Playback speed

Share post at current time

Share from 0:00

0:00

Generate transcript

A transcript unlocks clips, previews, and editing.

The NDIS bill is about to pass. Nobody agrees on how much of it is fraud

Miko Santos and Mencari Team

Aug 18, 2026

Two credible sources, two very different numbers, and a Senate debate running out of time to reconcile them.

Debate on the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 opened in the Senate on Monday, 17 August, with the government confident it will pass this sitting week with Coalition support. The bill would cut at least 160,000 people from the scheme and bank $37.8 billion in savings over four years, the single largest saving measure in May’s federal budget.

Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John used the floor to make the moral case against it directly. “The eyes of five point five million disabled people fall at this moment on this Parliament,” he told the chamber, accusing the government of “backing billionaires and gas companies instead of disabled people.” He did not soften the closing line: “Shame on you. You will be condemned by history.”

SUPPORT NOW

Appreciate the newsletter but aren’t ready to pay for a subscription? Grab us a beer or snag the exclusive ad spot at the top of next week's newsletter.

Shadow Health Minister Anne Ruston made the Coalition’s case for supporting the bill anyway, in the same debate. The scheme was designed to support around 410,000 people. It now supports 782,000, nearly double the original estimate. Costed at $13.6 billion, it now runs above $50 billion a year.

This is, by Ruston’s count, the government’s third attempt at slowing that growth: an 8 per cent target set in 2023, missed; a 5 to 6 per cent target set in January, also missed, with growth still near 11 per cent; a new target of 2 per cent set in this year’s budget.

Both of those accounts are true at once. The scheme has grown at the rate Ruston describes, and cutting 160,000 people from it will do the harm Steele-John is warning about. The debate isn’t really about whether those two facts exist. It’s about which one should carry more weight in the vote.

What actually changed this week

What moved this week wasn’t the underlying fight, which Inside Auspol has covered since the bill’s Senate committee report was tabled on 14 August. It was the amendments negotiated inside it.

The government and the Greens agreed to limit the disability minister’s power to cut funding across entire categories of NDIS support. Any decision made using an automated system must now be reviewable by a human, and the decision-making framework behind it has to be published before it’s switched on.

And a new clause bars restrictive practices, including forced medication, from being used as a condition of NDIS eligibility, with any genuinely required treatment funded instead through the public health system.

That last change addresses a gap that predates this bill rather than one it created. Somewhere in the scheme’s operation, a person could reportedly be pressured into a restrictive practice to keep their support. The amendment closes that specific door.

The fraud number that depends on who’s asking

The most contested figure in the debate isn’t about who gets cut. It’s about why.

The Grattan Institute, an independent think tank, told the Senate inquiry in its submission that fraud accounts for just 2 per cent of the bill’s projected savings — $900 million of the $37.8 billion package.

Ruston, on the same day, cited a different figure on the Senate floor: an Australian National Audit Office estimate that up to 10 per cent of NDIS payments are “non-compliant, incorrect, or fraudulent,” worth roughly $5 billion a year at today’s spending.

The two numbers aren’t measuring the same thing. Grattan’s 2 per cent is specifically fraud, calculated against this bill’s projected savings. The audit-derived figure Ruston cites is a broader compliance estimate — built from an earlier and smaller year of NDIS spending, and folding genuine fraud together with incorrect claims and administrative non-compliance. Different measure, different baseline, different year.

Neither figure appears to be fabricated. But the gap between “2 per cent, and specifically fraud” and “up to 10 per cent, loosely defined” is wide enough to support two entirely different political arguments from the same evidence base, and so far, nobody in the debate has been required to reconcile them.

The gap advocates are pointing at instead

People with Disability Australia’s acting chief executive, Megan Spindler-Smith, isn’t disputing the fraud figures at all. Her concern is what replaces the NDIS supports being cut.

“We are feeling pretty devastated,” she said, adding that the disability community’s warnings during the Senate inquiry have not been “adequately heard.” Her specific example is Thriving Kids, a $2 billion program meant to catch people leaving the scheme. It currently only covers children up to age eight, leaving older children, teenagers and adults with disability without a confirmed alternative.

Health Minister Mark Butler says that gap will close. He points to a technical advisory group developing a new, tighter functional capacity test, which he says he is working with directly, and says state governments will have replacement systems in place before most foundational supports commence from 2028.

Independent Senator David Pocock remains unconvinced, citing the Disability Royal Commission’s own findings that isolating people with disability from community participation raises their risk of “violence, abuse, exploitation.” Pocock and the Greens each tabled dissenting reports against the bill when the Senate committee’s findings were released on 14 August.

Disability Discrimination Commissioner Rosemary Kayess has repeated her earlier call, first made in early August, for a pause to allow “a more considered and consultative approach.”

Also moving this week

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Angus Taylor discussed amendments to the government’s other major bill, the News Media Bargaining Incentive, on Monday.

According to reporting not yet independently corroborated by Inside Auspol, the revised terms require platforms such as Google and Meta to strike eight commercial deals with Australian publishers rather than six, cap any single deal at a quarter of a platform’s total obligation, and direct 5 per cent of any collected funds to the newswire AAP.

Separately, Treasury’s consultation on its second tranche of capital gains and negative gearing changes, covering trust and testamentary-estate provisions, closes on 21 August.

What to watch

The Senate vote on the NDIS bill is expected before the sitting week ends on Thursday. Whether the restrictive-practices and automated-decision amendments survive a final reading unchanged is worth watching, since negotiated safeguards are often the first thing trimmed in a last-minute deal.

The tax consultation closes 21 August; whether the government moves straight to introducing legislation afterward, or takes more time, will signal how contested that package still is inside the government.

And so far, no one in the debate has been asked to reconcile Grattan’s fraud figure against the Audit Office’s. Whether that happens before the vote, or after, is an open question.

Got a News Tip?

Contact our editor via Proton Mail encrypted, X Direct Message, LinkedIn, or email. You can securely message him on Signal by using his username, Miko Santos.

🛑 More on Kangaroofern Media Lab

Read our last AU Politics newsletter : Bendigo Bank Axes 158 Roles
Read our last AI newsletter : Anthropic Raises $13B Series F
Read our last Tech newsletter : Australian Court Rules Apple
Read our last Podcast newsletter : Spanish podcast listeners seek more Latino cultural content:YouTube Unveils AI Podcasting Tools

Available for iOS and Android