NDIA Accountability Project

Submission 368 — Ms Nicolette Boele MP , Federal Member for Bradfield — Inquiry into the Thriving Kids initiative

‹ PrevPage 1 of 8 · Source p. 1Next ›

NICOLETTE BOELE MP

FEDERAL MEMBER FOR BRADF I ELD

Secretariat

Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Disability

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

By email: health.reps@aph.gov.au

3 October 2025

Submission to the Inquiry into the Thriving Kids Initiative

Dear Secretariat,

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission to the Standing Committee on

Health, Aged Care and Disability’s inquiry into the Government’s Thriving Kids Initiative

(the Initiative).

I make this submission as the Federal Member for Bradfield. Like all electorates across Australia, Bradfield has many thousands of NDIS participants, with the number projected to grow.

What follows is an overview of the community engagement undertaken by my office, highlighting key findings, statements and also recommendations. I welcome the opportunity to appear before the Committee should it choose to have hearings.

Government’s announcement of the Initiative

  1. Tens of thousands of children around Australia currently receive services through the NDIS for mild to moderate developmental delays or autism. The impact of these services on children and their families is enormous.

  2. Since the Government announced its changes to the NDIS, our Bradfield community has expressed to me its deep concerns – not just about how changes will likely impact them, but about the manner in which the government announced the Initiative. The announcement was made without warning, consultation, or clarity, causing great distress for many local families, educators and disability workers.

1

  1. It’s my opinion that the Government’s proposal to significantly alter services should have been managed with considerably more clarity and care.

Community consultation in Bradfield

  1. Feeling the alarm within our community about the Government’s hasty, confusing announcement, I undertook a community consultation process in Bradfield to hear from affected participants and families. I wanted to ensure not only that their concerns were being heard, but that the concerns would be fed into the Inquiry process.

  2. Two methods were used – emails from constituents to the Electorate Office and an online questionnaire promoted via social media. The online survey which ran for a week at the end of September had 98 respondents; data was also taken from the emails and letters sent to my office by constituents over the period of August and September since the announcement was made.

  3. Survey respondents comprised parents or carers of children with autism or developmental delays (29%), health professionals (14%), educators (13%), people with lived experience of autism (12%), service providers or community organizations (8%) and ‘other’ (24%).

Survey findings

  1. Seventy-three percent (73%) of participants said they had not felt informed or included by the government in discussions about the proposed changes; “not at all” informed or included (45%), and “not really” been informed or included (28%).

  2. When asked which were the most helpful in supporting children with mild to moderate needs, 34% stated allied health services (speech and occupational therapy, physiotherapy and psychology) followed by schools (18%), child and family health services (16%) and general practitioners (14%).

  3. When asked what they considered to be the biggest gaps in support, there was a relatively even number of respondents who pointed to support in schools, access to assessments and diagnosis, access to allied health services, and affordability.

  4. Respondents’ main concerns about the proposal to move children with mild to moderate needs from the NDIS to the Initiative were that there would be fewer individualized supports (19%), that out-of-pocket expenses and gaps would increase (17%), and that they would lose their current entitlements (15%). Four percent of

2

respondents said they had no concerns. Those respondents considered that the Initiative could work well.

  1. The potential benefits of the Initiative were thought to be stronger support in early childhood education and care (18%), faster access to early support (17%), strong support in schools (16%) and reduced pressure on families navigating the NDIS (16%).

  2. Attachment A to this letter sets out some of the key themes of the written responses to the survey questions.

Community correspondence about the Initiative

  1. As well as conducting a survey, I encouraged my community to write to me with their concerns about the Initiative. Many did.

  2. The comments contained in the correspondence I received included: a) “If the type of therapies that are offered with the Thriving Kids program [are further restricted], the choice and control originally applauded within the NDIS disappears.”

b) “The Thriving Kids scheme risks harm by placing children into systems that are already failing them. The Disability Royal Commission in 2019 found systematic exclusion, under-resourcing and inequity in the systems that “Thriving Kids” is planning to use.”

c) “Foundational supports, announced in 2023, were meant to be up and running by mid-2025. During this time, the NDIS has already been cutting funding and controlling how autistic people can use their funding. No foundation supports have been seen and people are already falling through the gaps. This gives no confidence that the Thriving Kids scheme will actually materialise or be transparent in its development.”

d) “By taking kids with autism off NDIS, you are essentially taking kids off a life raft and then throwing them in the water with a small floaty.”

e) “The Minister’s announcement was obviously not created with lived experience and input from autistic voices. The language used by the Minister (level of autism, “mild” autism) is outdated and no longer acceptable within the autistic community.”

3

Recommendations

  1. My community consultation process has identified several recommendations for the Committee to consider during its inquiry process:

a) Robust consultation process and co-design: ensure that any new programs and changes are widely consulted upon, and informed by the voices of those with lived experience. The cry of people living with disability is “nothing about us without us”.

b) Choice, flexibility and control: ensure that any new programs give choice, control and flexibility to the NDIS participant. The participants and their doctors are the experts in what works.

c) Change, support and education in our systems: the healthcare and education systems need reform to ensure they are truly inclusive spaces and accessible for children with autism and those with a disability.

d) Importance of early intervention and foundational supports: maintain the focus on early identification of developmental delays and autism, and access to foundational supports before issues escalate.

e) Integration with mainstream services: any new program must have seamless coordination between health, education, and disability services. Schools and early childhood educators are seen as critical partners in delivering foundational supports. The availability of allied health services in school settings considerably eases pressures on families.

f) Workforce capacity and training: as so many allied health services are currently provided through the NDIS, any new program must ensure workforce capacity prior to commencement. Educators, general practitioners and other frontline workers should receive additional specialised training in developmental delay and autism.

g) Equity and inclusion: new programs must provide culturally safe and accessible services for First Nations children, culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities, and children with complex or intersecting needs.

h) Evidence-based practice and periodic evaluation: new program design should be informed by research and leading practice, both domestic and international. 4

NICOLETTE BOELE MP

FEDERAL MEMBER FOR BRADFIELD

New programs should be regularly evaluated, with robust data collection and feedback loops for refinement.

i) Appropriate transitional arrangements: it is critical to build clear pathways between foundational supports and NDIS-funded services. There is a risk of service gaps during transitions, especially for children with fluctuating or emerging needs. There may be a need for p ilot programs or phased rollouts to test effectiveness before national implementation.

I wish the Stand ing Committee the best with its deliberations and look forward to the Inquiry’s recommendations. I also thank my community for its sincere and meaningful contribution to it.

Yours sincerely,

Nicolette Boele MP

5 Suite 1/ Level 2, 280 Pacific Highway, LINDFIELD NSW 2070

P: (02) 9465 3950  I E: nicolette.boele.mp@aph.gov.au  I www.nicoletteboele.com.au

Attachment A – Selection of Written Responses to Survey Questions

Fear of Losing Existing Supports

 “As a person with autism, the support provided from NDIS is invaluable and removing supports will damage support networks in place now.” (Educator)  “My son is asd 2 and has an NDIS plan but … his plan funding has been fully cut, reduced to next to nothing … Now it’s either up to me to try and fund or my son just doesn’t get that support or service no more.” (Parent)  “My son is a successful story of how NDIS individual support achieves great things … no generalised Thriving Kids program is going to work as well as individual care plans.” (Parent & lived experience)  “My children … will lose the supports they have simply because they are ‘verbal’ … The supports they have … are the reason they can do those things.” (Parent)  “I am concerned that my teen will be excluded … She only thrives because of the scaffold we have in place … If that is discontinued … she cannot be a thriving and contributing member of society.” (Parent)  “My grandson has benefitted incredibly from physio & classroom support. Without continuation … he could become a forgotten child.” (Parent)

