Final report from the Senate Committee on the NDIS Bill and what Inclusion Australia thinks.

This information was written by Inclusion Australia on 14 August 2026.

Where we say we it means Inclusion Australia.

This information is written in Easy Read.

Hard words are in bold. We explain what they mean.

It is a good idea to read this information with support.

The Senate Committee is a group of politicians who are looking at the changes the Government wants to make to the NDIS.

The Senate Committee has been looking at the NDIS Bill since May 2026.

This is called an inquiry.

They shared a new report today to tell us what they recommend happens about the changes the government wants to make to the NDIS Bill.

We have made Easy Read information about the report and what Inclusion Australia thinks.

You can download a copy here or click the link at the bottom of this page.

National Advocacy Collective’s statement on the NDIS Bill

This statement was written by the National Advocacy Collective.

Where it says ‘we’ it means the National Advocacy Collective.

This statement is in Easy Read.

Hard words are in bold.

We explain what they mean.

It is a good idea to read this statement with support.

About the National Advocacy Collective

The National Advocacy Collective or NAC was started in 2022 to support the rights of parents with an intellectual disability.

NAC is made up of:

  • Parents with an intellectual disability and their supporters
  • Disability advocates

Advocates are people who speak up for people with disability

  • Disability researchers

Researchers are people who look into disability and try to find ways to make things better.

  • Other supporters and allies.

Changes to the NDIS

NAC is very worried about the changes the Government wants to make to the NDIS.

These changes are called the NDIS Bill.

The NDIS often focuses on supporting children with disability.

But parents with disability need support too.

We are worried that parents with an intellectual disability will be worse off if the NDIS changes happen.

People with an intellectual disability should have the same chance to be parents and care for their children.

This is part of the NDIS goal of helping people live an ordinary life.

But parents with an intellectual disability are more likely to be involved with child protection services.

Child protection services is a part of the Government that looks into child safety.

This goes against the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability (UNCRPD).

The UNCRPD is an agreement between countries to protect the rights of people with disability.

Recently a case went to the Administrative Review Tribunal where a parent with disability wanted parenting supports through the NDIS.

The Administrative Review Tribunal or ART is a special court that looks into decisions made by Government services like the NDIS.

Parenting supports can be things like:

  • Step-by-step help with parenting
  • Learning parenting skills
  • Help talking to services like Centrelink or child protection services.

The ART agreed that:

  • Parenting is an important part of life for people with disability
  • Parents with disability should be supported
  • Parenting supports should be funded in the person’s NDIS plan.

We think the Government must listen to the ART when making decisions about parenting supports in a person’s NDIS plan.

What we think about the Bill

NAC does not think the Government should pass the NDIS Bill.

NAC is worried about the Bill because:

  • The Disability Minister should not decide how much money is available for each type of NDIS support
  • The NDIS must look at the whole person and not just one disability when deciding if a person should get NDIS support
  • The Bill must not stop people with disability getting the supports they need
  • The Government must look at what the changes mean for families and not leave families worse off.

NAC also thinks the Government must:

  • Look at how NDIS parenting supports are being used
  • Make sure NDIS decisions are fair for everyone
  • Train NDIS staff on the rights of parents with an intellectual disability.

What parents with an intellectual disability told us

One parent said:

“My support workers help me go to visits with my kids.

They help me understand better about being a good mum and looking at things through my child’s eyes.

If the NDIS cuts my funding it will be very hard because my children live far away from me.”

Sue said:

“If my NDIS funding gets cut I will not be able to leave my house or see my daughter unless she comes to my home or nearby.”

One parent said:

“I get support to help me go to Child Protection meetings and assessments.

I feel more secure having support at Child Protection meetings.

I will need more support to look after my new baby and for when I get my kids back.

If the NDIS cuts my funding it would be very sad because I will not get support anymore.”

Romeo said:

“If the NDIS cuts my funding I will lose support to see my children.”

