{"id":"national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019","name":"National Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019","slug":"national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"nt","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":30292,"registerId":"nt-national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"National Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019","content":"NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA\nNATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (AUTHORISATIONS)\nACT 2019\nAs in force at 1 July 2019\nTable of provisions\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\n1 Short title ......................................................................................... 1\n2 Commencement .............................................................................. 1\n3 Definitions ........................................................................................ 1\n4 Application of Act ............................................................................. 3\n5 Principles ......................................................................................... 3\n6 Meaning of denial of key needs ....................................................... 5\n7 Meaning of restrictive practice ......................................................... 5\n8 Application of Criminal Code ........................................................... 6\nPart 2 Senior Practitioner\n9 Appointment of Senior Practitioner .................................................. 6\n10 Functions ......................................................................................... 6\n11 Powers............................................................................................. 7\n12 Guidelines........................................................................................ 7\n13 Delegation ....................................................................................... 7\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\n14 Application for authorisation or interim authorisation ....................... 7\n15 Authorisation or refusal to authorise restrictive practice .................. 9\n16 Grounds to authorise a restrictive practice ...................................... 9\n17 Prohibited restrictive practices ......................................................... 9\n18 Alternative restrictive practice ........................................................ 10\n19 Period of authorisation and interim authorisation........................... 10\n20 Revocation of authorisation and interim authorisation ................... 11\nPart 4 Review of authorisation decisions\n21 Reviewable decisions .................................................................... 11\n22 Application for review of authorisation decisions ........................... 11\n23 Appointment of internal reviewer ................................................... 12\n24 Review of decision by internal reviewer ......................................... 12\n25 Conduct of review by internal reviewer .......................................... 13\n26 Decision by CEO on internal review .............................................. 13\n27 Notice of decision of CEO.............................................................. 13\n28 Review by NTCAT ......................................................................... 14\n\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 ii\nPart 5 Miscellaneous matters\n29 Protection from liability .................................................................. 14\n30 Offence to disclose certain information .......................................... 14\n31 Misleading information ................................................................... 15\n32 Approved forms ............................................................................. 16\n33 Regulations.................................................................................... 16\nENDNOTES\n\nNORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA\n____________________\nAs in force at 1 July 2019\n____________________\nNATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (AUTHORISATIONS)\nACT 2019\nAn Act to provide for the authorisation of restrictive practices for\nparticipants in the National Disability Insurance Scheme\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\n1 Short title\nThis Act may be cited as the National Disability Insurance Scheme\n(Authorisations) Act 2019.\n2 Commencement\nThis Act commences on the day fixed by the Administrator by\nGazette notice.\n3 Definitions\nIn this Act:\naffected person, see section 21(2).\napproved form means a form approved under section 32.\nauthorisation means an authorisation to apply a restrictive practice\nto a participant in accordance with a behaviour support plan.\naversion means a practice or action that may be experienced by a\nperson as noxious, unpleasant or painful.\nbehaviour support plan means a plan:\n(a) developed by an NDIS behaviour support practitioner in\naccordance with the NDIS Rules for a participant; and\n\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 2\n(b) that describes the strategies to be used in supporting the\nparticipant's behaviour.\nNote for definition behaviour support plan\nA behaviour support plan may also integrate relevant orders such as orders in\nrelation to supervision, monitoring or management conditions of the participant.\nCEO means the Chief Executive Officer.