Inaccessible

Unacceptable

Researched & Authored By Sheila King

Coaches Bus Stops Shuttle Services Page | 1

TRAVEL unLIMITED A REPORT INTO INACCESSIBLE TRANSPORT THROUGHOUT AUSTRALIA

NOTE: This report takes into consideration any and all transport that a person with a disability cannot get into, onto or out of, whether or not it is referred to in the DDA or the DSAPT. The report aims to highlight inaccessible transport per se. Inaccessible conveyances are inaccessible to people with disabilities whether they come under the umbrella of the above legislation or not. A specific conveyance may not have been identified or defined in the DSAPT, for example bus stops are not defined in the DSAPT as “waiting areas”, but many people with wheelchairs wait at them when they know that there are accessible buses stopping at that bus stop. In this same vein some leisure vessels which are not identified in the DSAPT, are nevertheless inaccessible to people with disabilities when the access to the vessel is at one height and the accessible toilet is down a flight of steps. It cannot be assumed that any conveyance not coming under the umbrella of the legislation is accessible to people with disabilities.

METHODOLOGY

A database was made up of all the transport companies as they appeared on the „Bus Australia‟ web site and in the Yellow Pages telephone pages under ‟Transport‟. The database covered companies from all States and Territories. The final database was made up of the names of nearly 2,626 companies.

The companies on the final database included those which, although not found on the „Bus Australia‟ web site or the yellow pages site, were found on the internet and in a random way, and/or brought to the notice of the author by the members of Australia For All Alliance Inc, when they saw named coaches on the road.

All transportation companies on the database were initially placed in alphabetical order, and thereafter configured into States and Territories. Where web sites were identified, contact with the companies was made via the web site. From the web site e-mail and telephone numbers were included on the database.

From the web site it was possible to group the companies into the service offered, ie Public Route Services, Charters, Tours, Charters/Tours, Shuttle services and Mini Bus services. At the same time, if the web site gave information as to the number of vehicles in that specific company‟s fleet, this information was entered onto the database.

Page | 2

Where there were gaps in the information required for the database, both via the web site, e-mail contact and the telephone, we advised the company we were contacting that we were endeavouring to make up a database of coach/bus companies. The questions asked were:

1. How many coaches/buses make up your fleet 2. How many of these coaches/buses have wheelchair access

The reason for the discrepancy in the number of companies identified on our initial web site and those shown in the table on page 13 which the report Is based on is that many companies were unable to be contacted for one reason or another, including the fact that they had no web site which showed any e-mail contact. Many of those companies who were able to be contacted via e-mail or telephone through information found on the yellow pages did not reply. Many telephone calls made to landlines and mobile telephones did not answer and/or were disconnected.

Page | 3

INTRODUCTION

The Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport establish minimum accessibility requirements for the providers and operators of „public transport conveyances, infrastructure and premises‟. They include a wide range of requirements for: access paths; manoeuvring areas; ramps and boarding devices; allocated spaces; doorways; controls; symbols; signs; waiting areas; boarding points; allocated spaces; surfaces; hand and grab rails; doorways and doors; lifts; stairs; toilets; Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSIs); alarms; lighting; controls; furniture and fittings; street furniture; gateways; payment of fares; hearing augmentation- listening systems; information provision; booked services; food and drink services; belongings; and priority arrangements (Attorney-General‟s Department, 2006).

The Transport Standards set out requirements for providers and operators that apply to the following modes of transport or „conveyances‟

 aircraft  buses or coaches  ferries  taxis  trains, trams, light rail, monorails, rack railways and:

Any other rolling stock, vehicle or vessel classified as public transport within its jurisdiction by regulation or administrative action of any Government in Australia.

The Transport Standards themselves are not structured around modes of transport, but apply to each mode in a particular way (allowing for the nature of the mode and what needs to be done to provide accessibility).

At the June 2008 meeting of Australia For All Alliance Inc the following documentation was tabled by a member who complained she could not find a touring and/or charter company which had an accessible vehicle she could access with her mobility aid. She was, she said, „mad to see Tasmania‟.

In order to assist people with mobility aids to know which companies and areas had accessible transport the management committee asked the secretary to make up a database containing this information which would be added to the web site www.australiaforall.com.

At the September 2008 meeting the secretary reported that she had found that the situation of non-compliance amongst the Transport Industry Companies was such that she recommended that Australia For All Alliance Inc, should instigate a survey and eventual report into inaccessible transport throughout Australia.

Australia For All Inc, wishes to thank Tieman Industries for underwriting the cost of both landline and mobile telephone calls which enabled the group members to make the many hundreds of telephone calls which the research into this report involved.

Page | 4

The following are copies of the correspondence brought to the notice of the Management Committee by one of our members and which are the basis on which it was decided to undertake this report. It shows quite vividly the difficulties and extensive correspondence is involved when just one person with a disability who has a mobility aid and requires wheelchair accessible transport, has to contend with just to make arrangements to be part of a touring holiday.

Page | 5

Page | 6

Page | 7

Page | 8

Page | 9

Page | 10

Page | 11

Australia For All Alliance has decided to take this opportunity to raise the issue of non-accessible transport on the 2011 International Day of People with Disability. All too often the main issue that disabled people complain most about amongst themselves is the fact that public transport is to a large degree inaccessible.

Public transport acts as a means of giving greater freedom and choice. However, inaccessible transport creates a barrier to freedom of choice for people with disabilities. Using public transport is an inherently social activity as it is a means of allowing different people to travel together.

This report highlights the barriers faced by people with disabilities in relation to non- accessible public transport including buses, coaches, shuttle services, ferries etc, and the impact that this has on their lives. It reaffirms that fully accessible transport should be to the fore on the political radar.

It is to be hoped that the contents of this report will compel transport providers, both public and private, to not only meet but exceed the schedule of compliance set out in the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport.

Accessibility does not just mean easy to reach, it also means easy to use.

An accessible transport system is one that recognizes the need for every stage in a journey to be accessible to people with disabilities. An accessible transport system includes as many people as possible. It cannot meet every need, but should endeavour to break down the barriers of exclusion.

The lack of accessible transport adds to social isolation, as many people with disabilities find that non-accessible transportation denies them the opportunity to visit family and friends who live away from them.

Any work undertaken to enhance public services will be undermined if people with disabilities cannot access a vital service such as transport. If public route transport is not fully accessible to people with disabilities it is likely to act as a substantial barrier, preventing them from participating fully in society.

The consequences of inaccessible transport include social isolation and limited life horizons – in other words social invisibility. The reality of this exclusion is recognized by the majority of non-disabled members of the community, but this recognition does not appear to extend to the majority of transport operators. It is hoped that this report will compel both Government, transport planners and operators to take action. The following table gives a summary of the availability or, more correctly, the non-availability of wheelchair accessible transport in all States and Territories for all types of transport available to the public.

