09/08/2026
Why the proposed NDIS Bill should be scrapped!
Key evidence raised in the Senate inquiry in the past two weeks:
• Serious concerns raised from disability organisations, legal services, academics, community organisations and the Australian Human Rights Commission.
• The central concern is that the Bill would cut supports before genuine alternatives are available.
Planned reduction:
Government changes are expected to reduce NDIS participation to about 600,000. approximately 241,000 people could be removed from the scheme by mid-2031.
• Children affected: About 155,000 of those removed would be aged 18 or under.
• Around 60 per cent of children and young people removed would be autistic.
• Removing 241,000 people from the NDIS would also remove demand for thousands of hours of paid disability support.
• NDIS Providers would face reduced income, service cuts, job losses and possible business closures, particularly medium, small and regional providers.
• Disability workers could lose shifts, hours and jobs, with casual and part-time workers hit first.
• Skilled workers may leave the sector, reducing future capacity and worsening waitlists.
• Remaining participants could face less choice, fewer providers and lower-quality support.
• Any claimed savings are likely to be offset by job losses, provider collapse and higher pressure on public systems.
Evidence of harm:
• Supports would be removed from large numbers of disabled people, especially children and autistic participants.
• The Bill relies on alternative supports that do not yet exist or are not ready.
• Costs and pressure would be shifted onto families, carers, hospitals, schools, state disability systems and community services.
• Loss of support is likely to increase crisis demand, carer burnout and poorer health, education and participation outcomes.
• Advocates raised concerns about broad ministerial powers, accountability and review rights.
• Undefined drafting and future rules create uncertainty about who will lose support and when.
• Social and community participation supports are at risk, despite being essential to inclusion, relationships and informal support networks.
Human rights and consultation concerns
• The Australian Human Rights Commission urged the government to halt the Bill until serious human rights concerns are addressed.
• Key concerns include rushed process, weak accountability and the impact on disabled people’s rights.
• Reform may be needed, but it must not proceed before rights protections and safeguards are in place.
• Peak disability organisations and legal services said the Bill should not pass in its current form.
• Concerns include unclear drafting, weakened protections, uncertainty about future rules and insufficient safeguards for carers.
• More than 100 academics and community organisations opposed powers that could cut social and community participation budgets.
Economic and ethical assessment
• Economic risk: Savings are achieved by shifting costs to families, carers, states, hospitals, schools and community services.
• System pressure: Removing support without replacement services will likely increase crisis intervention and downstream costs.
• False economy: Short-term budget savings may create greater long-term social and public-system costs.
• Ethical failure: The Bill targets people who rely on support to live safely and participate in community life.
• Disproportionate impact: Children, autistic participants and people on low incomes are likely to be among those most exposed to harm.
• Rights concern: Removing supports before alternatives exist undermines dignity, autonomy, inclusion and the purpose of the NDIS.
In Conclusion The Bill should be scrapped.
• Reform must restart through proper consultation with disabled people, disability organisations, families, carers, workers and state and territory services.
• Any future reform must be co-designed, evidence-based and sequenced so no one loses essential support before suitable alternatives are funded and available.
Check the comments for links to media articles, primary sources and evidence that was presented in the senate enquiry. Arm yourself with hard evidence when contacting senators this week!
Send us a message if you want to get an email list of senators and a template to use this week. Angus Taylor MP Senator Michaelia Cash Senator Fatima PaymanDavid Pocock Senator Penny Allman-Payne Senator Jordon Steele-John