\nchemical restraint, see paragraph (b) of the definition regulated\nrestrictive practice in rule 6 of the NDIS Rules.\ndenial of key needs, see section 6.\nenvironmental restraint, see paragraph (e) of the definition\nregulated restrictive practice in rule 6 of the NDIS Rules.\nguidelines means the guidelines made by the Senior Practitioner\nunder section 12.\ninternal reviewer means a public sector employee appointed\nunder section 23(1) to review a reviewable decision and to make a\nrecommendation to the CEO under section 25(2).\ninterim authorisation means an authorisation to apply a restrictive\npractice to a participant in accordance with an interim behaviour\nsupport plan.\ninterim behaviour support plan means an interim behaviour\nsupport plan within the meaning of the NDIS Rules.\nmechanical restraint, see paragraph (c) of the definition regulated\nrestrictive practice in rule 6 of the NDIS Rules.\nmisuse of medication means the administration to a person,\ncontrary to the instructions of the prescriber, of medication\nprescribed for the purpose of influencing the person's behaviour,\nmood or arousal levels.\nNDIS Act means the National Disability Insurance Scheme\nAct 2013 (Cth).\nNDIS behaviour support practitioner, see rule 5 of the\nNDIS Rules.\nNDIS provider, see section 9 of the NDIS Act.\nNDIS Rules means the National Disability Insurance Scheme\n(Restrictive Practices and Behaviour Support) Rules 2018 (Cth).\n\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 3\novercorrection means a practice where the response to an event\nis disproportionate to the event itself.\nExample for definition overcorrection\nMaking a child or young person clean an entire room because they tipped their\nmeal on the floor.\nparticipant, see section 9 of the NDIS Act.\nphysical restraint, see paragraph (d) of the definition regulated\nrestrictive practice in rule 6 of the NDIS Rules.\nrestrictive practice, see section 7.\nreviewable decision, see section 21(1).\nseclusion, see paragraph (a) of the definition regulated restrictive\npractice in rule 6 of the NDIS Rules.\nSenior Practitioner means the Senior Practitioner appointed under\nsection 9.\nTribunal affected person, see section 28(2).\nNote for section 3\nThe Interpretation Act 1978 contains definitions and other provisions that may be\nrelevant to this Act.\n4 Application of Act\n(1) This Act applies in relation to NDIS providers who seek to apply\nrestrictive practices to participants in the delivery of services to\nparticipants.\n(2) If a participant is also a person to whom Part 4 of the Disability\nServices Act 1993 applies, this Act prevails.\n5 Principles\n(1) The principles to be taken into account by NDIS providers in\ndelivering services to participants with behaviour that has the\npotential to cause harm to themselves or others are that:\n(a) participants are individuals who have the inherent right to\nrespect for their human worth and dignity; and\n(b) participants, whatever the origin of the participant's disability,\nnature, type and degree of disability, have the same basic\nhuman rights as other members of Australian society; and\n\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 4\n(c) participants have the same rights as other members of\nAustralian society to realise their individual capacities for\nphysical, social, emotional and intellectual development; and\n(d) participants have the same right as other members of\nAustralian society to services that will support their attaining a\nreasonable quality of life; and\n(e) participants and their families have the same right as other\nmembers of Australian society to participate in decisions that\naffect their lives; and\n(f) participants receiving services have the same right as other\nmembers of Australian society to be able to determine their\nown best interests in relation to those services, including the\nright to exercise choice and control; and\n(g) participants have the same right as other members of\nAustralian society to be connected to family, community,\nculture and country; and\n(h) participants have the same right as other members of\nAustralian society to engage as equals and actively participate\nin decisions that will affect their lives, support and care to the\nfull extent of their capacity, including in the provision of\nbehaviour support; and\n(i) participants receiving services have the same right as other\nmembers of Australian society to receive those services in a\nmanner that results in the least restriction of their rights and\nopportunities; and\n(j) participants receiving services should actively participate in\ndecisions about their lives, support and care including\nbehaviour support that is informed by evidenced-based best\npractice; and\n(k) participants have the same right as other members of\nAustralian society of the pursuit of a grievance in relation to\nservices.\n(2) The service must be provided in a way that:\n(a) aims to reduce or eliminate the need to use restrictive\npractices; and\n(b) recognises that:\n(i) restrictive practices should occur in limited and specific\ncircumstances; and\n\nPart 1 Preliminary matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 5\n(ii) restrictive practices should be used as a last resort; and\n(c) utilises the least restrictive practice for the shortest period of\ntime practical in the circumstances; and\n(d) ensures transparency and accountability in the use of\nrestrictive practices; and\n(e) recognises that restrictive practices should not be used\npunitively or in response to behaviour that does not cause\nharm to the participant or others; and\n(f) ensures that any restrictive practices are only used in a way\nthat is consistent with a behaviour support plan or an interim\nbehaviour support plan for the participant.