Page 1049 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 30 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
From 1 July, new WAT vehicles will be required to be able to carry a minimum of two people in wheelchairs. The government is sensitive to the fact that WATs have greater capital and operating costs than standard taxis. To address this, the government will reduce the discounted WAT licence fees even further and provide start-up funds for new, larger WATs.
The WAT licence lease fee for a smaller WAT willl drop from $3,000 to $1,000 and for larger WATs from $1,000 to $100 a year. A $5,000 subsidy will be provided to assist operators with the purchase and modification costs of a new WAT with the capacity to carry at least two wheelchair passengers.
The taxi subsidy scheme administered by the department of housing and community services helps Canberrans with a severe disability by subsidising the cost of taxi transport. The government has agreed in principle to consider options to further improve affordability. Options to be considered include raising the subsidy, increasing the number of trips available under the scheme and converting the paper-based voucher system to a smart card system.
I am optimistic that the changes the government has agreed to and the commitment of a substantial amount of new government expenditure will deliver improvements to WAT performance. In the unlikely event that these changes do not lift WAT performance to a satisfactory level, the government will consider other approaches to the provision of transport services for wheelchair users, including options involving a higher degree of government management of these services.
If we ever reach that point, Ms Bresnan’s proposal for more detailed costing of the introduction of a WAT service with salaried drivers may have a place. Indeed, I think it is fair to say that Ms Bresnan’s proposed approach, which calls on the government to undertake a cost analysis of current WAT subsidies compared to the cost of a dedicated WAT service with salaried drivers, and then to develop a plan to implement such a service, is a little unorthodox.
The government prefers to take an evidence-based approach. Ms Bresnan’s motion before the Assembly today completely ignores the investment that a number of hard-working and committed WAT operators have already made. I have absolutely no doubt of Ms Bresnan’s desire to improve WAT services. I am very aware of her commitment to this particular issue and the energy that she has devoted to it.
However, I do not support the approach she takes today to this complex issue. I do think it is unfortunate, in an environment where the government over the last year has commissioned an external expert review associated with detailed, ongoing, genuine consultation with all sectors of the community, has received a report, has had the report assessed, has consulted on the report, has prepared a government response, has consulted on the government’s response, has initiated activity, has begun the steps for the implementation of that response, to find a motion in the Assembly today, some two months after the government has announced its response, simply seeking to say, “We think you are wrong and we are calling on you to change an agreed approach on a way forward before it has even commenced.”
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video