This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

NDIS

Jump to new

Children with 'mild to moderate' autism or development delays to be removed from the NDIS by 2027​

Aug 20, 2025


Hundreds of thousands of children with autism will be diverted away from the NDIS under a new scheme announced by the federal government.

Federal Health Minister Mark Butler today proposed removing children with 'mild to moderate' autism or learning difficulties from the $46 billion dollar government-funded scheme to a new program.

His announcement comes after a report published in the Sydney Morning Herald found seven in 10 new people were joining the NDIS for autism. The report found 56,000 of the 78,600 people who signed up for the NDIS between June 2024 and June 2025 had autism listed as their chief diagnosis.

Butler said the government is aiming to scale growth with a target of 6 per cent per year down from 8 per cent.
Butler said the NDIS will no longer capture kids with mild autism or developmental delays by mid-2027.

"Remember the NDIS was established to support people with significant and permanent disability," Butler said.
"Since the scheme's creation, the number of people with disability entering the scheme has generally stabilised close to initial projections, except in one area – children with developmental delay or autism."

...... how did we cope beforehand?
WE DID !
 
A cash cow that certainly needs reining in. not just the recipients but also those providing the "support".
 
farmerge said:
A cash cow that certainly needs reining in. not just the recipients but also those providing the "support".
Click to expand...

Including, I hope, some of those very suspect providers spruiking Specialist Disability Accommodation. I get a feeling many who were suckered in i.e. greedy buggers with $$ in their eyes, could well lose a lot of money. A niche product and difficult to sell.
 
I once made an enquiry about that. Getting absolutely haranged from then on did nothing to allay my scepticism.
 
A long looooong time ago mums used to personally care for their kids, in the home. They would dote on them and typically treat their feeblest achievements as the workings of semi-divine beings. They could protect them from freaks in childcare and also support them more if they were a bit "special" or slow.

They would either take them to school or be waiting when they returned home from it. The husband went out and earnt a wage to support this arrangement. This was considered the norm. Everyone pretty much understood that it was not the responsibility of society at large to subsidise these families and their children.
 
Exactly. This is how She and Me brought up our two sons.
Back in the day, I had a well paid job that allowed my wife to be the homemaker, something that she is extremely proud of to this very day.
Our sons were not latch key children.
There was always one of us home when they got home from school, as my job at that time involved shift work.
But now is a different era when both parents work and usually not at home.
 
The Triangle said:
Its a joke. Every person under 45 has an autistic kid and the benefits seem endless, 10k 20k 30k a year in 'treatment' which does nothing other than free up the parents to not actually be parents.
Click to expand...
And in the meantime we are slowly being bled dry to fund this terrific rort.
I'm all for helping those that are dinkum in their need for assistance, but not just a free handout to suit some for a lifestyle they would like to pursue.
 
farmerge said:
And in the meantime we are slowly being bled dry to fund this terrific rort.
I'm all for helping those that are dinkum in their need for assistance, but not just a free handout to suit some for a lifestyle they would like to pursue.
Click to expand...
Just another example of unintended consequences of a noble and generous idea.
 
sptrawler said:
Just another example of unintended consequences of a noble and generous idea.
Click to expand...
Big problem as it has always been, no checks on who is providing what, and what sort of experience/expertise do these providers possess.
 
Have we become or are becoming an entitlement society I wonder. If there is an issue there is an expectation society should fix it for us.

A really silly example. A housing estate opened to the South of Canberra but across the NSW border.

Access is by one road in NSW and apparently is darn busy with slow traffic. Now there are claims from those who purchased there despite knowing there is only one access route in or out of the estate, there should be a connecting road to the Monaro Highway which is in the ACT and that already has traffic congestion problems. Like you purchased with a known problem and now you want others to fix it situation.
 
farmerge said:
Big problem as it has always been, no checks on who is providing what, and what sort of experience/expertise do these providers possess.
Click to expand...
No matter what you put in place people will find a way of scamming it, unfortunately that's human nature.

The only saving grace is that Labor are in office, they will be seen as sorting out the scammers, if the Coalition was doing it, they would be seen as attacking those who could least defend themselves. Lol
 
StockyGuy said:
Everyone pretty much understood that it was not the responsibility of society at large to subsidise these families and their children.
Click to expand...
Trouble is today everything's so expensive and structured around double incomes being the norm.