\n(3) The service must be regularly reviewed for its suitability for the\nparticipant.\n6 Meaning of denial of key needs\n(1) Denial of key needs means to prevent a person's access to basic\nneeds or personal supports.\n(2) In subsection (1), personal supports includes the following:\n(a) family;\n(b) friends;\n(c) peers;\n(d) advocates;\n(e) possessions.\n7 Meaning of restrictive practice\nRestrictive practice means any practice or intervention that has\nthe effect of restricting the rights or freedom of movement of a\nperson with a disability, and includes the following:\n(a) seclusion;\n(b) chemical restraint;\n(c) mechanical restraint;\n(d) physical restraint;\n(e) environmental restraint.\n\nPart 2 Senior Practitioner\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 6\n8 Application of Criminal Code\nPart IIAA of the Criminal Code applies to an offence against this\nAct.\nNote for section 8\nPart IIAA of the Criminal Code states the general principles of criminal\nresponsibility, establishes general defences, and deals with burden of proof. It\nalso defines, or elaborates on, certain concepts commonly used in the creation of\noffences.\nPart 2 Senior Practitioner\n9 Appointment of Senior Practitioner\n(1) The Minister must appoint a public sector employee to be the\nSenior Practitioner.\n(2) The Minister must be satisfied that the employee has the\nqualifications, clinical experience and personal qualities necessary\nto exercise the Senior Practitioner's powers and perform the Senior\nPractitioner's functions.\n10 Functions\nThe Senior Practitioner has the following functions:\n(a) to promote the reduction and elimination of the use of\nrestrictive practices by NDIS providers to the greatest extent\npossible;\n(b) to ensure to the greatest extent possible that the rights of\nparticipants who may be subject to restrictive practices are\nprotected;\n(c) to develop guidelines to support NDIS providers in relation to\nthe use of restrictive practices;\n(d) to support NDIS providers to develop and deliver practice\ninnovation in the reduction and elimination of restrictive\npractices according to the intent of the legislation in relation to\nthe National Disability Insurance Scheme;\n(e) to ensure that the authorisation of restrictive practices is\ncompatible with the United Nations Convention on the Rights\nof People with Disabilities 2006;\n(f) to disseminate information and provide education about\nrestrictive practices and the rights of participants;\n\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 7\n(g) to provide high level authoritative advice in relation to\ncontemporary clinical practice developments occurring at\nnational or international levels in relation to the safe\nelimination or reduction of restrictive practices;\n(h) to build capacity in the disability service sector through\nincreasing the level of awareness and understanding of\nrestrictive practices within the sector and contributing to a\nreduction in the use of restrictive practices;\n(i) to develop and foster extensive and effective relationships\nwith a diverse group of persons or entities that have an\ninterest in or would be affected by the use of restrictive\npractices in the disability service sector to influence practice\nand enable positive change.\n11 Powers\nThe Senior Practitioner may do all things necessary or convenient\nto be done for, or in relation to, the performance of the Senior\nPractitioner's functions.\n12 Guidelines\n(1) The Senior Practitioner may make guidelines for this Act, including\nguidelines in relation to the use of restrictive practices.\n(2) In developing guidelines under this section, the Senior Practitioner\nmust consult with relevant persons or entities in the disability\nservice sector and community members as appropriate.\n13 Delegation\n(1) The Senior Practitioner may delegate the Senior Practitioner's\npowers and functions under this Act to a public sector employee.\n(2) The Senior Practitioner must be satisfied that the employee has the\nqualifications, clinical experience and personal qualities necessary\nto exercise the Senior Practitioner's powers and perform the Senior\nPractitioner's functions.\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\n14 Application for authorisation or interim authorisation\n(1) An NDIS provider may apply to the Senior Practitioner for an\nauthorisation or interim authorisation.\n\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 8\n(2) An application for an authorisation or interim authorisation must:\n(a) be made in the approved form; and\n(b) include the following:\n(i) particulars of the restrictive practice proposed to be\napplied to the participant;\n(ii) a copy of the behaviour support plan or interim\nbehaviour support plan that specifies the proposed\nrestrictive practice;\n(iii) information that shows the provider has engaged in\nconsultation about the proposed use of a restrictive\npractice with:\n(A) the participant; and\n(B) the participant's family, carers, guardian or other\nrelevant person;\n(iv) particulars of the NDIS provider who will apply the\nrestrictive practice to the participant;\n(v) particulars of any restrictive practice previously applied\nto the participant over the 12 month period before the\ndate of the application;\n(vi) any other information the NDIS provider considers\nrelevant to the application;\n(vii) any other information as prescribed by regulation.