Page | 12

Summary of availability of Wheelchair Accessible Transport in all States 1

Number of No of Number 1 companies companies No. of of companies who were with companies on initial No. of contacted wheelchair compliant with STATE Database companies with had accessible DSAPT who could who replied no vehicles schedule not when accessible but less = > 25% of be contacted contacted. wheelchair than 25% fleet vehicles of fleet ACT 24 22 12 2 8 NSW 707 240 85 62 93 NT 21 21 15 4 2 QLD 260 192 149 18 25 SA 136 58 48 9 1 TAS 41 41 30 10 1 VIC 389 181 75 32 74 WA 233 60 48 6 6

TOTAL 1,811 815 462 143 210

Non-compliant => 25% Compliant 1 Includes: Touring bus companies Discussed in this report but not included in survey: Charter Bus Companies Taxis Public Route Companies Airlines Touring/Charter Companies Ferries and leisure craft Companies with Shuttle Buses Bus Stops

Companies with Mini -Buses

The members of the Transport Industry will find it very difficult to argue that they are, or were, unaware of the requirements of the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport (DSAPT) which came into law on the 23rd October 2002, as these were widely published throughout their industry.

Page | 13

The distribution of the requirements of the DSAPT included:  The Attorney Generals‟ release of the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport 2002 on the 23rd October 2002 and the accompanying Guidelines attached to this Standard,

 The Bus Industry Confederation‟s “The Bus & Coach Operators Guidelines For the Disability Discrimination Act”,

 “The National Transport Commission Bus Operator‟s Handbook” published in both the 2003 and 2008.

The Queensland Governments Queensland Transport Department‟s “Important Information for Public Transport Operators and Providers of Infrastructure and Premises for compliance with the Commonwealth Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport 2002”.

In the Executive Summary of the Bus Industry Confederation‟s Bus & Coach Operators Guidelines For the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport, under the question “Does it apply to me?” The answer is shown as: “If you operate route services or sell seats on a per seat basis –Yes”. The answer to the Question “How Long Have I Got To Comply” is clearly shown as: “New buses, coaches, premises or infrastructure must comply if put into service after 23 October 2002.

On page 36 of the National Transport Commission‟s Bus Operator Handbook, it gives details of the various parts of the DSAPT and states: The Accessible Transport Standards apply to route services or any bus and coach operator who sells seats on a per seat basis. There are exemptions for school bus operators.

The standards also relate to premises that the public visit in relation to the public transport service and these must also comply. The information goes on to say: “Buses, coaches, premises or infrastructure must have 25% of their fleet accessible for people in wheelchairs if they were in service prior to 23 October 2002. There are requirements to make certain aspects like information provision and lighting of buses, coaches, premises and infrastructure, 100% compliant by 31 December 2007”.

“The Important information” document published by the Queensland Government‟s Transport Department includes a great deal of additional information. Of most important it sets out the role the Australian Standards and the Australian Design Rules play. It is important that the Transport Standards & Guidelines should be read in conjunction with specified industry guidelines such as the Australian Standards (AS) and Australian Design Rules (ADR).

It is also important to note that whilst the Transport Standards include specific criteria for some physical disabilities, including hearing and vision impairments, operators and providers need to be mindful of removing discrimination against people with medical, intellectual, behavioral and emotional disabilities. Operators and providers should avoid attitudinal or informational barriers that limit the accessibility of public transport for some passengers. Page | 14

The following are relevant to the Transport Standards:

The Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport Guidelines 2004 states: “The Disability Standards prescribe national requirements that public transport service providers and facility operators must meet in order to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 in these areas.

The Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport detail mandatory performance outcomes covering a range of accessibility issues. Due to the very specific requirements of these standards they are the national authority for compliance with anti-discrimination legislation in the areas specified in the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport.

The Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport specifies how public transport is to be made accessible. The Guidelines are to assist in understanding and interpreting the Standards.

Discrimination can occur either directly or indirectly. Sections 5 and 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 define direct and indirect discrimination. In summary, direct disability discrimination arises if an operator or infrastructure provider treats a person with a disability less favorably than another person in a similar situation. Indirect disability discrimination arises when the impact of an operator‟s or provider‟s service is less favorable for a person with a disability than for a person without a disability.

The full schedule of compliance from 2002 to 2022 detailed in the Queensland Government‟s Transport Department is shown in the following table. Many of these target dates have been ignored by the majority of the members of the transport industry. Page | 15

Page | 16

An example of indirect disability (not directed at a specific person) is the following comment found in the „Condition For Travel‟ set out on several websites.

“Due to safety requirements the company requires any passenger travelling with a wheelchair, must be accompanied by a carer or escort at all times”

Section 6 of the The Disability Discrimination Act defines Indirect Discrimination as:

A person who discriminates against another person (aggrieved person) on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person if the discriminator requires the aggrieved person to comply with a requirement or condition:

(a) With which a substantially higher proportion of person without the disability comply or are able to comply:

This refers to the situation when a substantially higher proportion of persons without the disability are not required for safety or any other reason, to be accompanied by a carer or an escort at all times.

Examples of direct discrimination (against a specific person) are, for example, the copies of e-mails found at the beginning of this report.

As can be seen from the table on the previous page, setting out Compliance Target Dates – Public Transport Operators (Excluding Taxis), one of the specific target dates which required 100% compliance by 31 December 2007 was in relation to Hearing Augmentation. The DSAPT Section 26.2 covering Public Address Systems in conveyances states:

“If a public address system is installed in buses, coaches, ferries trains and trams people who are deaf or have a hearing impairment must be able to receive a message equivalent to the message received by people without a hearing impairment: and it must comply with AS1428.2 (1992) Clause 21.1”.

See page 27 for the full details of AS1428.2 (1992) Clause 21.1

Transport can be divided into different categories of which one is:

BUSES Buses provide the mass public transport necessary to support accessibility. They are able to provide the essential links needed throughout Australia to enable people to travel from one point to another. They are the principal, most frequently used and most widely available mode of public transport.

Transport accessibility is not simply about wheelchair accessible vehicles, important though they are. Issues such as the location of bus stops are crucial to ensuring accessibility. While low-floor routes are shown on bus timetables, this does not always mean the bus will be able to deploy a ramp at any given bus stop.

The length of the journey to reach a bus stop can have a direct bearing on whether an individual will be able to access that service. To encourage greater use of buses by people with disabilities more must be done to improve accessible bus stops, and Page | 17

to provide audio and visual announcements on all buses, and ensure that accessible buses are not rendered inaccessible by frequent equipment failure.

