Division
Monique Ryan I move amendment (5) as circulated in my name: (5) Schedule 1, item 34, page 12 (after line 16), after subsection 34A(1), insert: (1A) A determination under this section may specify classes of participants to whom the determination applies or does not apply. A class of participants may be identified by reference to any one or more of the following: (a) a characteristic of participants (including their circumstances); (b) the nature or type of supports provided under a plan; (c) the support needs (as assessed) of participants. I move amendment (5) with the support of the Justice and Equity Centre, Inclusion Australia and Down Syndrome Australia. The ministerial support determination proposed by this bill is a blunt instrument. It reduces funding without significant regard to individual circumstances or to the way that people actually use supports in their daily lives. I, along with Inclusion Australia and Down Syndrome Australia, am particularly concerned about its potential impact on the small number of NDIS participants who need support every hour of every day. These are the people with permanent and profound disability that the NDIS was established to support. This includes people with down syndrome and people with intellectual disability who have very high support needs. Many are amongst the most marginalised Australians. Some have spent their entire lives in state run institutions or group homes, and they rely on that 24/7 continuous support to live safely and with dignity. Applying a blanket 50 per cent reduction to their community and participation supports without recognising those quite unique circumstances could have profound implications for those individuals. Firstly, it creates a real risk that people who require 24-hour support will not receive funding in a way that reflects how those supports are delivered. Their support needs don't fit neatly within a standard funding model, and neither should this legislation. Secondly, it risks confinin
House of Representatives, 2026-07-01. negative: ayes 9, noes 50.
Question
Monique Ryan I move amendment (5) as circulated in my name: (5) Schedule 1, item 34, page 12 (after line 16), after subsection 34A(1), insert: (1A) A determination under this section may specify classes of participants to whom the determination applies or does not apply. A class of participants may be identified by reference to any one or more of the following: (a) a characteristic of participants (including their circumstances); (b) the nature or type of supports provided under a plan; (c) the support needs (as assessed) of participants. I move amendment (5) with the support of the Justice and Equity Centre, Inclusion Australia and Down Syndrome Australia. The ministerial support determination proposed by this bill is a blunt instrument. It reduces funding without significant regard to individual circumstances or to the way that people actually use supports in their daily lives. I, along with Inclusion Australia and Down Syndrome Australia, am particularly concerned about its potential impact on the small number of NDIS participants who need support every hour of every day. These are the people with permanent and profound disability that the NDIS was established to support. This includes people with down syndrome and people with intellectual disability who have very high support needs. Many are amongst the most marginalised Australians. Some have spent their entire lives in state run institutions or group homes, and they rely on that 24/7 continuous support to live safely and with dignity. Applying a blanket 50 per cent reduction to their community and participation supports without recognising those quite unique circumstances could have profound implications for those individuals. Firstly, it creates a real risk that people who require 24-hour support will not receive funding in a way that reflects how those supports are delivered. Their support needs don't fit neatly within a standard funding model, and neither should this legislation. Secondly, it risks confinin
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.