| Purpose |
Current purpose does not clearly recognise the Total Mobility scheme as a transport service, and an appropriate regional council responsibility. Current purpose does not appear widely accepted as national policy. |
To develop a new purpose for the scheme. An option for a new purpose statement is:
"To assist eligible people with impairments to access appropriate transport to enhance participation in their community and reduce social exclusion. This is provided in the form of a subsidised door-to-door transport service wherever Total Mobility transport providers operate."
|
The Total Mobility scheme is established as a transport service, that is an appropriate regional council responsibility. A stronger foundation for improving the adequacy, consistency, portability, and coverage is provided. |
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme will be raised. Regional councils may not support and implement any improvements to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have low financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). |
| Eligibility |
Eligibility criteria are interpreted differently in different regions. People living in districts that do not have bus, train or ferry services, are not currently eligible for the Total Mobility scheme. Some users have difficulty using vouchers in other regions. |
To develop new eligibility criteria, and detailed guidelines for interpreting the criteria.An option for new eligibility criteria is: "Any person who has an impairment (long or short term) that would prevent them from travelling unaccompanied on a bus, train or ferry, may be eligible for assistance under the improved Total Mobility scheme. Eligibility is not dependent on whether bus, train or ferry services are locally available. An eligible person must have an impairment that would prevent them from undertaking any of the following five components of a journey on a bus, train or ferry, (whether or not such a service is available), in a safe and dignified manner. These being, the ability to:
- get to the place the transport departs from,
- get on to the transport,
- ride securely,
- get off the transport,
- get to the destination."
|
Provides a universal entitlement to access the scheme, to any person who meets the eligibility criteria Eligibility is not dependent on where you live or whether there is a bus, train or ferry service. People can access service where Total Mobility is provided. For some councils', the inclusion of 'people with short term impairments' will widen the eligibility criteria currently applied in their regions. It is inclusive of eligible individuals who live in residential care settings, and of children (who could otherwise be reasonably expected to travel independently). This improves the national consistency, coverage and portability of the scheme. |
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme would be raised.Regional councils may not support and implement any improvement to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided).The number of people who are eligible to use the scheme, or would be under wider criteria is unknown, but likely to be significant.Regional councils may not support widening access to the scheme to new users, living in areas not currently rated for public transport. To do so, changes to rating policies would be required.Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government.Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have high financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). |
| Entitlement Fare subsidy |
Uncertainty of entitlement through fluctuating subsidy in a minority of regions. |
Standardise the fare subsidy at 50% throughout New Zealand - a 50/50 split between funders and user. |
This improves national consistency and adequacy of the scheme. |
Risk: A minority of regional councils may not support and implement any improvements to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Funding: Affected regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have low financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand).
|
| Maximum fare |
No nationally consistent method for establishing maximum fares across regions. People who make short trips do not receive assistance with the fare in some regions. |
Establish a nationally consistent method used by all regional councils to determine a maximum fare subsidy for its region. The maximum fare should be sufficiently adequate to enable a person to participate in their community. No minimum fare. |
Transparent and nationally consistent process to determine regional maximum fares. This improves the national consistency and adequacy of the scheme. |
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme would be raised. Regional councils may not support and implement any improvements to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have medium to high financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). |
| Number of trips |
No nationally consistent method for determining the number of vouchers allocated to each user in the scheme. Voucher use may be limited for use on specific trip purposes in some regions. |
Establish a nationally consistent method used by all regional councils to determine voucher allocation. Voucher allocation is sufficiently adequate to enable a person to participate in their community. Total Mobility users are able to make their own decisions about how they use the scheme to access their community. |
Transparent and nationally consistent process to determine regional voucher allocation. No restriction on trip purpose. This improves national consistency and adequacy of the scheme. |
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme would be raised. Regional councils may not support and implement any improvement to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have medium to high financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand).
|
| Assessment services |
Lack of quality and consistent assessment procedures administered across the country. |
Assessment services will be purchased by regional councils or Land Transport New Zealand. Assessment service providers will be required to meet minimum quality standards (yet to be determined) and consistently apply the eligibility criterion for the improved scheme. Users and potential users of the improved scheme will not be required to either pay for and/or join an organisation, for an assessment. |
Providing for nationally consistent application of eligibility criteria by competent assessment service providers. Potential user does not pay for assessment. This improves the national consistency, portability and adequacy of the scheme. |
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme may be raised. Regional councils may not support and implement any improvements to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Assessment agencies providing current services (usually voluntary disability sector organisations), may not support changes. Funding: Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option will have high financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). |
| Administration |
Voucher system is paper-based and labour intensive, and makes reliable data collection and monitoring difficult. Lack of a national voucher and identification card may make it difficult to redeem vouchers in other regions. Potential eligible users are unaware of the scheme. |
Investigate new technologies to establish a national administration system for the scheme. For instance national smart/identification cards. Active promotion of the scheme to attract eligible new users. |
Scheme is administratively efficient and effective. Knowledge of the scheme is increased amongst current and potential eligible users. This improves the national consistency, portability, coverage, sustainability and adequacy of the scheme.
|
Risk: Expectations of the community for improved access to the Total Mobility scheme would be raised. Regional councils may not support and implement any improvements to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). The number of people who are eligible to use the scheme, or would be under wider criteria is unknown, but likely to be very significant. Regional councils may not support promoting the scheme to attract new users. Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have high financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). This option is likely to have financial implications for some Total Mobility operators in installing smart card readers in taxis.
|
| Transport operators |
No national standard contracting arrangement between regional councils and Total Mobility transport operators. Some taxi operators may charge Total Mobility users a higher fare to compensate for additional time required assisting people with high needs. Limited availability of wheelchair accessible taxis at beginning and end of school day. Wheelchair accessible taxis are a less attractive capital investment when compared with other taxis. Hoist replacement is required.
|
Develop guidelines for best practise contracts between regional councils and Total Mobility transport operators to ensure national consistency and an adequate level of service is provided. Investigate incentives to improve and increase the current fleet of wheelchair accessible vehicles. |
All regional councils will have 'best practice' contracts with Total Mobility transport operators, based on national guidelines. This improves the national consistency, sustainability and adequacy of the scheme. |
Risk: Regional councils may not support and implement any improvement to the scheme (even if additional funding is provided). Funding: Regional councils will expect any increased costs to be funded by government. Financial implications have not been costed. It is speculated that this option could have medium financial implications for government (Land Transport New Zealand). This option is likely to have medium financial implications for some Total Mobility operators in installing smart card readers in taxis. |