No of No. of companies No. of No. of companies with companies STATE companies with no wheelchair compliant Contacted accessible accessible with DSAPT wheelchair vehicles schedule vehicles but less = > 25% of than 25% fleet of fleet ACT 4 1 2 1 NSW 85 22 16 47 NT 5 2 1 2 QLD 51 10 23 7 SA 20 8 5 1 TAS 7 4 2 1 VIC 73 30 10 33 WA 11 7 0 4

TOTAL 256 84 59 113

Non-compliant =>25% Compliant

**These figures do not include City Metropolitan companies with large numbers of buses on many routes as we found it difficult to ascertain how many buses serviced any one route.

As can be clearly seen from table above it shows transport providers covering Public Routes which are mainly based in the rural areas, there is still a long way to go to meet the DSAPT schedule of 25% of their fleets to be accessible by 31 December 2007, which date is long gone and the next target date is 31st December 2012 for 55% of a fleet to be wheelchair accessible.

Non-accessible route buses can cause:

Missed visits to the Cinema Missed visits to family Missed visits to a restaurant Missed Leisure visits Missed Medical appointments Missed attending sporting events

Page | 18

People with disabilities who are trapped in, what is called „ transport poverty‟ face a reduced ability to participate in civic life.

The European Commission in July 2008 adopted two legislative proposals establishing sets of rights for passengers using bus and maritime services on both domestic and international routes. These rights included minimum rules on availability of information for all passengers before and during their journey, assistance and compensation in the event of interruptions of journeys, measures in the event of delays, and specific assistance for persons with reduced mobility.

However it appears that the opening up of these two markets has not raised the quality of standards and services as it was expected to do, including better enforcement of passenger‟s rights.

BUS STOP INFRASTRUCTURE As well as the buses themselves having to comply with the DSAPT bus stops are also a part of transport infrastructure. Buses that are wheelchair accessible need to be able to stop at bus stops that allow people with wheelchairs to access them with ease and safety. Accessible buses require DSAPT compliant boarding infrastructure such as compliant bus stops. This unfortunately is another area where these requirements are being ignored.

This new bus stop installation is non-compliant with the DSAPT in that there are no kerb ramps to enable wheelchairs to access this bus stop. There is also a dangerous drop-off at the rear of the cement platform.

Page | 19

This bus stop has undergone a major refurbishment, but the bus shelter seen in the photograph has no allocated spaces for people with wheelchairs

This bus stop, again, has no kerb ramp to allow access for wheelchairs in accordance with the DSAPT.

The following new bus stop does not have the required kerb ramp for wheelchair access. As can be seen the only access is via a roll-on, roll-off kerb ramp which does not comply with the DSAPT.

Page | 20

As can be seen from all the above photographs taken on the 20th November 2011 in Hervey Bay, many new bus stops installed after October 2002 are not in accordance with the DSAPT.

STATE & INTERSTATE TOUR OPERATORS

No. of No. of No. of Companies Companies Companies No. of Companies Contacted with no With accessible Wheelchair Compliant STATE wheelchair Accessible With DAPT vehicles Vehicles but Schedule Less than +> 25% of’ 25% of fleet Fleet.

ACT 4 2 2 0

NSW 98 67 1 30

NT 10 8 1 1

QLD 74 63 6 5

SA 27 24 3 0

TAS 21 21 0 0

VIC 68 52 10 6

WA 18 14 4 0

TOTAL 320 251 27 42

Compliant => 25% compliant

Page | 21

The definition of touring is defined as “a trip with visits to various places of interest for business, pleasure, or instruction. A group organized for such a trip or for a shorter sightseeing excursion. A brief trip to or through a place for the purpose of seeing it”.

It appears from the this table that 320 people were able to take a tour, but unfortunately only 42 people with disabilities were able to take a tour because they had a mobility aid..

COMPANIES OFFERING CHARTERED T0URS

No. of Companies No. of No. of With Companies Companies Wheelchair Compliant with no Accessible With DAPT

accessible Vehicles but Schedule STATE No. of Companies wheelchair Less than +> 25% of’ Contacted vehicles 25% of fleet Fleet.

ACT 7 5 2 2

NSW 99 61 30 8

NT 6 4 1 1

QLD 99 83 10 6

SA 27 20 6 1

TAS 18 13 5 0

VIC 71 48 18 5

WA 30 22 4 4

TOTAL 357 256 78 25

Compliant => 25% compliant

Page | 22

The definition of a company that offers charters is defined “as charter pertaining to a method of travel in which the transportation is specially leased or hired for members of a group or association ie “to charter a bus or coach”.

The above figures lead one to conclude that amongst the 357 transport operators, offering charters identified for the purpose of this report only 25 have met the scheduled target date, the remaining operators have, between them, decided to completely ignore the information contained in either of the Bus Industry Confederation‟s Bus & coach Operators Guidelines for Disability Discrimination and and/or the National Transport Commission‟s Bus Operator Handbook, although both publications emphasised the mandatory requirements of the 2002 Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport.

Why are there so few accessible conveyances offering tours and charters? The reasons given by some companies can be found in Appendix “A” at the end of this report.

COMPANIES OFFERING SHUTTLE SERVICES

Shuttle services throughout Australia are misnamed. They are defined in the DSAPT as a “Dial-a-ride-Service which is a service that:

(a) Is usually operated by a small bus, and

(b) Serves a local community, and

(c) Operates on flexible routes that allow passengers to be picked up and dropped off at their front doors.

The DSAPT calls for a number of allocated spaces to be provided on small buses; Section 9.4 states:

1. At least 2 allocated spaces must be provided in each bus with more than 32 fixed seats.

2. At least one allocated space MUST be provided in each bus with less than 33 fixed seats.

3. An allocated space is additional to the fixed seating capacity.

Page | 23

. SHUTTLE SERVICES No of No. of companies No. of No. of companies with companies STATE companies with no wheelchair compliant Contacted accessible accessible with DSAPT wheelchair vehicles but schedule vehicles less than 25% = > 25% of of fleet fleet

ACT 1 0 0 1 NSW 29 26 3 0 NT 2 1 1 0 QLD 27 7 20 0 SA 2 2 0 0 TAS ** 0 0 0 0 VIC 41 17 19 6 WA 2 2 0 0

TOTAL 104 55 43 6

Non Compliant =>25% Compliant

It is one of the constant complaints made by people who use wheelchairs that because the majority of shuttle services cannot accommodate mobility aids, it costs them more to travel to any given airport as they have to travel by taxi, the cost of which is sometimes as much as 4 times the cost of a shuttle service for a person without a mobility aid.