Housing, utilities and a long list of other things are far more expensive in real terms today than was the case historically. It basically has forced the double income scenario apart from those with a particularly high income or some other source of wealth.
 
Nah, I really don't think so. I don't think it's a money thing. Women have been programmed to dream of having it all, travelling the world, having a string of hot lovers like Taylor did, not settling, being a girl boss, have others care your young kids all day (if you have any), and so on. It's causing the end of Western civilisation.

Like some others here I have my reservations about Islam as any ideal, but the manner in which it governs family and gender roles is one built to ensure survival and strong birth rates.
 
StockyGuy said:
Nah, I really don't think so. I don't think it's a money thing.
Click to expand...
If someone on a single fairly ordinary income, say $90k before tax, applies for a $1 million loan will the bank even give it to them?

Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Canberra $1 million is just an average house these days and Perth is set to join that list by the end of the year. Sydney's average is now $1.7 million.

I just don't see how the average person could do it without dual incomes or having some other substantial source of wealth that isn't from working as an employee.
 
All been done under the guise of equal opportunity, now there is no reason a woman can't work, having a child and nurturing a family isn't acceptable these days.
Meanwhile the cost of living has been adjusted to double income families, the rich get richer as their asset values increase , the wage slave pedals harder, but the wage slaves can't complain because their childcare is subsidised. Priceless.
House prices, when we had a sensible economy, were set at what a one income family could borrow, now we have an unsustainable economy house prices are set at what the market can screw out of a family.
Eventually it has to collapse, so we now have an economic summit, to explain what everyone knows, Govt and families have hit maximum debt.
 
Last edited:

Well, well. The bleeding heart stories emerge.

These homes were meant to transform lives. They've wasted millions of dollars instead

It is a federal housing scheme designed to transform the lives of the profoundly disabled. But a Four Corners investigation has found more than 1,000 of these purpose-built homes are sitting empty.
www.abc.net.au

Close to a decade ago when work was being done on my home, chatting to the builder we got on to the issue for housing for disabled people. He mentioned he had looked into it but, in his view, it was specialised and, although it could be done, it was pricey and really should be built to the special needs of the individual and not generic builds. I mentioned selling after the person died or hospitalised would be hard due to the niche market. He simply said Yep, stay away and leave it to instos if they get into it.

So here we are with the sob story of ethical investing, helping others, etc. Yeah, sure. Entered into it to make a buck. All the other waffle is just to bolster the self-justification - as if one or two properties would fund your retirement. You were relying on the $100k pa from the Government.
 
The more we see and hear about NDIS the more frightening it gets.
Sometime ago I wrote to the then Minister in charge, the original political dud, Bill Shorten, about the misgivings that Blind Freddy could see with the NDIS Scheme.
Of course this prick never returned any correspondence, and the rorting continues unabated.
I am a great believer in helping those that have been bridled with physical and mental problems, usually from birth. But not to empower the wealth of the so-called helping hands, or those that are sucking on the NDIS teat just because they can.
This is one thing that really gets up my left nostrel.
End rant for the time being.
 
farmerge said:
The more we see and hear about NDIS the more frightening it gets.
Click to expand...

Yes. However, those with the empty homes won't be sucking on the public teat. Not tenanted, no funds from Gov will they get. I gather they have been, or will be, burnt big time. Most of these properties are designed for two or more SDA residents. I cannot imagine even if they could get tenants will they get even $750 per week instead of the $100k pa per SDA tenant they were expecting. Would a family of four want to move into a place in the middle of nowhere with no amenities close by let alone a property designed for disabled individuals?

Blowed if I know why a claim they saw a financial planner in anyway resolves those who purchased or entered into an arrangement to build. What would an FP know about demand and supply in specific areas and availability of other SDA builds? That's not their field of expertise. In any case, RE isn't a financial product which requires FP advice.

Pretty messy all round but trying to pin the blame on Gov doesn't wash in this case. Developers and sales teams pushed the SDA product and the punters gobbled it up from what I understand. As far as I know, the Gov hasn't underwritten the developers or provided them with a guarantee tenants were available. However, it is only my opinion for what it's worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

August 2025 DDD
2 3
Replies
54
Views
7K
ducati916
Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
3K
Investoradam
Corrupt Customs: Walk Through Green
Replies
0
Views
3K
Garpal Gumnut
Banks Brace for a Storm of Litigation
Replies
5
Views
4K
mullokintyre
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...