Lack of Clarity and Poor Design of Thriving Kids

 “I am concerned that Thriving Kids was announced before it even exists … schools would be some kind of hub … without giving any clear idea of what that means … As an autistic adult, I am deeply concerned … this will be yet another program that forces autistic children to mask their autistic traits rather than being neuro-affirming.” (Educator & lived experience)  “It’s so important to get this right. The risks of not implementing an accessible, sound and adequate system are huge.” (Parent)  “Health professionals … should prescribe and recommend what each child needs rather than government trying to do that just to save money.” (Health professional & parent)  “My biggest concern is that to truly thrive, kids still need adequate assessment and tailored plans … which can’t be addressed with blanket approaches.” (Health professional)

Gaps in Schools and Early Education

 “My son … missed out on fundamental therapy … Forced to home-schooling for 7.5 years.” (Parent)  “Schools are under so much pressure as it is … I cannot imagine how yet another program or requirement could possibly fit into the school day.” (Educator & lived experience)  “Our OT sees my kids at school but it’s been a lot of red tape and never without drama … Organising all these supports separately is exhausting.” (Parent & educator)  “We either need all teachers to be trained in ways to support special needs children or more support.” (Parent)  “Inclusion in mainstream schools was a great idea implemented without the necessary support and training … mainstream children are suffering as a result.” (Educator) 6

 “Access to external providers at school … only an option if students are on the NDIS. Would this change when students are transitioned off?” (Educator)  “Teachers are not sufficiently trained and need onsite support.” (Parent)  “All areas have gaps. There is a particularly large gap in allied health services within the NSW department of education. If the NSW government included allied health services and access, there would be much better supports in place for children with autism within schools.” (Parent)

Affordability and Accessibility of Therapies  “Without the NDIS we would not have been or be now able to afford occupational therapy as it’s so expensive.” (Parent & educator)  “We currently spend around $800 a week on interventions with no rebates … How is this fair and equal support of all early learners?” (Parent & educator)  “Current rates for allied health are unaffordable unless you are on the NDIS. If allied health was more affordable and available, this could work.” (Parent & lived experience)  “I’m a paediatric speech pathologist with my own small business. I’m worried that my clients with autism will not be supported and lose access to their weekly, necessary therapy. I also worry for kids with Developmental Language Disorder and Speech Sound Disorders from 3-10 yrs who currently have great difficulty accessing funding, and are only eligible for 5 Medicare sessions to all allied health services per year through a “chronic disease management plan”. The funding in place for them is inadequate. (Speech pathologist)  “Receiving a diagnosis is simply too expensive … and once new interventions are introduced there is no capping on charges … this makes diagnosis and care unaffordable.” (Educator)

Bureaucracy, Waste, and Stress

 “The NDIS have weaponized bureaucracy against the most vulnerable children … Think of a constant ‘robodebt’ level of distress … hoop jumping, palm offs, obfuscation …” (Parent)  “I have an issue with how those already in the NDIS system have been put as a set and forget … tough to navigate … very deficit focused.” (Parent)  “Our personal experience with the NDIS is generally summarised as ‘shambolic’ … inadequate bureaucracy, inappropriate funding allocation and massive processing issues.” (Parent)  “Parents are paying thousands — 70 allied health sessions per year is NOT over servicing.” (Parent & lived experience)

Lack of Consultation and Trust  “I am deeply concerned about the lack of real consultation with the autistic community — this is vital …” (Educator & lived experience)  “The lack of consultation with allied health … is extremely disappointing.” (Health professional & parent)  “Main concern … government will not follow voices with lived experience and offer flexibility. No one feels informed … government have no idea what they are doing yet.” (Parent & lived experience)

7

 “I know that my child needs help … I’m terrified of change without information and support. I’m scared about not being able to afford support. I’m scared for our future.” (Parent & lived experience)

8