You can download this Easy Read statement here (or click below).

Joint statement from academics and advocates: NDIS cuts to social and community participation will cause preventable harm

We, the undersigned academics and community organisations, urge Parliament not to proceed with the mechanism proposed by the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 that enables broad reductions to Social, Community and Civic Participation supports. Research evidence shows these changes are likely to carry significant risks for people with disability, with consequences for peoples’ health, safety and employment. If Parliament proceeds with changes that will cause foreseeable harm, it must legislate safeguards and not rely on review and appeal processes after harm has occurred.

The NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 (the Bill) proposes support determination powers that would enable the Minister to reduce funding across categories of NDIS supports for the purpose of achieving financial sustainability for the Scheme. The Government has indicated these powers would initially be used to reduce Social, Community and Civic Participation (SCCP) supports by 50% and capacity-building daily activities by 10%.

We acknowledge the amendments made to the Bill in the House of Representatives and the additional clarification provided in the revised Explanatory Memorandum that was released on 17 July. These changes recognise many of the concerns raised by people with disability, families, academics and the broader community that the proposed cuts will cause significant harm to people who rely on the NDIS to live an ordinary life.

However, these updates do not address the fundamental issue with these proposed cuts.

For many people with disability – and especially people with an intellectual disability and people with psychosocial disability – SCCP supports are the practical supports that make inclusion possible. They enable people to take part in ordinary community life, develop trusted relationships and maintain the informal networks that the Disability Royal Commission identified as critical safeguards against violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation[i].

Alternative supports are not yet available, and because many people with disability live on low incomes and experience persistent poverty, these supports cannot be replaced or self-funded when they are removed. Reducing them weakens the very safeguards enable people to live safely and independently in their communities.

While the Government has made clear that it does not intend these changes to “affect supports that are essential to a participant’s health, safety or continuous 24/7 care and support”, the Bill nonetheless creates broad powers to reduce supports in a way that makes those outcomes predictable.

We are already seeing the impacts

Advocates across Australia are hearing consistent reports of significant reductions to SCCP supports through NDIS plan reviews. People with disability and families describe losing supports that assist with medication management, meal preparation, attending medical appointments, maintaining employment, remaining visible and connected in the community and staying safe at home.

These outcomes do not constitute reductions in “social activities” alone – they are reductions to preventative supports that enable people to remain healthy, safe and connected while reducing reliance on more intensive and costly service systems like hospitals.

The experiences being reported show that the kinds of harms the Government says it does not intend are already occurring for many people who rely on the NDIS, and will only increase because of the Bill if it is passed.

The research evidence tells us

Research evidence shows a clear connection between social isolation and foreseeable risks of harm, including violence and abuse[ii]. It has demonstrated over time that generating community participation and inclusion is a reliable way to prevent and reduce harm[iii].

It also has many other benefits, both for people with disability and for other community members[iv]. Community participation gives people a sense of belonging and connection, strengthens relationships, reduces isolation, builds confidence and helps people feel safer in the community[v].

Community inclusion is a key component of abuse prevention, which builds natural safeguarding mechanisms and relationships which can help detect risks and foster resilience[vi]. There are many ways in which risk of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation is heightened when people with disability are isolated from community and relationships. People often lack the protective networks who can detect and respond to harm, or provide support to people to escape harmful situations[vii]. They have fewer avenues to share concerns or seek help[viii], and poor quality practice from support services such as overly controlling or neglectful actions are less likely to be noticed and acted on[ix].

Many people with cognitive disability remain socially isolated and participate in few community or political activities[x]. Making community participation meaningful for people with significant support needs has been demonstrated to require sustained support – practical strategies, skilled support, decision-making support, relationships and accessible community opportunities[xi][xii].