\n(3) The Senior Practitioner may request further information from the\nNDIS provider making the application.\n(4) If the Senior Practitioner requests further information, the NDIS\nprovider making the application must provide the information within\n28 days after the request is made.\n(5) If the information is not provided to the Senior Practitioner within\n28 days, the application lapses.\n(6) The Senior Practitioner may inspect the place where the restrictive\npractice is to be applied to the participant before deciding the\napplication.\n\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 9\n15 Authorisation or refusal to authorise restrictive practice\n(1) The Senior Practitioner must consider the application and decide\nwhether to:\n(a) grant the authorisation or interim authorisation; or\n(b) refuse to grant the authorisation or interim authorisation; or\n(c) propose an alternative restrictive practice for the authorisation\nor interim authorisation.\n(2) As soon as reasonably practicable after making a decision under\nsubsection (1), the Senior Practitioner must give written notice of\nthe decision and the Senior Practitioner's reasons for the decision\nto:\n(a) the NDIS provider who made the application for the\nauthorisation or interim authorisation; and\n(b) the participant.\n16 Grounds to authorise a restrictive practice\nThe Senior Practitioner may grant an authorisation or interim\nauthorisation if:\n(a) the behaviour support plan or interim behaviour support plan\nis consistent with the principles of this Act; and\n(b) the behaviour support plan or interim behaviour support plan\nis consistent with the guidelines; and\n(c) the restrictive practice is necessary to prevent harm to the\nparticipant or others; and\n(d) the restrictive practice is the least restrictive approach\nreasonably available for the participant.\n17 Prohibited restrictive practices\nThe following restrictive practices may not be authorised by the\nSenior Practitioner:\n(a) aversion;\n(b) overcorrection;\n(c) misuse of medication;\n(d) denial of key needs;\n\nPart 3 Authorisation for restrictive practices\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 10\n(e) practices for the purpose of harassment or vilification or\nactions that are unethical, degrading or demeaning to a\nperson or may be perceived by the person or the person's\nguardian as harassment or vilification;\n(f) practices or actions which limit or deny access or participation\nto community, culture and language, including the denial of\naccess to interpreters;\n(g) in relation to a person under the age of 18 years – seclusion;\n(h) any other restrictive practice prescribed by regulation.\n18 Alternative restrictive practice\n(1) If, under section 15(1)(c), the Senior Practitioner proposes an\nalternative restrictive practice, the NDIS provider who made the\napplication for the authorisation or interim authorisation may\nrespond to the proposal within 28 days after the proposal is made.\n(2) The Senior Practitioner must consider the response and decide\nwhether to:\n(a) grant an authorisation or interim authorisation for the\nalternative restrictive practice; or\n(b) refuse to grant the authorisation or interim authorisation for the\nalternative restrictive practice.\n(3) As soon as reasonably practicable after making a decision under\nsubsection (2), the Senior Practitioner must give written notice of\nthe decision and the Senior Practitioner's reasons for the decision\nto:\n(a) the NDIS provider who made the application for the\nauthorisation or interim authorisation; and\n(b) the participant.\n19 Period of authorisation and interim authorisation\n(1) An authorisation is effective for 12 months from the date the\nauthorisation is made, unless otherwise specified by the Senior\nPractitioner in the authorisation.\n(2) An interim authorisation is effective for 6 months from the date the\nauthorisation is made, unless otherwise specified by the Senior\nPractitioner in the authorisation.\n\nPart 4 Review of authorisation decisions\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 11\n20 Revocation of authorisation and interim authorisation\n(1) The Senior Practitioner may revoke an authorisation or interim\nauthorisation at any time.\n(2) If the Senior Practitioner revokes an authorisation or interim\nauthorisation, the Senior Practitioner must give written notice of the\nrevocation and the Senor Practitioner's reasons for the revocation\nto:\n(a) the NDIS provider who made the application for the\nauthorisation or interim authorisation; and\n(b) the participant.\nPart 4 Review of authorisation decisions\n21 Reviewable decisions\n(1) A reviewable decision is a decision under section 15(1)(a) or (b),\n18(2)(a) or (b) or 20(1).\n(2) An affected person, for a reviewable decision, is:\n(a) the NDIS provider who made the application for the\nauthorisation or interim authorisation; or\n(b) the NDIS behaviour support practitioner for the behaviour\nsupport plan or interim behaviour support plan; or\n(c) the participant or the participant's guardian.\n22 Application for review of authorisation decisions\n(1) An affected person for a reviewable decision may apply to the CEO\nfor an internal review of the decision.\n(2) Subject to subsection (3), the application must be made within\n28 days after written notice of the decision is given to the affected\nperson.\n(3) However, if the reviewable decision is a decision to authorise a\nrestrictive practice, an affected person mentioned in\nsection 21(2)(c) may make the application at any time during the\nperiod of the authorisation or interim authorisation.