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

David Pocock

by leave—President, under the standing orders I ask that my name be recorded as opposing clause (b) in each of the Greens' amendments.

Sue Lines

The question now is that the amendment moved by Senator David Pocock on sheet 3983 be agreed to.

Senator David Pocock's circulated amendment—

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) the expansion of automated decision-making authorised by this bill has been described in evidence to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee as unprecedented in Australia law,

(ii) the automated decision-making powers in this bill extend beyond routine administrative tasks to decisions involving discretion, evaluative judgement and decisions that would normally require a human decision-maker to form a particular state of mind, and

(iii) recommendations 17.1 and 17.2 of the Report of the Royal Commission in the Robodebt Scheme called for:

(A) a consistent legal framework for automated decision-making, including transparency, review rights and public access to the rules and algorithms used, and

(B) an independent legal body to monitor and audit automated decision-making systems for fairness, accuracy, bias and usability; and

(b) calls on the Government to ensure that the provisions of the bill permitting automated decisions involving evaluative judgement or the formation of a particular state of mind are not utilised until recommendations 17.1 and 17.2 of the Report of the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme have been implemented".

Question negatived.

I will now deal with the amendment circulated by Senator Thorpe. The question is that the amendment on sheet 3856 be agreed to.

Senator Thorpe's circulated amendment—

Omit all words after "That", substitute "the Senate rejects the bill and is of the opinion that:

(a) it will significantly impact all people with disability getting supports to live everyday life; and

(b) it was subject to inadequate consultation with First People with disability and First People disability organisations; and

(c) it will disproportionately and severely harm and breach the human rights of First People with disability by:

(i) worsening existing barriers for First People with disability in accessing support that is culturally safe, geographically accessible and that does not risk displacement from Country,

(ii) disregarding personal, social and environmental circumstances in making decisions about a person's functional capacity and needs, and

(iii) further reinforcing and entrenching systemic discrimination against First People with disability, despite an acknowledgement by the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability that the experiences of First People with disability cannot be separated from their experiences and effects of ongoing colonisation, intergenerational trauma and racism".