Here is what the Ndis has to say about its new independent assessment process. https://www.ndis.gov.au/media/2640/download Firstly seems to imply (notwithstanding Tune’s wording) they won’t be amending the Act but using the existing broad delegated power given under the NDIS rules

I had some people flick me emails re “is this allowed?”. The 2013 Act allows the agency to request assessments, and while their requests for existing information must be “reasonably necessary” no such restriction applies to assessments under s26 on my reading.

That means that signal boosting advocate and PwD on these issues is imperative in the short term. this document should make a reference to the Castledine case, where the AAT underlined the unique value the evidence of experienced support teams can have http://www.villamanta.org.au/news/castledine-and-national-disability-insurance-agency/

medical experts are important, but it is on the NDIA to use expertise in line with legislative principles and values. So:
- What will constitute a substantial reduced capacity under these tools
- How these tools map onto the typical support plans the NDIA refuse to publish

The document should reference:
Liddle v NDIA - an overview of how assessment requests must not endanger people’s health http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/AATA/2018/5071.html , the obligation of appropriate application of assessment tools (oddly included in the planning Ndis rules but not the access ones

This thread is just a technical perspective. questions of social policy are not settled by citation of experts or by the internal reasoning of administrative bodies. legitimacy is earned by hearing the voices of those affected and the votes of public representatives

I’d query this bit - we already have a definitional of capacity under the Ndis rules. It’s centred on effective participation or completion of tasks, I don’t know what “involved in life situations” means and I’m not sure this can overwrite the existing language