\n(4) The application must be in the approved form.\n(5) The making of an application under this section does not stay the\noperation of the reviewable decision.\n\nPart 4 Review of authorisation decisions\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 12\n23 Appointment of internal reviewer\n(1) The CEO may appoint a public sector employee to review the\nreviewable decision and to make a recommendation under\nsection 25(2) to the CEO in relation to the decision.\n(2) The CEO must be satisfied that the employee has the\nqualifications, clinical experience and personal qualities necessary\nto review the reviewable decision.\n(3) The CEO must give written notice of the appointment of an internal\nreviewer to each affected person for the decision.\n(4) The CEO must, at the same time as giving a notice to each affected\nperson under subsection (3), give a copy of the notice to the\ninternal reviewer.\n24 Review of decision by internal reviewer\n(1) On receipt of an application under section 22 or a copy of a notice\nunder section 23(4), the internal reviewer must review the Senior\nPractitioner's decision.\n(2) However, in the circumstances mentioned in subsection (3), the\ninternal reviewer may reject an application under section 22 without\nreviewing the decision.\n(3) The circumstances for rejecting an application under subsection (2)\nare that the internal reviewer is satisfied that:\n(a) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or\n(b) the application was made after the period allowed by\nsection 22 for making the application had expired; or\n(c) the application relates to a matter that is the subject of an\napplication to a court or tribunal.\n(4) Without limiting subsection (3)(a), an application is frivolous or\nvexatious if, at the time the application was made:\n(a) another application under section 22 for an internal review of\nthe same decision had been made by another person; and\n(b) a decision has been made under section 26 on the other\napplication or the other application has been rejected under\nsubsection (2).\n\nPart 4 Review of authorisation decisions\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 13\n25 Conduct of review by internal reviewer\n(1) In reviewing the decision, the internal reviewer must:\n(a) take into account any matter prescribed by regulation for this\nsection; and\n(b) follow the procedures, if any, for review prescribed by\nregulation; and\n(c) comply with the rules of natural justice.\n(2) After reviewing the decision, the internal reviewer must make a\nrecommendation to the CEO on whether to:\n(a) affirm the decision; or\n(b) vary the decision; or\n(c) set aside the decision and substitute a new decision.\n26 Decision by CEO on internal review\n(1) After receiving a recommendation under section 25(2), the CEO\nmust:\n(a) affirm the decision; or\n(b) vary the decision; or\n(c) set aside the decision and substitute a new decision.\n(2) In making a decision under this section, the CEO is not bound by\nthe recommendation made by the internal reviewer.\n27 Notice of decision of CEO\n(1) As soon as reasonably practicable after making a decision under\nsection 26, the CEO must give written notice of the decision to the\nfollowing persons:\n(a) the applicant for the internal review;\n(b) each person who could have applied for an internal review of\nthe reviewable decision under section 22.\n(2) The notice must state the following:\n(a) the CEO's decision and the reasons for it;\n\nPart 5 Miscellaneous matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 14\n(b) details of the right the person has under this Act to apply to\nthe NTCAT for a review of the CEO's decision.\n28 Review by NTCAT\n(1) The NTCAT has jurisdiction to review a decision under section 26.\n(2) A Tribunal affected person for the decision is the applicant under\nsection 22 and any other person who could have applied under that\nsection for an internal review of the reviewable decision.\n(3) A Tribunal affected person for the decision made under section 26\nmay apply to the NTCAT for a review of the decision.\nPart 5 Miscellaneous matters\n29 Protection from liability\n(1) A person is not civilly or criminally liable for an act done or omitted\nto be done by the person in good faith in the exercise of a power or\nperformance of a function as any of the following:\n(a) the CEO;\n(b) the Senior Practitioner;\n(c) an internal reviewer.\n(2) Subsection (1) does not affect any liability the Territory would, apart\nfrom that subsection, have for the act or omission.\n(3) In this section:\nexercise, of a power, includes the purported exercise of the power.\nperformance, of a function, includes the purported performance of\nthe function.\n30 Offence to disclose certain information\n(1) A person commits an offence if:\n(a) the person obtains information in the course of performing a\nfunction connected with the administration of this Act or\nexercising a power under this Act; and\n(b) the information is confidential and the person is reckless in\nrelation to that circumstance; and\n(c) the person intentionally engages in conduct; and\n\nPart 5 Miscellaneous matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 15\n(d) the conduct results in the disclosure of the information and the\ndisclosure is not:\n(i) for a purpose connected with the administration of this\nAct, including a legal proceeding arising out of the\noperation of this Act; or\n(ii) to a person who is otherwise entitled to the information;\nand\n(e) the person is reckless in relation to the result and\ncircumstance mentioned in paragraph (d).