Division
Zali Steggall by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4) as circulated in my name together: (1) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (line 22), at the end of subsection 48A(1), add: ; and (e) alternatively to paragraphs (a) to(d), the participant demonstrates that: (i) the supports are no longer available; or (ii) the plan is insufficient to meet the participant's reasonable and necessary support needs; or (iii) new evidence relevant to the participant's support needs has emerged. (2) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (line 8), after "participants", insert ", and the reasonable and necessary supports required by participants, including those necessary for participants to undertake paid employment, volunteering and study". (3) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (lines 11 to 18), omit subsection 34A(5). (4) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (after line 18), at the end of section 34A, add: I move these amendments to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 in the hope of putting forward some targeted, practical amendments that will complement the many other amendments that have been moved by my fellow crossbench members of parliament. The amendments I moved today seek to ensure that sustainability is not achieved by removing basic fairness, basic review rights or the individualised nature of the scheme. Procedural fairness should be a basic which is underwritten in this legislation. I simply fail to understand why the government and the minister are not agreeing to these practical, sensible amendments. The NDIS was built on a simple promise that Australians with disability would have access to the reasonable and necessary supports they needed to live with dignity, participate in the community and exercise choice and control over their own lives. The NDIS must be sustainable. It must be well governed. It must be able to deal with waste, fraud and poor practice. Sustainability cannot become a slogan used to justify blunt instruments and p
House of Representatives, 2026-07-01. negative: ayes 10, noes 70.
Question
Zali Steggall by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4) as circulated in my name together: (1) Schedule 1, item 21, page 9 (line 22), at the end of subsection 48A(1), add: ; and (e) alternatively to paragraphs (a) to(d), the participant demonstrates that: (i) the supports are no longer available; or (ii) the plan is insufficient to meet the participant's reasonable and necessary support needs; or (iii) new evidence relevant to the participant's support needs has emerged. (2) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (line 8), after "participants", insert ", and the reasonable and necessary supports required by participants, including those necessary for participants to undertake paid employment, volunteering and study". (3) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (lines 11 to 18), omit subsection 34A(5). (4) Schedule 1, item 34, page 13 (after line 18), at the end of section 34A, add: I move these amendments to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 in the hope of putting forward some targeted, practical amendments that will complement the many other amendments that have been moved by my fellow crossbench members of parliament. The amendments I moved today seek to ensure that sustainability is not achieved by removing basic fairness, basic review rights or the individualised nature of the scheme. Procedural fairness should be a basic which is underwritten in this legislation. I simply fail to understand why the government and the minister are not agreeing to these practical, sensible amendments. The NDIS was built on a simple promise that Australians with disability would have access to the reasonable and necessary supports they needed to live with dignity, participate in the community and exercise choice and control over their own lives. The NDIS must be sustainable. It must be well governed. It must be able to deal with waste, fraud and poor practice. Sustainability cannot become a slogan used to justify blunt instruments and p
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.