National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 984 NDIS Amendment Bill 2026 – Senate Inquiry – A Submission. Introduction: A submission regarding the proposed changes in regulations, rules and laws related to the NDIS Amendment Bill 2026 and associated funding reductions for PWD. Rationale: As a sample of what the proposed changes to the NDIS Act will have on a wide range of PWD, we present a case, based on the needs of our son, as just one example. Our son, who is a 33 yr old, is autistic, with a
sever Intellectual Disability, no expressive language, very minimal receptive language comprehension,and a wide range of other impairments. He is accurately described a 2 yr old child, trapped in the body of a 33 yr old man. For the purpose of this inquiry, our lived experience with our son is used as an illustration, of the impact, a reduction in NDIS funding, will have on his wellbeing, health and functional capacity. We would appeal to members of this Inquiry to keep in mind, the ‘Authority’ which this parliament has, over the individuals who have no power to speak for themselves. Please exercise this ‘Authority’ cautiously.
Submission: We submit the following via point form and appeal to the inquiry to adjust amendments which ensure that all PWD, who have no power to speak for themselves, have their rights and funding preserved. .
Point 1: ‘Social, Civic and Community’ Participation’. Focusing on our son, as an example, a proposal to reduce funding by 50%, which limits access for a PWD to participate in ‘Social, Civic and Community’ activities will result in the following. > increase boredom and an escalation in negative behaviour. >increased risk of self-harm and harm to others. >reduce physical activity which in turn will increase weight & reducing health and wellbeing. >increase social isolation by reducing visits to family and joining a group of friends for a meal and social event as well as access to community based ‘Day Programs’. >reduce access to civic events related to advocacy for PWD & others. NOTE: It should be noted that a major cost component limiting community access for PWD, is the cost of transport, a factor over which they have no control. They are therefore dependent on funding to cover transport costs as well as support costs via parts of the community participation funding.
Point 2: ‘Capacity Building’. Focusing on our son, as an example, a proposal to reduce ‘Capacity Building’ funding by 10% will result in the following. > limit choices such as an outing to a local Café with friend. >having to choose between having accessing a dietitian or a physiotherapist, but not both. > reduced access to an O.T. for building life skills & lifelong learning. >decreased social interaction with others, outside home, used to reinforce skills learnt from therapy services. > limit access and choice in using essential services located in the community.
Point 3: ‘New Criteria’ Focusing on our son, as an example, a proposal to change the ‘Criteria’ could prevent qualifying for required funds, within the NDIS, at any stage and when health deteriorates due to ageing & associated health issues. Therefore the new criteria needs to be clearly definition and needs clarification via the following. > What is the ‘New Criteria’? > To whom will the ‘New Criteria’ apply? >What impact will the ‘New Criteria’ have on funding levels?
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 984
Point 4:
‘The Appeal Process’
Focusing on our son, as an example, the proposed amendments will limit access to the ‘NDIS Appeal Process’. For example access to an appeal process when a decision, by either the NDIS or NDIA, reduces funding or denies access to ‘a review of services’, will result in the following. >negate due process. >limit independence and choice and control. >Increase risk of being denied essential services. > result in insecurity and anxiety and deny the fulfilment of the goals of individuals.
NOTE; The current appeal process, system within the NDIS, is not perfect, however if appeal access, to an independent advocate system, such as ‘The Tribunal’, would have to be considered, to be discrimination. The concept of ‘An ‘Independent Tribunal’ inside the NDIS, is unacceptable.
Point 5 ‘Plan Assessment’ Focusing on our son, as an example, the proposed amendments to the ‘Assessment Process’ to determine the need of an individual will inevitably, result in a denial and or a reduction in services caused by a reduction in allocated funds via plan budgets. Currently a PWD develops a plan based on their individual needs, often with assistance from a person who meets them face to face and knows them well. The new planning process, with the formation of ‘A set of Evaluators’, who have a background in O.T. Dietary, and other therapies, who will complete a ‘Tick Box’ assessment via a phone call, has to be considered to be a
questionable method. The results of this ‘I-Can –Version 6’, tick box assessment, would then, via ‘AI’, beused for ‘The Measurement of Functional Capacity’. This will result in reduced levels of funding and poor individual outcomes for PWD because of the following. >lack of individual input gained from direct observations. >it lacks integrity, honest and transparency, which will be hidden behind the ‘Magic of AI’ >be unsuitable for individuals who are ‘non-verbal’, ‘intellectually disable’, ‘profoundly autistic’, ‘use devises to communicate’, as well as a wide range of sensory impairments. >reduce individual rights. > prevent / limit the right to appeal a decision.
Thank you for reading and considering this ‘Submission’. Please feel free to contact us to discuss any issues.
Bruce and Karen Donaldson.