\nMaximum penalty: 200 penalty units or imprisonment for\n2 years.\n(2) Strict liability applies to subsection (1)(a).\n(3) If the information mentioned in subsection (1) relates to a person, it\nis a defence to a prosecution for an offence against that subsection\nif the person has consented to the disclosure of the information.\nNote for section 30\nIn addition to the circumstances mentioned in this section, a person who\ndiscloses information mentioned in this section will not be criminally responsible\nfor an offence if the disclosure is justified or excused by or under a law (see\nsection 43BE of the Criminal Code).\n31 Misleading information\n(1) A person commits an offence if:\n(a) the person intentionally gives information to another person\n(the recipient); and\n(b) the information is misleading and the person has knowledge of\nthat circumstance; and\n(c) the recipient is acting in an official capacity and the person\nhas knowledge of that circumstance.\nMaximum penalty: 200 penalty units or imprisonment for\n2 years.\n(2) A person commits an offence if:\n(a) the person intentionally gives a document to the recipient; and\n(b) the document contains misleading information and the person\nhas knowledge of that circumstance; and\n\nPart 5 Miscellaneous matters\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 16\n(c) the recipient is acting in an official capacity and the person\nhas knowledge of that circumstance.\nMaximum penalty: 200 penalty units or imprisonment for\n2 years.\n(3) It is a defence to a prosecution for an offence against\nsubsection (2) if the person, when giving the document:\n(a) draws the misleading aspect of the document to the recipient's\nattention; and\n(b) to the extent to which the person can reasonably do so – gives\nthe recipient the information necessary to remedy the\nmisleading aspect of the document.\n(4) In this section:\nacting in an official capacity, in relation to a recipient, means the\nrecipient is exercising powers or performing functions under, or\notherwise related to the administration of, this Act.\nmisleading information means information that is misleading in a\nmaterial particular or because of the omission of a material\nparticular.\n32 Approved forms\nThe CEO may approve forms for this Act.\n33 Regulations\nThe Administrator may make regulations under this Act.\n\nENDNOTES\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 17\nENDNOTES\n1 KEY\nKey to abbreviations\namd = amended od = order\napp = appendix om = omitted\nbl = by-law pt = Part\nch = Chapter r = regulation/rule\ncl = clause rem = remainder\ndiv = Division renum = renumbered\nexp = expires/expired rep = repealed\nf = forms s = section\nGaz = Gazette sch = Schedule\nhdg = heading sdiv = Subdivision\nins = inserted SL = Subordinate Legislation\nlt = long title sub = substituted\nnc = not commenced\n2 LIST OF LEGISLATION\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Authorisations) Act 2019 (Act No. 15, 2019)\nAssent date 27 May 2019\nCommenced 1 July 2019 (Gaz S45, 26 June 2019)","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation appears consistent with its original intent as stated in the long title: 'An Act to provide for the authorisation of restrictive practices for participants in the National Disability Insurance Scheme.' The scope remains tightly focused on creating an approval and oversight regime for restrictive practices under the NDIS in the Northern Territory, without significant expansion into adjacent areas."},"complexity_factors":["Moderate length at 33 sections across 5 Parts, but relatively focused scope","17 defined terms in section 3, with several terms (like restrictive practice types) defined by reference to external Commonwealth NDIS Rules rather than defined within the Act itself","Cross-references to external legislation including the Commonwealth NDIS Act 2013, NDIS Rules 2018, NT Criminal Code, and Disability Services Act 1993","Nested procedural requirements for applications (section 14) with multiple sub-elements and 28-day time limits","Two-tiered review system (internal review then NTCAT) with specific standing rules for different affected persons","Conditional offence provisions in sections 30-31 with multiple fault elements (intention, recklessness, knowledge) and defences","Principles section (section 5) contains 11 separate principles plus 6 service delivery requirements, creating interpretive overlay for decision-makers"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this law does:**\n\nThis is a Northern Territory law that creates a formal approval system for when disability service providers can use \"restrictive practices\" on people with disabilities who are part of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). Restrictive practices are things that limit a person's freedom or rights—like physical restraint, seclusion (locking someone alone in a room), or medication used to control behaviour.