Page | 24

This is the configuration of a shuttle service vehicle. If you wish to use this service the driver requests that, although you cannot get out of your wheelchair, it has to be put into the trailer, which is clearly seen in this photograph. The reason for this request is that there is no allocated space inside the shuttle for a mobility aid, as required by Section 9.4 of the DSAPT

MINI BUSES

No of No. of companies No. of No. of companies with companies STATE companies with no wheelchair compliant Contacted accessible accessible with DSAPT wheelchair vehicles schedule

vehicles but less = > 25% of than 25% fleet of fleet

ACT ** 0 0 0 0 NSW 24 16 8 0 NT 3 1 1 1 QLD 9 9 0 0

SA 6 5 1 0 TAS ** 2 2 0 0 VIC 15 9 5 1

WA 6 4 2 0

TOTAL 65 46 17 2

Non-Compliant =>25% Compliant

** Denotes no Mini Bus companies found in sample

Mini Buses are in the majority of cases used for tourism purposes, such as tours to wineries, sporting events etc. They are defined under the DSAPT as „Buses” . Mini Buses are rarely seen with a trailer behind, and there is no alternative such as a taxi Page | 25

to get them to the advertised destination, as there is with a shuttle service. Which, of course, means that people who rely on wheelchairs are socially isolated from taking the tours to places of interest, sporting activities, wineries etc, which people without wheelchairs are free to enjoy.

TAXIS The database made up for this report did not encompass the taxi industry;

However it is important that a person with a disability should be able to hire a taxi when they require it with minimal delay. The DSAPT states under Part 1.2 of the Schedule of Target Dates: “Response times for accessible vehicles are to be the same as for other taxis. – Application – Conveyances including taxis.

Stories of people with disabilities pre-ordering taxis in good time in order to ensure they were „picked up‟ at a time designated by them, and then having to wait an inordinate time for the taxi to arrive after the time ordered, or not arriving at all, are all too frequent. Wheelchair accessible taxis are, as stated above, required to treat response times for accessible vehicles the same as they do for other taxis.

Taxi drivers who start their meters at pick-up, and leave them running whilst they untie their passenger‟s wheelchairs when they reach the passenger‟s destination, are also too prevalent to be „one-offs‟. The relevant State Taxi Licensing Boards must ensure that these practices cease and ensure that the relevant drivers are severely reprimanded. The need to use taxis regularly as a person‟s only means of transport, can become prohibitively expensive, without additionally having to meet extra and illegal costs. Disability training should be compulsory for all taxi drivers in an endeavour to reduce the constant complaints made by people with disabilities of the poor attitude of some of these service providers.

A large percentage of many wheelchair accessible taxi fleets are used for picking up children from their homes and taking them to their individual schools. These accessible taxis undertake this work on every school day during the hours of 7.30 to 9.30 am and 3.00 to 4.30 pm, and during school holidays.

People with disabilities are very rarely able to obtain a wheelchair accessible taxi during these times of the day. This causes a very stressful situation as people with disabilities requiring wheelchair taxies often have professional appointments with doctors, hospitals, dentists, etc and it is only after they have telephoned the taxi company for a wheelchair accessible taxi that they are advised that they are all out on school runs. This necessitates that person having to telephone the professional office concerned to cancel their appointment and make an alternative one. On many occasions the alternative appointment is unable to be made on the same day.

ACCESSIBLE SCHOOL CONVEYANCES

1.3 Treatment of dedicated school bus services in the Transport Standards A dedicated school bus service is defined in the Transport Standards as a service that operates to transport primary or secondary students to or from school or for

Page | 26

other school purposes (Part 1.13). These services are excluded from 26 parts of the Transport Standards.

“The decision to excise dedicated school buses from the standards is just mind boggling to me. It‟s a missed opportunity to use the leveraging power of government spending to get bus operators, manufacturers and designers to start thinking about access and spread that beyond the bus fleet”. (Craig Wallace (Former Chair of the ACT Disability Advisory Council) Hearing Transcript, p. 10)

While tertiary students in rural areas are able to use the school bus service to travel to TAFE or university, this is not an option for students with a mobility impairment.

IT CAN BE DONE - This is a school child accessing the lift of an accessible school bus in Western Australia, where accessible school buses are not something to look forward to in 20 years time but are in use in 2011. The Public Transport Authority of Western Australia in their Disability Access and Inclusion Plan 2007-2012 state: “If the need can be demonstrated for a wheelchair accessible bus on a non-accessible route, consideration may be given to modifying the bus to make it wheelchair accessible or other forms of transport assistance offered.”

Australia For All Alliance supports Mr. Wallace‟s comments. The Commonwealth Government‟s Response to the Review of the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport that there be a phased application of the dedicated school bus services to the physical access requirements in the Transport Standards, for children confined to wheelchairs commences in 2029 and 100% compliance not be required for these conveyances until 2044 is unacceptable. The Federal Government must take steps to ensure that this recommendation is withdrawn and more immediate target dates are set down in relation to the Federal Government‟s response to the Review of the DSAPT – 2002. The Federal Government should also take into consideration the fact that many children with disabilities require carers to look after them whilst they are travelling to, from and whilst in school.

Page | 27

It is a frightening fact that any child with a disability attending school in 2011 will never see children with a disability taken to school in wheelchair accessible school buses. The proposition that a child with a disability is unable to access the same transport as his non-disabled peers to attend school, is in itself a discriminatory act.

FERRY AND LEISURE CRAFT TRAVEL The number of ferries surveyed was small. However it became clear from telephone and e-mail contact that the majority are not wheelchair accessible, because their accessible toilets are positioned below the boarding point, and therefore cannot be accessed by passengers in wheelchairs.

Also of note was the fact that few, if any, ferries which used an amplification system had complied with the Disability Standards For Accessible Public Transport-2002 which required compliance with AS1428.1 (1992) Clause 21.1 – Hearing st Augmentation to be 100% compliant as 31 December 2007 states:.

The DSAPT invokes AS1428.1 Clause 21 Hearing Augmentation – Listening Systems which states: 21.1 – General Where a sound amplification system is provided, a listening system to aid hearing impaired people shall be installed or made available and shall cover at least 10% of the total area of the enclosed space. A sign indicating that an assistive hearing device is installed or is available shall be provided at the main door or doors to the enclosed space. Where the listening system does not cover the total area of the enclosed space, the boundaries of the area served shall be designated by such signs.

Although not strictly the same as ferries the hearing augmentation requirements also apply to leisure vessels if they have a sound amplification system. It is known that a number of whale watching vessels were brought into service 4 or 5 years after the DSAPT came into law. These do not appear to be accessible to people in wheelchairs as the toilets are on a lower deck than the boarding access.