This evidence makes clear that community participation is a safeguarding issue, not simply a lifestyle preference. Elevated risks of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation for people with disability are well documented.[xiii]  Ways to address these risks and experiences are known, and high among them are building and sustaining informal supports; increasing active involvement and relationships; and addressing negative community attitudes towards people with disability[xiv]. Reducing community presence and involvement not only increases risk to people with disability, it runs counter to evidenced abuse prevention strategies and the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission[xv].  It is also at odds with the stated human rights objective of the Scheme to enable people with disability to live independently and be included in the community.[xvi]

SCCP supports therefore operate as protective and empowering: they help people build relationships, be visible to others, exercise choice, seek help and remain connected to ordinary places where harm is more likely to be noticed and challenged. Cutting these supports will not merely reduce “activities”; it will reduce safeguards and increase preventable risk.

What must happen next

The undersigned academics and community organisations firmly believe Parliament must not proceed with a mechanism enabling drastic reductions to SCCP supports that will create avoidable harm for people with disability, and especially people with cognitive disability.

The Government has confirmed its intention not to affect supports that are essential to a person’s health, safety and access to 24/7 supports. If that is truly Government’s intent, then the legislation must be amended to ensure those outcomes cannot occur.

The most sensible and straightforward way to achieve this is to remove the support determination power and proposed cuts to SCCP from the Bill.

The evidence is clear, and the risks are foreseeable. Parliament must now act to ensure the legislation delivers the outcomes it says it intends to achieve.

Media contact: 

To sign the statement, please add your details to this google form: Signatories of the joint statement from academics and advocates: NDIS cuts to social and community participation will cause preventable harm – Google Forms 

Signed:

