Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (2) to (4), (8) and (9) to the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026:

(2) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (line 10 and 11), omit "either of both", submit "any".

(3) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (line 16), omit "and".

(4) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (after line 16), after subparagraph 48A(1)(b)(ii), insert:

(iii) an alteration in the participant's plan such that it is insufficient to meet the participant's reasonable and necessary support needs; and

(8) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (after line 18), at the end of section 34A, add:

(6) A support determination that is reasonably likely to result in a material reduction in funding for a class of supports must be accompanied, at the time the determination is tabled in each House of the Parliament, by:

(a) a statement of reasons for the determination; and

(b) an assessment of the likely impact of the determination on participants; and

(c) actuarial or financial analysis relied upon in making the determination; and

(d) a summary of consultation undertaken with people with disability and representative organisations.

(7) A support determination to which subsection (6) applies does not take effect unless, within 15 sitting days after the determination is tabled in each House of the Parliament, each House passes a resolution approving the determination.

(8) If a House of the Parliament does not pass a resolution approving the determination within the period referred to in subsection (7), the determination is taken never to have had effect.

(9) In this section material reduction in funding includes a reduction that is reasonably likely to have a significant impact on participants' access to supports.

(9) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (after line 18), after section 34A, insert:

34AA Effect of support determination

If a determination under section 34A has the effect of reducing the funding available to a participant under the participant's plan, the participant's plan may be insufficient to meet the participant's reasonable and necessary supports such that the participant may meet the condition for conducting a reassessment under subparagraph 48A(1)(b)(iii).

My amendments today have been informed by consultation with over 60 community members in Kooyong. I've also consulted the Justice and Equity Centre, People with Disability Australia, Occupational Therapy Australia, Inclusion Australia, the Summer Foundation and other prominent disability advocates. I'm trying to improve a suite of harsh and drastic reforms which have not been subjected to inclusive community consultation—reforms which are targeted not at rorters and at waste but at the vulnerable individuals who depend on the NDIS. The media, many in the general public and many in this House have missed the point of this legislation. I don't believe that it's primarily aimed at reducing fraud, budget pressure or systemic abuse. It's aimed at getting people off the NDIS and limiting the supports available to those who remain on the scheme.

I've moved 15 detailed amendments today. I've been asked by members of the House to stop moving amendments and to stop causing divisions. But I've moved these amendments and I've spoken to this bill repeatedly because of those people who are watching at home. Cheryl, I know you're watching and I've been speaking for you. George, I know you're watching. You always watch. I've been speaking for you. I've been speaking for Peter's mum. I've been speaking for the many constituents who have come to our office over the last weeks and months and expressed huge distress about this bill. The crossbench in the House has circulated 39 amendments to this bill.

Recommendation 26 of the NDIS independent review was that changes to the NDIS can only be implemented once foundational supports are in place. My amendments (2) to (4) address limits on participants' ability to seek reassessment. Under this bill, participants can't request a reassessment unless they meet very narrow conditions. Given that the bill also provides for automatic renewals without participant involvement, some participants could be stuck with inappropriate plans for years. And I note many participants' concerns that, if they do seek reassessment, their plans are likely to be cut. We're hearing that that is happening all of the time, and it is causing great concern to many recipients of NDIS supports. Participants should be able to seek reassessment where their plan is insufficient to meet reasonable and necessary support needs, including where a support determination has reduced their funding below what is reasonable and necessary. Amendment (9) would ensure that a support determination which affects a participant's plan such that it is insufficient for their needs may meet a condition for conducting a reassessment under the broadened reassessment trigger in amendments (2) and (4). Amendment (8) then requires additional parliamentary transparency for this unbounded power to reduce funding across support classes.

This bill is a pretty bitter pill for many disabled Australians and is something that many of them are having great difficulty in swallowing. I ask the government to accept these amendments to render the legislation slightly less concerning to vulnerable Australians.

See this speech in context