of people with disability.
- Unreasonably Short Time Frame for Submissions
The government announced a consultation for this Bill that began on 22 May 2026 and closed on 29 May 2026—a window of just one week. To provide the disability community, representative organisations, experts, and the public with such a short time frame to review a complex Bill and prepare a submission is a profound failure of democratic process. This truncated timeline appears designed to limit scrutiny and circumvent genuine consultation. It is an insult to the intelligence and lived experience of the Australian disability community.
- No Collaboration with Key Mainstream Professionals
The Bill and its implementation will have a direct impact on the work of teachers, nurses, daycare educators, and allied health
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 956
professionals. Yet, as with previous abrupt changes to the scheme, these professionals have not been given adequate opportunities for collaboration or input. These are the people who will be left to fill the service gaps when thousands are removed from the NDIS. Without their expertise and partnership, this Bill will make an already dysfunctional system even more chaotic.
- No Transparency Around Advisory Board Conflicts of Interest
Finally, I am deeply concerned about the lack of transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest on the Bill’s advisory boards and within the NDIA Board itself. The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) found the NDIA Board’s management of conflicts was inconsistent, including for members with employment at NDIS providers or consultancies. This builds on concerns that advisory groups are often dominated by representatives from established organisations with vested interests, which can overshadow the voices of everyday participants. The government has a duty to ensure that the bodies advising on this landmark legislation are not compromised by financial or professional conflicts of interest. A public, transparent register of interests is essential.
- A Clear Contradiction: Protecting the NDIS by Cutting It While Protecting Gas Exporter Profits
The Albanese government has repeatedly claimed that this Bill is necessary to protect the future of the NDIS. However, the reality is that the government is simultaneously slashing support for 160,000 people with disability while refusing to make multibillion-dollar gas corporations pay their fair share. The government has explicitly ruled out a 25 per cent tax on gas exports that would raise an estimated $17 billion annually——more than enough to cover any shortfall in the NDIS budget.
This decision cannot be justified on economic grounds. The Senate inquiry into gas taxation has heard clear evidence that a gas export tax would overwhelmingly be absorbed by the corporations’ healthy profit margins, not passed on to our trading partners. Meanwhile, Australian governments are providing $16.3 billion in fossil fuel subsidies in 2025–26——an amount that is growing faster than NDIS spending. That equates to $31,020 of taxpayer money handed out every single minute to some of the wealthiest corporations in the nation.
The government’s choice is stark: slash critical support for 160,000 people with disability, or ask gas giants to contribute their fair share. By choosing the former, the government has shown that protecting corporate profits is a higher priority than protecting the most vulnerable members of our community. This is not “securing the NDIS for future generations.” It is a political choice to balance the budget on the backs of people with disability while letting the gas industry off the hook.
In summary, I urge the Committee to consider the devastating impact of this Bill: the 160,000 individuals facing removal with no plan
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 956
for their care; the discriminatory potential of algorithmic assessments that penalise invisible disability; the insultingly short consultation period that undermines genuine democratic input; the exclusion of teachers, nurses and educators who will be left to manage the fallout; and the troubling lack of transparency around conflicts of interest on advisory boards.
Most of all, I ask the Committee to confront the fundamental contradiction at the heart of this Bill. The government claims it must cut support for 160,000 people with disability to protect the NDIS, yet it continues to hand billions in subsidies and tax loopholes to wealthy gas exporters while refusing to implement a modest 25 per cent export tax that would raise $17 billion annually. This is not a budget necessity. It is a political choice to prioritise corporate profits over the lives of vulnerable Australians.
If the government truly wishes to secure the NDIS for future generations, it should start by asking profitable gas corporations to pay their fair share. This Bill must not pass in its current form.
Please consider my concerns and do everything in your power to ensure the NDIS remains a safety net for all who need it, not a cost-cutting exercise subsidised by the most vulnerable.
Yours sincerely,