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n\n- **NDIS participants** in the NT who display behaviours that could harm themselves or others\n- **NDIS providers** (disability services) who want to use restrictive practices as part of behaviour support\n- **The Senior Practitioner**—a specially appointed official who decides whether to approve these practices\n- **Families, carers and guardians** who must be consulted before any approval is given\n\n**How it works:**\n\n1. **Before using any restrictive practice**, a provider must apply to the Senior Practitioner for authorisation (permission)\n2. The Senior Practitioner checks that:\n   - The practice is absolutely necessary to prevent harm\n   - It's the least restrictive option available\n   - A proper behaviour support plan is in place\n3. **Some practices are completely banned**, including:\n   - Seclusion for children under 18\n   - Using pain or unpleasant experiences as punishment (aversion)\n   - Misusing medication\n   - Denying basic needs like food, family contact or possessions\n   - Anything degrading or harassing\n4. **Authorisations last 12 months** (or 6 months for interim approvals) and can be revoked at any time\n5. **People can appeal decisions** through an internal review process and then to the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NTCAT)\n\n**Why it matters:**\n\nThis law tries to balance safety with human rights. It recognises that sometimes restrictive practices might be needed to keep someone safe, but sets up strict guardrails to prevent abuse. It requires providers to work toward reducing and eventually eliminating these practices, and ensures decisions are transparent and reviewable. The law also aligns with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.\n\n**Key protections:**\n- Participants must be treated with dignity and have a say in decisions about their care\n- Restrictive practices must be a \"last resort,\" not routine\n- Families and advocates must be consulted\n- Regular reviews ensure practices don't continue longer than necessary"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This Act, as presented, remains tightly focused on authorising and regulating restrictive practices for NDIS participants in the Northern Territory. It implements a territory‑level authorisation, oversight and review framework that complements Commonwealth NDIS rules rather than materially expanding beyond that core purpose. The sole significant scope interaction noted in the text is that this Act prevails where it overlaps with Part 4 of the Disability Services Act 1993 (s4(2)), but that is a resolution of overlap rather than an expansion of purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Relatively short Act (33 sections) with a focused subject matter (authorisation of restrictive practices).","Approximately 20+ defined or cross-referenced terms in s3 (e.g. restrictive practice types, behaviour support plan, NDIS Rules, NDIS Act).","Multiple cross-references to external instruments: Commonwealth NDIS Rules and NDIS Act, and Part IIAA of the Criminal Code (s3, s8).","Discretionary decision points concentrated in Senior Practitioner powers and CEO/internal reviewer functions (ss11,15,18,25–26).","Several procedural time limits and consequences (28‑day response periods in ss14(4)–(5),18(1), review application timeframes in s22).","Nested review structure: internal reviewer recommendation to CEO, CEO decision, then merits review by NTCAT (ss23–28).","Exceptions and prohibitions catalogue (explicit prohibited practices in s17 and power to add by regulation).","Delegation powers and guideline‑making leave interpretive space that affects implementation (ss12–13).","Offences with strict liability elements and significant penalties (ss30–31)."],"plain_english_summary":"**What this law does (mechanically)**\n\n- Establishes a Territory regime for authorising the use of \"restrictive practices\" (techniques or interventions that limit a person with disability's rights or freedom of movement) by NDIS providers when delivering services to NDIS participants (see s3, s4(1), s7).\n- Creates the office of a Senior Practitioner (Minister-appointed public sector employee) with powers to assess, approve, refuse, propose alternatives to, and revoke authorisations for restrictive practices. The Senior Practitioner also issues guidelines and promotes reduction of restrictive practices (ss9–13, 15, 20).\n- Requires NDIS providers to apply for formal authorisation (or interim authorisation) in an approved form and to include a behaviour support plan and evidence of consultation with the participant and relevant persons (s14(1)–(2)). The Senior Practitioner may inspect premises before deciding (s14(6)).\n- Sets the legal tests the Senior Practitioner must apply when granting an authorisation: the behaviour support plan must follow the Act's principles and the Senior Practitioner’s guidelines, the practice must be necessary to prevent harm, and it must be the least restrictive option reasonably available (s5, s16).\n- Prohibits certain restrictive practices outright (e.g. aversion, overcorrection, misuse of medication, denial of key needs, seclusion for people under 18) and permits further prohibitions by regulation (s17).\n- Limits authorisation durations (default 12 months for authorisations, 6 months for interim authorisations) and allows the Senior Practitioner to revoke an authorisation at any time (s19–20).\n- Provides an internal review process (application to the CEO, appointment of an internal reviewer, recommendation, CEO decision) and external merits review by the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NTCAT) (ss21–28).\n- Protects officials acting in good faith from civil or criminal liability for acts done in the exercise of their powers (s29) and creates offences for unlawful disclosure of confidential information and for knowingly providing misleading information, with significant penalties (ss30–31). The CEO may approve forms and regulations may be made (ss32–33).