Other matters which the Transport Authorities which license these vessels should ensure is that signage and information on board all vessels should be clear, easy to access and available in alternative formats, and that any obstacles around the decks should be colour contrasted from their surroundings. Lounges in ferries and leisure craft should have enough space to enable wheelchair users to manoeuvre with ease and safety. It is advisable that all staff undergo disability training, preferably with the assistance of a person with a disability.

Role of Transport Authorities. DSAPT Section 39.1 – Liability of transport authorities for discrimination.

(1) Section 122 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provides that a person who „causes, instructs, induces, aids or permits‟ another person to do an unlawful act is also liable for that act. „Permitting‟ an unlawful act may include failing to exercise power reasonably available to prevent the act, as well as giving direct permission to do an unlawful act.

Page | 28

(2) The fact that a transport authority licenses or regulates transport services does not in itself establish a relationship of principal and agent so as to make the authority liable under section 123 of the DDA 1992 for discrimination by the operator. However, licensing and regulatory authorities, need to be aware of these provisions in exercising their powers. For example, if a Government authority fails to investigate a complaint that an operator or provider is ignoring conditions of a licence and discrimination results, the authority may be liable to a complaint under the legislation.

On the following page is an example the liability of the transport authorities for discrimination not being used in relation to a Whale Watching Vessel, brought into service in 2008 which does not appear tocomply with the requirements of the DSAPT in that the toilet facilities are not accessible to people with disabilities as they are on a lower floor than that which is used for boarding. Passages on this vessel are sold on a ticket basis to members of the public to transport them to see whales. The DSPTA became law in 2002. From that date all new vehicles brought into service at the time the DSPTA was proclaimed had to be fully compliant. The first compliant dot point was 25% of all pre-2002 vehicles had to be fully compliant with the DSAPT by 31 December 2007, and all vehicles entered into service after the 23rd October 2002 had to be 100% on entering service.

The whale watching vessel in question should be fully compliant with the DSAPT as it came into service in August 2008, six years after the DSPTA became law.

It is questionable whether the following correspondence indicates that this vessel used for whale watching cruises is wheelchair accessible. The term “The toilets are not suitable” would indicate that it is not accessible and although these types of vessels might not be identified in the DSAPT, nevertheless when for public use they should be wheelchair accessible.

From: Australia For All Alliance Inc (mailto:[email protected]) On behalf Of: [email protected] Sent: Friday, 1 August 2008 8:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: New Spirit Of Hervey Bay

Dear Mr. Dorn

Congratulations on the commissioning of the new Spirit Of Hervey Bay. Could you please let me know if this lovely new whale watching vessel has access onto and around it for people in wheelchairs. Is there a lift access to the upper deck?

Regards Sheila King

Page | 29

It should be noted that under the Guidelines for the DSAPT Part 1.7 – Rides and Amusement Parks states: That a ride in an amusement park becomes public transport for the purpose of the disability standards if it serves to move the general public from one location to another distant location. For example a monorail system that connects different areas within the park would need to comply with the disability standards.

Whale watching boats are not identified in the DSAPT, where is this function different from the operation of Rides in Amusement Parks?

AIRLINES The introduction of „budget‟ airlines has enabled people with disabilities who might not have been able to afford to travel to do so.

The introduction of these budget airlines has caused the European Commission through it‟s 2008 Regulation C1107 and the American Federal Department of Travel through its 2009 Federal Register, put in place regulations to ensure that discrimination against people with disabilities is reported to, and dealt with, by the regulating authorities, and the airports and airlines penalised for any discrimination reported to them.

Page | 30

This is not the case in Australia where if a claim against an airline – budget or otherwise – fails to conciliate, it is left to the individual to bear the costs of taking the matter further – that is through the court system. Very few cases come to court simply because of the costs involved.

Under both the European and American regulations it is a legal requirement for airport management and airline operators to ensure that all information on assistance available is successfully transmitted to all concerned. It is illegal for anyone to be unreasonably denied access onboard a plane due to their disability. Other aspects covered by these two documents are compensation for damaged mobility equipment and undue waiting time.

Despite considerable attention being given to making the skies accessible to people with mobility aids, they are still unable to access some types of air travel in the same way as other members of the community. The most vexious item is the budget airline‟s self proclaimed two wheelchair policy. A policy which allows an airline to refuse to fly a person with a mobility aid if the airline has already assisted two people without mobility aids to access the aircraft with the aid of the airline‟s own wheelchair, contravenes the DSAPT.

This refusal is despite the fact that the assistance given may well have only been to enable two people, either elderly or with a minor injury, to utilise the airline‟s wheelchair and mobile lift up to the door of the airline.

The airline would have been aware that these two people did not have an accompanying mobility aid which would have to be uplifted into the hold of the aircraft. But nevertheless under the budget airline‟s two wheelchair policy, this „assistance‟ would be counted as part of the two wheelchair policy.

If this request for assistance from people without mobility aids occurred on two occasions, a person seeking to book a seat on the same flight who had an accompanying mobility aid would be refused because the airline‟s excuse that they have fulfilled their two wheelchair policy. This, despite the fact that at that time there was no mobility aid in the hold of the aircraft.

In Australia the budget airlines appear to have made their own rules in respect of people with disabilities and it is now essential that the Federal Government step in and over-ride this two wheelchair policy, so that the airlines, budget or otherwise, provide greater incentive for people with disabilities to take to the skies with their mobility aids.

The following photograph is of an 86 year old woman being dragged up the steps of an aircraft. She was required to access it in this way because the airline stated that they had already given wheelchair assistance to two passengers, which involved using the mobile lift on both occasions and therefore they had fulfilled their two wheelchair policy, thus they argued they were unable to assist the woman into the aircraft via the mobile lift. One of the gentlemen assisting is her son, the other is a passenger who offered to assist him.

Page | 31

The lift which would have given her access to the aircraft door with ease and safety, can be seen in the background. This again is another instance of an airline making its own policy, to the detriment of both the disabled and elderly members of the community.

This disgusting occurrence would not have been necessary had the airline complied with the Disability Standards For Accessible Transport, Section 8.2 – When Boarding devices must be provided, which states:

(1) A manual or power assisted boarding device must be available at any accessible entrance to a conveyance that has:

(a) a vertical rise or gap exceeding 12 mm (AS/NZS3851 (1998) Clause 2.1.7(f0 or (b) A horizontal gap exceeding 40mm (AS/NZS3856.1 (1998) Clause 12.1.8(g)

At the present time it is an obscenity that the Federal Government is party to a system that encourages a person denied access to a flight to make a complaint to the Human Rights Commission. In the case of the budget airlines, conciliation is nearly always terminated, the Commission leaving the aggrieved individual, with the Government‟s knowledge and acquiescence, to take the complaint and all the stress and costs involved, into the Court system.

