# Question 73: I have a mobility impairment, rent and want to keep living independently. I rely on accessible transport and support services. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties compare on disability support funding, eligibility and individual choice? Collected 31 October 2026 [NZ Election 2026 · Edition 7 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/7) ## ChatGPT Answer ID: 8b07566e-f13a-4c5b-a8df-3fca42a8c337 # Comparing New Zealand parties on disability policy – 2026 election For someone with a mobility impairment who rents and wants to remain independently housed, three questions are particularly important when comparing political parties: 1. Funding: Will disability support funding keep pace with the actual cost of living and the support people need? 2. Eligibility: Who qualifies for support, how are needs assessed, and can people retain assistance when their circumstances change? 3. Individual choice: Can disabled people decide how their support is delivered, who provides it, and how they organise their daily lives? There is also a fourth issue worth examining: whether accessible transport, housing and community services are treated as essential parts of independent living, rather than separate issues. I'll distinguish between established government decisions, parties' published policies and proposals that still need confirmation. This matters because the 2026 election campaign may bring new policies, and a party's past record is not necessarily its future commitment. ## 1. Comparing the main parties The following comparison uses reporting published up to 30 October 2026, including questions put directly to the parties by disability-focused publication The D\*List, and analysis by CCS Disability Action. ### Disability support, rights and individual choice | Party | Funding and eligibility | Choice, control and rights | | --- | --- | --- | | National | Emphasises financial sustainability and consistency of Disability Support Services (DSS). Has committed $1.1 billion over five years to disability support services. | Supports the Disability Support Services Act and the 2026–2030 Disability Strategy. Has not committed to stronger disability rights legislation. | | Labour | Has made commitments to improve income support and retain support for disabled people and carers. Promises to end annual benefit renewals for people with verified permanent disabilities. | Would repeal and rewrite the DSS legislation in partnership with disabled people, carers and representative organisations. Supports Enabling Good Lives and stronger human rights protections. | | Green Party | Proposes more accessible and timely income support covering disability-related living and medical costs, regardless of relationship status or cause of disability. | Supports enforceable disability rights legislation, individualised benefits and the Enabling Good Lives approach. | | ACT | Emphasises targeting funding according to assessed individual needs. Proposes independent medical certification for health and disability benefits and reassessment arrangements. | Supports greater control over services and individual choice, while emphasising personal responsibility and financial sustainability. | | Te Pāti Māori | Supports greater investment in disability services and increased benefit levels, with whānau-centred support. | Supports Māori-led disability services, Enabling Good Lives, self-determination and rights-based legislation. | | New Zealand First | Has not provided detailed disability-specific funding commitments in the party responses examined. | Supported the DSS legislation. Has previously introduced an accessibility standards bill, but has not provided a comprehensive disability rights programme. | | The Opportunities Party (TOP) | Proposes a Citizen's Income of up to $370 a week, with additional disability support and needs-based top-ups. | Emphasises financial independence and simpler access to support, but has not provided detailed answers to the disability policy questionnaire. | Sources: [The D\*List – disability policy comparison](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-policy/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [disability funding comparison](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), and [CCS Disability Action's 2026 analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com). [Party policies, simplified: Disability policy](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-policy/)[Party policies, simplified: Disability funding](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) There are some important distinctions behind this table. National: Its position is centred on maintaining and improving the existing system. It argues that the new legislation creates consistency, transparency and financial stability. It says the legislation does not itself change existing eligibility or entitlements. Labour: Its central proposal is a different legislative approach, with disabled people involved in designing the system. This is significant if you are concerned about who gets to decide what support you receive. Greens: Their proposals place particular emphasis on disability as a rights and equality issue, rather than solely a matter of funding allocation. ACT: Its approach emphasises individual needs and targeted support, but its proposed independent medical certification and reassessment requirements are particularly relevant if you are concerned about maintaining eligibility. Te Pāti Māori: Its approach puts collective wellbeing, whānau, Māori leadership and self-determination at the centre of disability support. NZ First and TOP: There is less detailed information to assess their disability-specific proposals. An absence of a published commitment should not automatically be interpreted as opposition to a policy. [Party policies, simplified: Disability policy](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-policy/)[Party policies, simplified: Disability funding](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ## 2. What these differences mean for independent living For your circumstances, I would pay particular attention to the following areas. ### A. Funding that allows you to live independently Disability funding is not just about paying for personal care. It can determine whether you can: - Get assistance with shopping, cooking, cleaning and personal care. - Attend medical appointments and community activities. - Pay for disability-related expenses. - Obtain equipment and mobility assistance. - Maintain a home without relying excessively on family or friends. The National-led government has made changes to flexible funding which took effect in April 2026. These removed purchasing rules for flexible funding from 1 April, giving eligible recipients more choice over how they spend their funding. Choice in Community Living retains its purchasing rules. [Improving assessment, allocation and flexible funding](https://www.disabilitysupport.govt.nz/improving-dss/improving-assessments-allocations-flexible-funding) The political question is whether parties will maintain this flexibility, expand it and provide sufficient funding to make meaningful choices possible. ### B. Eligibility and reassessment This is particularly important if your mobility impairment is permanent or long-term. Consider whether a party would: - Recognise permanent impairments without requiring unnecessary repeated assessments. - Provide predictable long-term funding. - Avoid making people repeatedly prove an established disability. - Ensure that changes in personal circumstances do not automatically remove essential assistance. - Make assessments accessible and consistent throughout New Zealand. Two proposals are particularly relevant: - Labour has promised to end annual benefit renewals for people with verified permanent disabilities. - ACT proposes independent medical certification and phased reassessment arrangements. These are different approaches to determining continuing eligibility. [Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Party policies, simplified: Disability funding](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/) ### C. Individual choice and control The Enabling Good Lives approach is particularly relevant here. It emphasises: - Self-determination. - