Disability groups make last-ditch bid to halt NDIS reform bill

Peak representative organisations warn of support gaps, inadequate safeguards and excessive ministerial powers ahead of the senate inquiry’s report, due tomorrow.

---

Australia’s peak disability representative organisations have mounted a last-ditch attempt to stop the federal government’s NDIS reform legislation, warning the bill should not proceed in its current form or timeframe.

In a joint submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, 12 disability representative organisations said the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 contained “significant unresolved risks, insufficient safeguards and overly broad powers” and should be paused.

The senate inquiry examining the legislation is due to report tomorrow.

The submission, signed by organisations including People with Disability Australia, Inclusion Australia, First Peoples Disability Network Australia and the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations, argues the reforms are being advanced without adequate consultation, evidence or transitional safeguards.

“DROs recommend that the Bill not proceed in its current form or within the current timeframe,” the submission stated.

The organisations said the legislation was being progressed “in the absence of sufficient consultation, evidence, modelling, transitional safeguards and clarity regarding the broader systems on which the reforms rely”.

While supporting reforms aimed at improving the sustainability and integrity of the NDIS, the groups warned that alternative supports intended to sit alongside the scheme were not yet ready.

“Alternative systems or supports do not yet exist,” the submission stated.

“There remains significant uncertainty about when they will be operational and the extent to which they will be accessible, affordable, culturally safe or capable of meeting need.”

The organisations said they remained “deeply concerned” about the sequencing of the reforms and the possibility participants could lose supports before replacement systems were available.

“DROs are particularly concerned that people may lose access to the NDIS; experience reductions in support; face service gaps; or experience avoidable harm before alternative supports are available and capable of meeting need.”

The submission singled out the proposed Thriving Kids program, described as the most developed component of the planned foundational supports framework.

“At a minimum, foundational support initiatives such as Thriving Kids should be fully established, operational and independently evaluated before children eight years of age and under are transitioned from the NDIS on the assumption that equivalent supports will be available elsewhere,” the submission stated.

The groups also questioned whether the government had produced sufficient evidence to justify the reforms.

They argued there was “insufficient evidence” that impacts on women, First Nations communities, culturally and linguistically diverse communities, autistic people and children had been properly assessed.

The submission further stated that “robust economic modelling of the reforms is not currently possible” because of the lack of detail about foundational supports, implementation arrangements and other key elements of the reform package.

“Without this evidence base, it is not possible to determine whether the reforms will achieve their stated objectives, what unintended costs may arise in other systems, how individuals and communities will be affected, [or] the broader social and economic implications.”

The organisations also raised concerns about provisions that would allow significant aspects of the scheme to be determined through legislative instruments rather than primary legislation.

“The Bill would permit substantial changes to participant supports, funding and Scheme operation through legislative instrument rather than primary legislation,” the submission stated.

According to the groups, these powers are “extraordinarily broad” and are accompanied by “limited statutory safeguards, oversight or accountability mechanisms”.

The submission also took aim at the parliamentary process itself, arguing people with disability had not had adequate time to understand or respond to the proposed changes.

“The timeframe provided for public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny is inadequate,” the groups said.

“A process of this nature cannot be described as best practice consultation.”

The organisations said the consultation process was “completely inaccessible” for many people with disability and argued the legislation had been referred for inquiry on the same day it was released publicly.

“The lack of transparency, consultation and care for the community demonstrated at all levels of government and parliamentary process has caused irrevocable harm to the trust of our organisations and the disability community.”

The groups called for the inquiry process to be extended, additional evidence and modelling to be released publicly, stronger participant safeguards to be embedded in the legislation, and greater accountability around ministerial powers before the bill proceeded.

The committee’s report deadline has already been extended to tomorrow from Tuesday.