Page | 32

TRAINS Amongst the issues raised by people with disabilities who travel on trains is that of the allocated spaces for priority seating. The complaint is in regard to the „flip seats‟ which cover the priority seating. People with upper arm weakness and/or mobility aid users find them difficult to flip up or down. The „flip‟ part of these seats could well be discarded.

Another issue raised by people with disabilities is that concerning designated toilets on train stations. These appear to be locked when the toilets for other people remain open at all times. People in wheelchairs , become very annoyed at having to find the person with the key to this toilet and then having to ask the permission of a total stranger to use the toilet. This matter appears to be endemic to rural train stations which are only manned for part of the day. It is argued that this is a safety issue to avoid vandalism. Whilst this might not appear to be a very serious matter to some travellers, arrangements which provide different access to toilets for people with disabilities can be very stressful to those concerned and contravene the dSAPT.

As detailed earlier in this report many transport operators who offer tours insist that the tourist with a disability be accompanied by a carer. Buses and Coaches are not the only form of transport with this self-proclaimed policy.

In or around July 2008 the Great Southern Railway introduced The Southern Spirit Train as „It‟s Our Maiden Voyage – be amongst the first to experience the excitement, adventure and romance of The Southern Spirit on it‟s inaugural journey through the heart of Australia”. It stated that there would be 8 rail cruises in the Southern Spirit‟s itinerary, beginning with „The Inaugural Spirit‟ on the 25th November 2008. The inaugural journey would be a 13 day cruise across Australia from Darwin to Sydney via Melbourne and Canberra.

The company was contacted as to the accessibility for people with disabilities in either the Gold or Platinum classes on this train. The resulting answer was that they would not allow a person with a mobility aid to travel independently in the Platinum Class of this train, they would require the person with a disability to be accompanied by a carer. The reason given for the necessity of having an person to accompany a person with a disability was that the corridors of the train were too narrow for a standard manual wheelchair and a person with a disability would have to be

Page | 33

transferred into what the writer called „a push chair‟. The push chair has to be „pushed‟ as the name implies, and therefore if one travelled alone, this would be impossible to accomplish as „pushing‟ was not a staff duty.

HEREOC (as it was at the time) was asked if the company who owned this train, Luxury Australian Rail Cruises had sought an exemption for having corridors which were not compliant with the DSAPT. The answer from a member of HREOC‟s policy Department was that no exemption had been sought by the Great Southern Railway.

The Guidelines to the DSAPT state:

Part 2 – Access paths 2.1 General (1) The concept of an „access path‟ is used in the Disability Standards to specify requirements for independent movement of passengers through premises and infrastructure. The existence of an access path is implicit in many sections of the Disability Standards.

(2) Because the Disability Standards cater for people with many types of disabilities, and a variety of services, some sections are relevant only to particular situations.

2.4 Non-complying access paths An access path that departs in minor ways from the Disability Standards may be regarded as satisfying the Disability Standards if it meets the performance requirements of AS1428.2 Clause 7 with equivalent effectiveness, amenity, availability, convenience, dignity and safety. However, direct assistance may be required to ensure that a non-conforming access path of this kind is available to all passengers.

These clauses apply to the following conveyances: Buses, Ferries, Trains, Trams and Light Rail.

On the 18th March 2009, an enquiry was again made to the company seeking information as to whether the company provides a person to do the pushing if a passenger‟s own wheelchair was too wide for their narrow corridor.

The reply received stated “Thank you for your e-mail, unfortunately the push chair will require someone to push it and due to this you will need to have a carer to push you. .

In correspondence with Mr. Bill Shorten who had the Disability portfolio at that time, the CEO of the Great Southern Railway advised Mr. Shorten that the requirement to have a carer accompany a person was wrong, and that the staff were always available to assist the passenger.

In July 2011 on making a further enquiry the answer again was: “A person with a wheelchair would have their wheelchair taken from them prior to entering the train,

Page | 34

and returned at the end of the train cruise”. The e-mail went on to say that the disabled person would need to be accompanied by a carer who could push the person to areas on the train such as the restaurant car, they wish to go to, as the push chair was not able to be self propelled.

OTHER TRANSPORT SYSTEMS It is very important that the Federal Government tackle the issue of non-compliance with the DSAPT which leads to non-accessible transport, as without this intervention it appears that any company can initiate a policy that does not provide for the inclusion of people with disabilities. Public and private transport plays a very important role in the lives of many people with disabilities. It ensures that all members of the community are able to travel, not just those with access to a motor vehicle.

EXEMPTIONS – Recently in relation to a discriminatory case against Queensland Rail a person with a disability was advised by Queensland Rail that The Australian Human Rights Commission had granted QR an exemption on the understanding that QR would increase accessible spaces if AND WHEN DEMAND FOR THEM INCREASED.

This statement is in direct contravention of when exemptions can be granted by the AHR. It is understood that the Commission can only grant exemptions for a limited period of less than five years.

FERRIES etc. and AVIATION The current voluntary codes of practice governing disabled people‟s access to ferries and aviation services are clearly not working. There is considerable evidence that disabled travellers continue to be regularly discriminated against when trying to access these services. Anecdotal evidence of continuing discrimination within the airline industry is particularly prevalent. It is necessary therefore that the Government consider bringing the issue of accessibility in these industries under statutory control.

TRANSPORT Since 23 October 2002 the transport industry have had a statutory duty for the vehicles in an operator‟s fleet, in service prior to this date to be at least 25% accessible for people with disabilities by 31st December 2007. Also as from 23 October 2002 the DSAPT called for all vehicles coming into service at that date to be wheelchair accessible. It is clear that, despite having nine years in which to prepare for this requirement, many companies have done little to meet the target dates. The Federal Government must put increased pressure on the transport industry to meet the target dates, and therefore, its member‟s obligations under the law. The Federal Government must put increased pressure on the transport industry to meet these obligations. If these requirements are not met in the very near future it is hoped that The Human Rights Commission (HRC) and/or the State and Federal Governments will take legal action to force compliance. It is realised that the Human Rights Commission is not able to force compliance, but it is able to put pressure on the Government to do so. People with disabilities must continue to highlight the social,

Page | 35

emotional and financial costs of an inaccessible transport system for their communities throughout Australia.

INAPPROPRIATE QUESTIONS ON APPLICATION FORMS Many of the touring bus companies, such as APT (Australian Pacific Touring) and AAT Kings refuse to accept people with disabilities unless they complete a form which they insist is required for the safety of the passenger. This form, which is shown at the end of this report is an unacceptable invasion of a person‟s privacy. Questions such as: “Are you travelling with your doctor‟s permission” are not acceptable in this day and age from a tour company. Normal passengers who could well have a hidden disease or disability, are not asked to complete this form.