  1. Professor Sally Robinson, Flinders University
  2. Dr Laura Davy, Australian National University
  3. Professor Linda Steele, University of Technology Sydney
  4. Associate Professor Dinesh Wadiwel, The University of Sydney
  5. Professor Alastair McEwin AM, UNSW Sydney
  6. Professor Emerita Gwynnyth Llewellyn, The University of Sydney
  7. Inclusion Australia
  8. Scientia Professor Julian Trollor, UNSW, Sydney
  9. Hunter Circles 
  10. Associate Professor Shane Clifton, The University of Sydney
  11. Dr Amy Conley Wright, The University of Sydney
  12. Dr Georgia Van Toorn, University of New South Wales, Sydney
  13. Down Syndrome Australia Consortium
  14. Kate Swaffer, PhD Candidate, Adelaide University; Co-founder, Dementia Alliance International
  15. Dr Lisa Stafford, Griffith University
  16. Elvira Pertego Andia, University of Technology Sydney 
  17. Professor Angus Buchanan, Curtin University 
  18. Jemma Tilley, Western Sydney University
  19. Professor Elizabeth Kendall, Griffith University
  20. Dr Alex Devine, The University of Melbourne
  21. Associate Professor Georgina Sutherland, The University of Melbourne
  22. Georgia McKenzie, La Trobe University
  23. Rhys Evans, University of Technology Sydney 
  24. Spiral Inc
  25. Women with Disabilities Australia (WWDA) 
  26. Professor Keith McVilly, The University of Melbourne
  27. Emily Rosenthal, The University of Melbourne
  28. Professor Christine Imms, The University of Melbourne
  29. People with Disability Australia (PWDA) 
  30. Brianna Lee, University of Technology Sydney 
  31. Dr Claire Quilliam, The University of Melbourne
  32. Professor Libby Callaway, Monash University
  33. Professor Jackie Leach Scully, UNSW, Sydney
  34. Dr Mariko Francis, RMIT University
  35. Children and Young People with Disability Australia (CYDA)
  36. Professor Paul Harpur, The University of Queensland
  37. Brain Injury Australia
  38. Able Together Pty Ltd
  39. Associate Professor Kathy Ellem, The University of Queensland
  40. Dr Samitha Gowinnage, The University of Queensland  
  41. Dr Jodie Bailie, The University of Sydney
  42. Ryan Olsen, Monash University
  43. Zoe Chambers, Swinburne University
  44. Katherine Heseltine, The University of Queensland
  45. Associate Professor Steven Rynne, The University of Queensland
  46. Associate Professor Lyn Phillipson, University of Wollongong
  47. Erin Fearn-Smith, The University of Sydney  
  48. Physical Disability Australia
  49. Associate Professor Ceridwen Owen, University of Tasmania
  50. Victorian Advocacy League for Individuals with Disability (VALID)
  51. Dr Gemma King, Australian National University
  52. Queensland Advocacy for Inclusion
  53. Queensland Independent Disability Advocacy Network (QIDAN)
  54. Dr June Alexander, Flinders University
  55. Mat Teubert, Monash University
  56. Deaf Victoria
  57. National Mental Health Consumer Alliance (NMHCA) 
  58. Dr Jenna Taylor, The University of Queensland
  59. TASC Community Legal Centre
  60. Luke Caughey, The University of Queensland
  61. Dr Ingrid Wijeyewardene, University of New England
  62. Stella Boyd-Ford, The University of Queensland
  63. Dr Jacqueline Walker, The University of Queensland
  64. Deafblind Australia
  65. Dr Perri Cambell, Swinburne University of Technology
  66. Professor kylie valentine, UNSW, Sydney
  67. Dr Tessa Zirnsak, La Trobe University
  68. Self-Advocacy Resource Unit (SARU) 
  69. Dr Lewis Johnstone, Monash University
  70. Professor Leanne Hassett, The University of Sydney
  71. Dr Chabel Kahn, The University of Melbourne
  72. Dr Sophie Yates, Australian National University
  73. Dr Ariella Meltzer, UNSW Sydney
  74. Family Advocacy NSW
  75. Professor Helen Dickinson, UNSW Sydney
  76. Dr Tess Bright, The University of Melbourne  
  77. Consumers of Mental Health Western Australia
  78. Dr Piers Gooding, La Trobe University 
  79. Associate Professor Sue Olney, The University of Melbourne
  80. Professor Jo Watson, Deakin University
  81. Associate Professor Angela Dew, Deakin University
  82. Dr Amie O’Shea, Deakin University
  83. Dr Shoshana Dreyfus, La Trobe University
  84. Professor Sharon Lawn, Flinders University
  85. Associate Professor Michelle King, Griffith University
  86. Parent 2 Parent (P2P) Queensland
  87. Dr Philippa Duell-Piening, University of Galway
  88. Professor Sean Tweedy, The University of Queensland
  89. Professor Erin Wilson, Swinburne University of Technology
  90. Dr Lewis Johnstone, Monash University
  91. Associate Professor Yvette Maker, The University of Tasmania
  92. Lucy Macali, Swinburne University of Technology 
  93. Associate Professor Michelle Bellon, Flinders University
  94. Associate Professor Jane Lloyd, UNSW Sydney 
  95. Emeritus Professor Simon Darcy, University of Technology Sydney 
  96. Dr Georgia McKenzie, La Trobe University 
  97. Associate Professor Louisa Willoughby, Monash University 
  98. Professor Nora Shields, La Trobe University 
  99. ACT Down Syndrome & Intellectual Disability Association Inc. 
  100. Blind Citizens Australia 
  101. Dr Louise Pearce, The University of Sydney 
  102. Emeritus Professor Christine Bigby, President Australasian Society for Intellectual Disability 
  103. Deafblind West Australians 
  104. Professor Melissa O’Donnell, Australian Centre for Child Protection, Adelaide University 
  105. Antipoverty Centre 
  106. Developmental Disability Western Australia (DDWA) 
  107. Australia Council of Social Service (ACOSS) 
  108. Australian Autism Alliance 
  109. Edward Jegasothy, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney 
  110. Occupational Therapy Society (OTSi) 
  111. Ability Pathways Australia 
  112. Adjunct Professor Jeffrey Chan, University of Queensland
  113. Dr Judith Gould Solid Foundation Allied Health Murray Bridge SA 
  114. Dr Robert Pereira, University of Canberra, and Pear Tree Occupational Therapy 
  115. Jesuit Social Services 
  116. Dr Patsie Frawley, Professor Disability and Community Health, University of Canberra 

Professor Scott Avery, a First Nations academic at Girra Maa Indigenous Health UTS, supports the retention of community participation supports within the NDIS but has abstained from signing the Statement, pending a respectful engagement processes with First Nations people with disability utilising legitimised community consultation practices.


