Submission 977
To the Committee Secretary
Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee
Submission to the Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the
NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
My name is and I am the father of a 14-year-old daughter who has been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. My daughter was diagnosed with autism at four years of age and has been supported through the National Disability Insurance Scheme since early childhood.
The NDIS has played an essential role in our daughter’s development and wellbeing over many years. The funding she has received has enabled access to therapy, allied health support, and interventions that our family simply would not have been able to afford independently. These supports have given her the best possible opportunity to participate in school, family life, and the community despite the significant challenges associated with her disabilities.
Autism is not a condition that a child simply “grows out of.” It is a lifelong disability that affects nearly every aspect of my daughter’s daily functioning. Alongside the social and communication challenges commonly associated with autism, she experiences severe anxiety, executive functioning difficulties, sensory challenges, hypermobility, low muscle tone, digestive problems, toileting issues, and ongoing struggles with both fine and gross motor skills. The cumulative effect of these difficulties has had a profound impact on her mental health and has at times resulted in self-harm and suicidal thoughts.
Descriptions such as “moderate disability” do not adequately reflect the lived experience of autistic individuals and their families. The reality is that many autistic people are expected to navigate education systems, workplaces, healthcare systems, and social environments that are fundamentally not designed with their needs in mind. While autism can sometimes be described as a “hidden disability,” its impacts are very real and can be debilitating.
As our daughter moves into adolescence and eventually adulthood, her support needs are evolving rather than disappearing. The transition into adult life will present additional barriers relating to education, employment, independence, and community participation. Continued access to NDIS supports will be critical in helping her manage these challenges and maintain her wellbeing and safety.
I am therefore extremely concerned about a number of proposed changes contained within the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026. I also wish to express concern about the limited consultation period provided for public submissions. Families caring for children with disabilities are already under significant pressure balancing caregiving responsibilities, employment, financial pressures, and advocacy. A two-week submission period is insufficient for meaningful consultation on legislation with such serious consequences.
I respectfully ask the Committee to reconsider the following sections of the Bill.
Section 34A — Ministerial Funding Cuts
This section would allow the Minister to introduce percentage-based funding cuts across broad categories of supports.
I am concerned that powers of this nature provide insufficient safeguards for NDIS participants and their families. Decisions that may dramatically affect the lives of people with disabilities should not be made without strong accountability measures, evidence-based justification, and proper consultation with the disability community.
Blanket reductions fail to recognise the highly individual nature of disability support needs. They also risk prioritising budgetary considerations over participant wellbeing and outcomes.
Submission 977 Section 33(2EA) — Support Caps by Cohort
The proposal to allow supports to be capped according to participant cohorts is deeply troubling.
The NDIS was established on the principle that supports should be tailored to the individual and based on what is “reasonable and necessary.” Introducing cohort-based caps risks undermining this principle and may result in people with complex needs losing access to essential supports.
Even among autistic individuals with similar diagnoses, support needs can vary enormously. Broad funding caps cannot fairly account for these differences.
Section 50A — Unspent Funds and Auto-Renewal
I am concerned about provisions relating to the loss of unspent funds during reassessment or automatic plan renewals.
Families frequently encounter long waitlists, therapist shortages, service cancellations, and other barriers that delay access to supports. In many cases, unspent funds reflect the difficulties participants face in accessing services rather than a lack of need.
Participants should not be penalised for systemic issues beyond their control.
Section 34(1)(aa) — “Directly Arising” Rule
Restricting supports only to those that “directly arise” from a participant’s primary disability is another area of significant concern.
For autistic individuals, disability impacts are often interconnected and overlapping. Mental health difficulties, sensory regulation, executive functioning impairments, physical conditions, and social participation challenges cannot always be neatly separated into isolated categories.
This proposed wording risks excluding supports that are essential for maintaining daily functioning, mental health, and community participation.
Section 9B — New Eligibility Test
The introduction of stricter functional capacity assessments from 2028 for both new and existing participants creates considerable uncertainty and anxiety.
Conditions such as autism and ADHD can present differently depending on stress levels, environmental demands, available supports, and masking behaviours. A single assessment may not accurately reflect the ongoing and lifelong nature of these disabilities.
Reassessing existing participants under stricter eligibility criteria may place already vulnerable individuals and families under enormous stress and instability.
Schedule 5 — Broad Regulatory Powers
I am also concerned about the proposed regulatory powers allowing the Minister to alter how the legislation operates for up to 12 months without additional parliamentary approval.
Changes with significant consequences for Australians with disabilities should always be subject to transparency, scrutiny, and democratic oversight. Concentrating such broad powers within a single office creates uncertainty and reduces accountability.
Submission 977
Conclusion
The NDIS has been critical in supporting my daughter’s development, mental health, education, and quality of life. It has also provided our family with the ability to access supports that would otherwise have been financially impossible.
I urge the Committee to ensure that any reforms to the NDIS protect the rights, dignity, and long-term wellbeing of Australians with disability. Reforms should strengthen the scheme while preserving its core purpose of providing individualised, evidence-based supports to those who genuinely need them.
I also strongly encourage greater consultation with people with disabilities, their families, advocates, therapists, and professionals before introducing changes that may significantly affect participant access and outcomes.
Thank you for considering my submission.
Yours sincerely,