The request to complete this form has drawn complaints to Australia For All Alliance Inc from many people with disabilities. An example of such a complaint is this letter which was received in Australia For All‟s office with the following message: “Please read below the „charming‟ documents we received from AAT Kings after booking 2 bus tours, to Darwin and Litchfield National Park in the Northern Territory.

My husband and I are both blind, and we have travelled extensively independently around Australia and internationally, accompanied by my guide dog, Lincoln.

Never had we requested more assistance than verbal directions, or on occasion sighted guide assistance from tour operators.

I believe these letters are disgraceful and blatantly discriminatory for all people with a disability.

Firstly, we are unable to take the tour unless we have an „able bodied‟ person accompany us, although they have already booked and taken our money to pay for the tour.

We have been told that to take a guide dog to Litchfield National Park, I have to apply for, and pay for, a special permit to have permission granted to have my guide dog accompany me in the national park.

Paragraph 17 of the first letter states that sighted guide assistance and directions or other physical assistance cannot be provided by tour or hotel staff.

This is a very sad state of affairs for any person with a disability.

I think the questionnaire form is an outrageous violation of privacy, and they have no right to demand personal information such as this. Only one question is remotely related to blindness or vision impairment.

As a final insult we asked for the documents to be e-mailed in accessible text format, and received 2 pdf format files, which opened as blank documents”.

The writer attached quite a few letters received from AAT Kings, however space only allows for a few of the statements taken from the correspondence to the person it was addressed to, to be detailed below.

Page | 36

Passengers with special needs are welcome on board AAT Kings tours providing they are accompanied by an able-bodied companion capable of providing all necessary assistance and do not require special assistance from providing all necessary assistance and do not require special assistance from AAT Kings personnel or anyone else on the tour.

Coaches stop on average 6 to 7 times a day, often for half an hour only. Passengers need to be able to climb on and off coaches reasonably quickly.

During stops, the coach has to be left empty and locked to comply with legal regulations for driver’s hours.

Seat rotation is enforced, so passengers must be able to walk down the coach aisle.

Collapsible, push-able wheelchairs can be accommodated in coach lockers. Please note that motorised wheelchairs cannot be accepted.

Passengers bringing special medical equipment need to check on space availability and be prepared to carry it themselves.

For deaf or hearing impaired passengers, the Tour Directors do not face passengers whilst giving commentary. Many instructions are given verbally. Specially designed alarm clocks for the deaf are recommended. (Editor‟s note: what do alarm clocks for the deaf have to do with the lack of hearing augmentation on the vehicle as required by the DSAPT?).

The following paragraph are taken the letter quoted above when referring to accommodation in required for an overnight stay tour.

Passengers who are blind or sight impaired need to be aware that neither AATKings personnel nor hotel staff are available to conduct them to their room or to explain room layout.

Prior to booking confirmation, clients will need to complete the attached Special Needs form and return it to AAT Kings so that we can request confirmation of travel.

Some of the questions which need to be asked of all tour companies who require forms such as these to be signed are:

1. What qualifications does the person deciding whether or not a person with a disability is fit or mobile enough to go on one of their tours have, to make this decision. 2. What qualifications does the person deciding whether or not the potential passenger meets all the criteria set down on the form, have, to make this decision

In respect to the items denying assistance of any kind, direct or indirect the DSAPT states:

Page | 37

33.10 – Assistance during boarding and alighting: (1) People with disabilities can be assisted to board or alight from conveyances, such as coaches and aircraft, through the provision of: (a) mobility aids on conveyances where design constraints prevent use of a person‟s own mobility aid; or

(b) assistance in moving from a wheelchair into a fixed seat if an allocated space is provided.

Neither of these alternatives appear on the form which these companies ask their prospective passengers with disabilities to complete.

The above is a copy of the form which was the subject of the complaint received from a member of the public Page | 38

CONCLUSION

It appears that the Federal Government feels comfortable with the DDA and DSPTA legislation which purports to ensure that people with disabilities are not discriminated against. But the truth is that both pieces of legislation are like pieces of Swiss Cheese - full of holes.

It is important that any legislation unambiguously defines the requirements for people with disabilities, it must also be easy to enforce without cost to the complainant. The situation at the present time is that for a complaint to be satisfied it is required for it to go to conciliation via the Australian Human Rights Commission who then terminates the complaint if agreement is not achieved.

The Commission in its termination letter advises the complainant that they may make an application to the Federal Magistrates or the Federal Court of Australia for the court to hear the allegation of discrimination. This can be seen as the termination process resulting in the abandonment by the AHRC of the complainant to the mercy of the Court System.

It has been indicated by the AHRC that this is a simple process, but for some of the most vulnerable people in the community (people with disabilities) the cost and stress of gaining justice is a deterrent to them taking the matter further.

The solution to this situation is to adopt a system of complaint resolution similar to that implemented in the United States of America and in Europe, where the relevant responsible Government Departments take up and investigate any case of discrimination on behalf of the complainant.

This system if used in Australia would take matters of discrimination governed by the DSAPT out of the Court system, thus relieving the Court‟s work load, and at the same time not requiring one of the most vulnerable members of the community to place their own assets in jeopardy to gain justice.

It would appear that the present complaint based system for an aggrieved person is not working because transport operators and providers clearly make a risk assessment that their non-compliance with the DSAPT will not attract any complaint that will be taken as far as the Court system .

Clearly what is required is a system where heavy punitive damages can be imposed on companies which are found to contravene the DSAPT to the detriment of the complainant. Such a system would be administered by the relative State transport department‟s.

When a complaint is terminated as being irreconcilable, then the matter should be passed over to the relative department involved in the complaint, to investigate.

Page | 39

If necessary that department should be responsible for enforcing the provisions of the DSAPT. If then the transport operator/provider fails to adhere to the result of the investigation then that department then should take the matter through the Court System for enforcement, advising the complainant of the final result.

Had this system been instigated after the DSAPT came into effect, most of the occurrences of non-compliance which are detailed in this report would not have occurred.

Sheila King Hon. Secretary Australia For All Alliance Inc. November 2011 [email protected] www.australiaforall.com 07 4125 7771

Page | 40

APPENDIX “A’

The following are a selection of the many replies received showing non- compliance with the DSAPT.

We have a fleet of 17 coaches + 1 Limousine. They range from 13 to 59 seat coaches, they can be viewed on our website. At this point in time we have no wheel chair lift buses. If this situation changes we will notify you. Busselton WA

This company received the award for being Melbourne‟s Best Tours, even though none of their coaches are wheelchair accessible.