[i] Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability, 2023. Final Report – Volume 3: Nature and Extent of Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation https://.disability.royalcommission.gov.au/publications/final-report-volume-3-nature-and-extent violence-abuse-neglect-and-exploitation, page 6.

[ii] Starke M., Larsson, A., & Punzi, E. (2024). People with intellectual disability and their risk of exposure to violence: identification and prevention – a literature review. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17446295241252472

[iii] Davy, L., Robinson, S., Idle, J. & valentine, k. (2024) Regulating vulnerability: policy approaches for preventing violence and abuse of people with disability in Australian service provision settings. Disability & Society, 40, 1039-1060 https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2024.2323456

[iv] Purcal, C., Fisher, K.R., Robinson, S., Idle, J., Giuntoli, G., Newman, C. (2024) Five factors for effective policy to improve attitudes towards people with disability. Social Policy and Society https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746424000198

[v] Bigby C, Anderson S, Cameron N. Identifying conceptualizations and theories of change embedded in interventions to facilitate community participation for people with intellectual disability: A scoping review. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2018; 31: 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12390

[vi] NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (2025) Evidence Review: Risk Factors and Prevention of Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about-us/what-we-do/our-research/risk-factors-and-prevention-violence-abuse-neglect-and#paragraph-id-107590

[vii] NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission (2025) Evidence Review: Risk Factors and Prevention of Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about-us/what-we-do/our-research/risk-factors-and-prevention-violence-abuse-neglect-and#paragraph-id-107590

[viii] Tomaszewski, T., Fisher, K.R., Robinson, S. & Ikaheimo, H. (2026) Rethinking how people with cognitive disability complain. Disability & Society, 41 (2), 521-541 https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2025.2536586

[ix] Robinson, S., Ikaheimo, H., Fisher, K.R., Idle, J., Cresciani, R. & Smyth, C. (2026) Understanding everyday harm between young people with cognitive disability and support workers. Disability & Society https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2026.2615721

[x] Robinson, S., & Idle, J. (2023). Loneliness and how to counter it: People with intellectual disability share their experiences and ideas. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 48(1), 58-70.

[xi] Boland, G., de Paor, E., & Guerin, S. (2023). Living in Localities: The Factors That Influence the Social Inclusion in Neighborhoods of Adults With Intellectual Disability. A Systematic Scoping Review. Inclusion, 11(1), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-11.1.55

[xii] Simplican, S. C., Leader, G., Kosciulek, J., & Leahy, M. (2015). Defining social inclusion of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: An ecological model of social networks and community participation. Research in developmental disabilities, 38, 18-29.

[xiii] CRE-DH (Centre of Research Excellence in Disability and Health). 2021. Research Report: Nature and Extent of Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation against People with Disability in Australia. Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability

[xiv]Araten-Bergman, T., & Bigby, C. (2020). Violence Prevention Strategies for People with Intellectual Disabilities: A Scoping Review. Australian Social Work, 76(1), 72–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2020.1777315

[xv] Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. (2023). Final Report. https://disability.royalcommission.gov.au/publications/final-report

[xvi] The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights, Explanatory Memorandum, National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012.

Changes to Centrelink Payment Compulsory Activities and the Targeted Compliance Framework

This information was written by Inclusion Australia on 6 August 2026.

Where it says ‘we’ it means Inclusion Australia.

This information is written in Easy Read.

Hard words are in bold.

We explain what they mean.

It is a good idea to read this information with support.

It is about changes to how compulsory activities will happen in employment services.

Compulsory activities are the things some people must do to keep getting their Centrelink payment.

For example they might need to:

  • Look for work.
  • Go to appointments
  • Use an employment service.

Employment services include:

  • Workforce Australia
  • Inclusive Employment Australia (IEA)

IEA used to be called Disability Employment Services or DES. 

If compulsory activities are not done sometimes Centrelink can:

  • Stop a payment for a short time
  • Reduce a payment
  • Cancel a payment.

This is sometimes called a penalty.

We know there are at least 3200 people with an intellectual disability who have compulsory activities.

We think there are a lot more people with an intellectual disability who have not told Centrelink they have an intellectual disability.

Inclusion Australia has made Easy Read information about compulsory activities and people’s rights.

You can read it here: Inclusive-Employment-Australia_Easy-Read-factsheet_final-1.pdf

About the Targeted Compliance Framework

The Targeted Compliance Framework is called the TCF for short.

The TCF is the rules about what happens if people do not do their compulsory activities.

Some TCF rules are not being used now.

This is because some of the rules were not following the law.

For example cancelling Centrelink payments.

On Tuesday 4 August the government said it might bring these rules back in the TCF.

This means that from 26 October 2026 more people’s payments could be suspended or cancelled.

What Inclusion Australia is worried about

We know that many people with an intellectual disability face barriers to doing compulsory activities.

Many of the rules and systems are not accessible.

Information about what you need to do can be confusing.

We know the TCF causes serious harm to people with an intellectual disability.

If a person’s payment is stopped they might not have enough money for:

  • Food
  • Housing
  • Medicine
  • Travel
  • Other everyday needs.

What Inclusion Australia would like to see now

Inclusion Australia is asking for:

  • The TCF to be removed
  • All compulsory activities to be removed
  • People affected by payment penalties that are against the law to get compensation in an accessible way.

Compensation means people are paid money they are owed plus extra because something wrong happened to them.

We also want clear and accessible information to be available about:

  • Compensation
  • How to find help with individual advocacy
  • How to find help to get legal advice.

Inclusion Australia will continue to talk to the government and tell them what we are worried about.

We will share more information about speaking up for the rights of people with an intellectual disability when they are accessing Centrelink payments when it is available.

You can download this Easy Read information here (or click below).

You can read a big version of Inclusion Australia’s statement here

Update on the changes to the NDIS Bill

This information was written by Inclusion Australia.

Where it says ‘we’ it means Inclusion Australia.

This information is written in Easy Read.

Hard words are in bold. We explain what they mean.

It is a good idea to read this information with support.

About the NDIS Bill

The NDIS Bill is changes the Government wants to make to how the NDIS works.

You can find Easy Read information we have made about the NDIS Bill at:

https://www.inclusionaustralia.org.au/what-we-think-about-the-ndis-bill-easy-read/



Over 4500 people across Australia made submissions to tell Government what they think about the Bill.

Many people said they are unhappy with the draft Bill and are worried how it will affect them.

On 1st July 2026 the Australian Greens Party made a deal with the Government to change some parts of the NDIS Bill to make it better for people with disability.

These changes are called amendments.

The amendments mean that:

  • The NDIS Minister can only decide how much money is available for a few types of NDIS supports

  • People with disability cannot be made to try treatments and medication they do not want to before they can apply for the NDIS

  • People should not lose funding for the supports they need at work

  • Decisions about NDIS access and funding should not be made by a computer without being checked by a real person.

What we think about the changes

We think these changes are a good start but we are still worried about the Bill.

We are glad that:

  • The Disability Minister has less power to make changes to how much money is available for important everyday supports

  • The Government needs to share more information about automated decision making before it happens

  • The Bill must be reviewed along with the other NDIS changes made in 2024

This means it must be checked carefully to make sure it is working well.

We are still worried about the Bill because:

  • The Disability Minister can still decide how much money is available for many types of NDIS supports

  • There is not enough information about what the changes will mean for people with disability

  • The changes in the Bill may hurt or leave some people with disability worse off.

What happens next?

The Government will hold more public hearings about the Bill soon.

A public hearing is when people and organisations talk to the Government about their worries face-to-face.

The next public hearings will be held in Canberra and Perth.

Politicians will meet again in August to decide if more changes need to be made to the Bill.

Inclusion Australia will keep working hard to speak up for people with an intellectual disability and their families to make sure the Bill does not hurt or leave anyone worse off.

You can download this Easy Read information here (or click below)

Disability Support Pension (DSP) Roundtable Report

In November 2025 Inclusion Australia held a national roundtable about the DSP.

A roundtable is where people get together to talk about an issue.

40 people from across Australia took part in the roundtable

  • People with an intellectual disability
  • Families and support people
  • Disability and advocacy organisations.

At the roundtable people shared their stories of

  • Applying for the DSP
  • Getting the DSP
  • Working while on the DSP.

The group talked about

  • How the DSP works well
  • What does not work well
  • What needs to change.

We made a report about what we heard at the Roundtable.  

In the report we make recommendations about what should change.

These recommendations are endorsed by other organisations. This means they say they agree with the recommendations.

You can read a big version of the DSP Roundtable report here

You can download the report in Easy Read here (or click below).

What we think about the NDIS Bill Interim Report Easy Read

This information was made by Inclusion Australia.

Where we say ‘we’ it means Inclusion Australia.

This information gives an update on the NDIS Bill and what we think about it. 

We made this information to

  • Help people understand the changes
  • Share information in an accessible way.

Hard words are in bold. 

We explain what they mean. 

The Senate Committee for the NDIS Bill released their interim report this week. 

The Senate Committee is a group of politicians who are looking at the changes the Government wants to make to the NDIS. 

These changes are called the NDIS Bill.

An interim report gives an update on what the Senate Committee think before the final report is finished.  

The Senate Committee received over 4500 submissions from people and organisations telling them what they think about the NDIS Bill.

The Senate Committee said they understand that many people are not happy with the NDIS Bill but they think it should still go ahead with a few small changes.

We think the interim report does not cover all the concerns that thousands of people with a disability and their supporters have about the NDIS Bill.

We are disappointed that the Senate Committee did not make recommendations to change the bill.

We are glad that the Australian Greens has made a deal with the Government to extend the inquiry for another 8 weeks. 

As part of the deal they have agreed to change some parts of the Bill that people were really worried about. For example: 

  • The NDIS Minister being able to decide how much money is available for each type of NDIS support  
  • People with a disability being made to try treatments and medication they might not want to try before being able to apply for the NDIS
  • People losing funding for supports they need to live and work
  • Automated decision making. 

This mean decisions about NDIS access and funding are being made by a computer and not checked by a real person.

We don’t know all the details of those changes yet and we will ask more questions about them.

The deal with the Greens and Labor also means there is more time for the Government to:

  • Look into the changes and what they will mean for people with a disability
  • Listen to what people with a disability and their families and supporters think about the Bill
  • Make sure the changes will not hurt or make anyone with a disability worse off.  

Inclusion Australia will keep working with the government and the disability community to make sure changes are fair and safe.

We will keep making Easy Read information about the changes as we find out more.

You can download this Easy Read information here (or click below)

Federal Budget and changes to the NDIS Easy Read

This information was made by Inclusion Australia.

Where we say ‘we’ it means Inclusion Australia.

It is about the Federal Budget and changes to the NDIS.

We made this information to

  • Help people understand the changes
  • Share information in an accessible way.

Hard words are in bold. 

We explain what they mean. 

The Australian Government shared the new Federal Budget on Tuesday 12 May.

The Federal Budget is a document that explains how the government will spend money for the next few years.