\n\n**Who this affects**\n\n- NDIS providers operating in the Northern Territory who propose to use restrictive practices when supporting NDIS participants (s4(1)).\n- NDIS participants and their guardians, families and carers, whose rights and liberties may be restricted and who must be consulted as part of any application (s14(2)(iii), s5).  \n- The Senior Practitioner, the CEO and other public sector employees who perform internal reviews (ss9, 23, 25).  \n- The Territory (through administrative costs of running the Senior Practitioner office, inspection and review processes) and potentially the NTCAT (for external reviews) (ss9–13, 23–28).\n\n**Why it matters (stated purpose, then an operational test)**\n\n- Stated purpose: to provide a regulated, rights‑focused process so restrictive practices are used only when necessary, are minimised, and are consistent with best practice and international disability rights (ss5,10(e)).\n\n- Testing that purpose against costs and incentives:\n  - Who pays: administrative and compliance costs fall largely on NDIS providers (time and evidence to prepare applications, consultations, behaviour support plans, responding to information requests, possible site inspections — s14). The Territory funds the Senior Practitioner, review processes and enforcement (ss9, 23, 26).  \n  - Who decides: the Senior Practitioner has broad discretionary decision‑making power to grant, refuse, propose alternatives, inspect premises and revoke authorisations (ss11, 14(6), 15–20). The CEO and internal reviewer exercise further administrative review (ss23–26), and NTCAT provides judicial review (s28).  \n  - Behaviour changes incentivised: providers are pushed to reduce or eliminate restrictive practices and to adopt least‑restrictive, evidence‑based alternatives because authorisations require demonstration of necessity and least restrictive approach (s16) and because certain practices are expressly forbidden (s17).  \n  - Compliance burden and operational risk: providers must meet paperwork, consultation, time limits (28 days to respond to information requests — s14(4)–(5); 28 days to reply to alternative proposals — s18(1)), and possible inspections (s14(6)). Failure risks application lapsing, refusal, revocation, or criminal penalties for misleading or disclosing information improperly (ss14(5),20,30–31).  \n  - Bureaucratic discretion and implementation risk: the Act grants substantial discretion to the Senior Practitioner (powers to propose alternatives, vary duration, revoke at any time — ss11,15,18,19–20). Outcomes will depend on how guidelines are written and resourced (s12), and on the Senior Practitioner’s exercise of delegation (s13).  \n  - Effects on private enterprise and service models: independent NDIS providers must adapt care practices, staff training and record‑keeping to meet the authorisation regime; some intervention techniques will be unavailable (s17). This can alter staffing costs, insurance and contractual arrangements with participants (ss14,17).  \n  - Concentrated benefits and diffuse costs: participants (and their families/guardians) receive formal protections and review rights (ss5,21–28), a concentrated benefit. Many small providers face diffuse administrative costs across many transactions.  \n  - Substitution and unintended consequences: providers may substitute non‑authorised, less‑restrictive strategies (intended), or could modify client selection or service offers to avoid burdensome authorisation processes (potential, not asserted by the text).  \n\n**Key mechanics to watch (implementation levers and constraints)**\n\n- Defined external references: the Act relies on the Commonwealth NDIS Rules and the Commonwealth NDIS Act for definitions and standards (s3, definitions). That means practical interpretation depends on federal instruments as well as territory guidelines (s12).\n- Time limits and application formalities: applications must be in approved form and provide detailed material; further information requests have 28‑day deadlines and non‑compliance causes lapse (s14(2)–(5)).\n- Review and oversight stack: internal review (CEO/internal reviewer) is available within tight timeframes and does not stay operation (s22(5)); external review to NTCAT is available after internal review (ss26–28).  \n- Prohibitions: a defined set of practices may never be authorised (s17), which shapes what providers can propose.\n- Criminal risk: offences for unauthorised disclosure of confidential information and for knowingly providing misleading information carry heavy penalties and some strict liability (ss30–31).\n\n**Net operational effect (concise)**\n\nThe Act creates a territory licensing‑style process for the use of restrictive practices in NDIS service delivery. Providers must justify interventions through approved behaviour support plans, meet consultation and reporting requirements, and obtain ongoing (time‑limited) authorisations. A central public official (the Senior Practitioner) and an internal/tribunal review structure exercise control over approvals and revocations, and the Act expressly bans certain practices. The regime increases administrative burden on providers, gives the public sector decision‑makers significant discretion, and channels protective benefits to participants via legal tests, time limits and review rights (see ss14–20, 21–28)."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019","history":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019/history","analysis":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-authorisations-act-2019/documents"}}