Skip to content
Political Tracker

28 May 2026 · 9:13 AM · Division 2

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the Ndis for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Second Reading - Automated decision-making
Official title
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the Ndis for Future Generations) Bill 2026 - Second Reading - Automated decision-making

Noes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
11
No
86
Not recorded voting
53

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Curtin MP Kate Chaney (Independent), which means it failed. This amendment would have changed the words of the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill).

Amendment text

That all words after “notes that” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

“(a) the bill enables the use of automated decision-making in determining a wide range of matters affecting NDIS participants;

(b) it is reported that neither human decision-makers nor the Administrative Review Tribunal will be authorised to modify or override the automated decisions made about the support needs of NDIS participants;

(c) when used well, automated decision-making can deliver faster, more consistent and more efficient government services, and that agencies like the NDIA need digital tools to operate at the scale required;

(d) the Government has failed to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme, handed down in July 2023, which called for the introduction of a consistent legal framework and oversight for automated decision-making in government services;

(e) the consequences of poorly implemented automation for high-risk decisions are already being seen in widespread concern around automated aged care assessments and the unlawful cancellation of income supports for Australians under the Targeted Compliance Framework; and

(2) calls on the Government to bring forward a legislative and mandatory framework for automated decision-making in government services, incorporating transparency requirements, decision-level safeguards, human accountability and oversight for high-risk decisions, meaningful review rights, and independent oversight, in order to prevent a repeat of the failures of the Robodebt scheme”.

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
11
No
86
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party085
Independent100
Australian Greens10
Centre Alliance01

How each member voted

Aye · 11

No · 86

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.