We knew there would be changes to the amount of money the government will spend on the NDIS in the budget.

Mark Butler is the Minister for the NDIS and he told us about the changes in his Press Club speech a few weeks ago.

The budget did not tell us much about how the changes to the NDIS will be made.  

The government shared a timeline for changes at the same time as they shared the budget. 

The timeline tells us when parts of the changes will happen.

There are still lots of details we do not know.

Some changes may take years to happen. 

Some changes will need new laws.

Minister Butler shared a draft of the new laws in Parliament on Thursday 14 May.

Draft means changes can still be made to what the new laws will be. 

All of these changes need more consultation with the disability community.

We have asked the government to allow time for this to happen before changes are made. 

We are working hard to understand the new laws.

We will be talking to government about them.

The government wants the changes to be fair and sustainable.

Sustainable means the NDIS can continue in the future.

The government say there will be

  • Changes to how some supports are funded
  • New assessments and planning processes
  • Stronger checks on providers

New supports outside the NDIS called Foundational Supports. 

Foundational supports are support for people with disability and some of those people don’t have an NDIS plan.

The new changes will not start yet. It takes time for the laws to be approved.

Nothing will change straight away.  

Inclusion Australia knows many people are worried about what these changes will mean.

We know many people are confused.

Inclusion Australia will keep working with the government and the disability community to make sure changes are fair and safe.

We will keep sharing updates in Easy Read to explain more information when we have it.

We will keep advocating for the rights and inclusion of people with an intellectual disability in any changes.

You can download this Easy Read information here (or click below).

Disability advocates call on Government to ensure critical supports remain while NDIS changes are made

Australia’s Disability Representative Organisations acknowledge the need to tackle NDIS fraud and ensure long-term scheme sustainability, and we are ready to work constructively with the Government on these reforms.

A wide range of significant changes were announced today by The Hon. Mark Butler MP, Minister for Disability and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

One of the changes the Minister announced is around how people will enter the NDIS. We understand that from 1 January 2028 significant changes related to scheme eligibility will occur, with current participants reassessed over a transition period.

Any decisions that determine who gets support and who doesn’t must be built with the people most affected. Co-design and genuine engagement with the disability community – people with disability,
their families, carers and advocates – is not a formality, it is the only way this can work. People with disability are the experts in their own lives and must lead the design of solutions.

We are also concerned about the eligibility threshold. How that bar is set will define the scheme for a generation. The disability community must be at the table when that decision is made.

Access to community and social inclusion are key to a good life. We look forward to hearing more information about the Inclusive Communities Fund the Minister has announced.

We are firm that the Government must honour its commitment to ensure people who will be diverted away from the NDIS, and impacted by changes to social and community participation, are genuinely supported elsewhere. We want to work with Government to ensure effective systems are in place before people are moved off the scheme, not after.

With a large number of participants projected to leave the scheme, we are calling on the Government to release draft legislation as soon as possible so people with disability and their representative organisations can scrutinise what is being proposed.

The Disability Royal Commission’s findings are definitive. Australians with disability must be safe from abuse and neglect. Any reform of the NDIS is fundamentally incomplete – and will fail – without a parallel, ironclad commitment to ensuring the safety of every Australian living with a disability.

These reforms must also proceed alongside the full implementation of recommendations from the Disability Royal Commission and the Independent NDIS Review. The disability community deserves a holistic suite of reform that upholds the rights and dignity of all people with disability.

We are calling on the Government to work with us, and with the broader disability community, every step of the way.

This statement has been endorsed by:

  • Australian Autism Alliance
  • Australian Federation of Disability Organisations
  • Children and Young People with Disability Australia
  • Community Mental Health Australia
  • Disability Advocacy Network Australia
  • Down Syndrome Australia Consortium
  • First Peoples Disability Network Australia
  • Inclusion Australia
  • National Ethnic Disability Alliance
  • People with Disability Australia
  • Physical Disability Australia
  • Women With Disabilities Australia