Unfortunately, none of our coaches have wheel chair access. Melbourne, VIC

We have 10 vehicles based here in Perth. Unfortunately our coaches do not have wheelchair access, we do welcome passengers in wheelchairs on our tours however we can only carry those who have manual, collapsible wheelchairs which can be stowed until the coach during transit. We also request passengers bring a carer or aid with them to assist them getting on and off the vehicle when their wheelchair would be stowed underneath. Western Australia

Our busses do not have wheel chair ramps or access. If someone with this disability wants to travel on our bus, they will need to have someone travelling with them that can help them get onto and off the bus. This is due to our health and safety rules that the drivers are not allowed to help. Robina, QLD

Sorry we have no wheelchair access at this stage. The only reason for this is there is simply not enough work for wheelchair access vehicles. We only get about2 requests a year for wheelchair access. It always feels bad to say to people „sorry‟ we don‟t have wheelchair access vehicles. (Author‟s comment: Perhaps the reason this company does not get many requests, is because they do not have any wheelchair accessible vehicles! – word gets around).

‘”Sorry, but we do not cater for wheelchair passengers”.

At the moment, we don‟t have any wheelchair access coaches. However, we do have a coach that could be easily modified and the change is in our long/short-term plan.

We have a total of 26 busses allocated to our service on a daily basis 13 are for Airport Transfers and the other 13 are for Theme Park Transfers. None of our Airport Transfer busses are wheelchair accessible. All Airport Transfer busses have stairs at the entrance of the door. The buses we use for our theme park transfers are majority of the time not wheelchair accessible.

Page | 41

Unfortunately we don‟t have any vehicles with wheelchair access.

Of our five low floor service vehicles, four of them have access ramps. These vehicles run every half hour 6am to 10.30 pm weekdays and every 50 min Sunday‟s. Of the five coaches, none have wheelchair access.

We have a fleet of 22 vehicles and only one that has wheel chair access. Other vehicles have kneeling access and we provide stools to that level. We have stools for each vehicle and the driver does give hand and arm assistance.

There are 14 x 48 Seat coaches and 1x 25 seat mini coach with trailer and additional 3 x 20 seat vehicles. These are dispersed through both the Darwin & Katherine bases, making travel through the Top End more accessible and convenient for travellers. . Unfortunately we currently have no vehicles in either location with wheel chair access.

Yellow Corporation do not have wheel chair accessible vehicles.

We have 11 buses/coaches in our fleet however none have wheelchair access.

Austrek Tours have a fleet of 8 buses, unfortunately however our buses are quite old and do not have wheelchair access.

Our organisation has a number of coaches which are primarily used for our own touring programs. At this stage we do not have any with wheelchair access

We have 11 buses/coaches in our fleet however none have wheelchair access.

We use many buses for our Airport Shuttle Service but none are fitted for wheelchair access.

We have almost 70 buses, coaches and mini vehicles in our fleet. We have 2 mini coaches that can take 2 wheel chairs each. We also have 1 large coach that can take up to 13 wheelchairs in one go.

Unfortunately we don‟t have any wheelchair equipped vehicles. Just for your records though, we have 28 minibuses ranging from 8 to 21 seats. Our fleet are all late models, serviced regularly and well maintained.

We have 2 large buses – one 53 seats one 64 seats. Regretfully we do not have lifts or wheelchair accessibility on either of the buses

None of our eight buses have ride on wheelchair access. However if they can be folded down they can be put into the trailer for travel to the airport.

Our buses do not have wheel chair ramps or access. If someone with this disability wants to travel on our bus, they will need to have someone travelling with them that can help them get onto and off the bus. This is due to our health and safety rules that the drivers are not allowed to help.

Page | 42

We have 10 vehicles. None of the buses/Coaches have wheelchair access as we have never needed this before.

Please find attached AAT Kings Special Needs form.

Thank you for enquiry. We use many buses for our Airport Shuttle Service but none are fitted for wheelchair access.

Unfortunately none of our buses are wheelchair accessible.

Our Mini Buses comprises of 6 x 13 passenger buses, 3 x 21 passenger buses & 4 x 24 passenger buses. None are wheel chair carrying vehicles

We have approximately 35 buses and coaches varying in capacity from 10 seats up to 70 and we have a 52 seat wheelchair equipped coach capable of carrying up to 2 collapsible style wheelchairs

We have a fleet of 30 vehicles unfortunately we do not have any wheelchair equipped buses

W e have 14 x 48 Seat coaches and 1x 25 seat mini coach with trailer and additional 3x 20 seat vehicles. These are dispersed through both the Darwin & Katherine bases, making travel through the Top End more accessible and convenient for travellers. Unfortunately we currently have no vehicles in either location with wheel chair access.

We have over 90 vehicles in our fleet ranging from 11 to 78 seats of which 6 are wheelchair capable taking up to a maximum of 12 wheelchairs in our largest vehicle.

Page | 43

These are just a selection of the number of the companies that indicated compliance with the DSAPT

Swan Transit Midvale fleet has 65 vehicles of which 28 have wheelchair access.

Swan Transit Welshpool depot has a total fleet of 76 buses with 71 being wheelchair accessible.

Approximately 197 of our buses are ultra-low floor (ramp accessible). These are our public buses which run throughout the South-Eastern suburbs. We also have approximately six charter vehicles which are accessible; however, they are contracted to school services, so their availability is somewhat limited during school times. – Grenda Group

We have 17 buses in total and all are wheelchair accessible. Sunbus, Rockhampton

All of our buses have wheelchair access. – Tullarmarine Bus Lines

We have 12 urban buses that are wheelchair accessible. Mackay Transport

Currently Westside operate 95 vehicles on road with 57 vehicles having wheel chair access or 60% of our fleet make up being wheel chair friendly.

Coachtrans fleet comprises mainly of 21 Seater Air-Conditioned -Toyota Coasters ,Consisting of 52 vehicles inclusive 14 with Wheelchair access

It should be noted that all our wheelchair accessible buses operate our daily public route services which currently means that around 75% of Picton route services are accessible and around 70% of Berrima route services are accessible. Picton Buslines

We have 46 passenger carrying vehicles, 48 seaters down to 12 seaters. 34 of these vehicles have wheelchair access. Carbridge

We have 79 buses, 44 of which have a facility to assist a wheelchair passenger, namely, a ramp. Swan Transit.

We currently have 10 Wheelchair accessible - Low Floor buses that are used on timetabled route services in Wagga Wagga. BusAbout.

35 coaches/buses 29 currently have wheelchair access. Eastrans Bus Service

Of the 92 buses we operate, 48 are wheelchair accessible. Forest Coachlines.

We currently have a fleet of 65 buses, of which 49 are low floor accessable vehicles with new buses on the way. Hornibrook Bus Lines

Currently Westside operate 95 vehicles on road with 57 vehicles having wheel chair access or 60% of our fleet make up being wheel chair friendly. Bus Queensland.

Page | 44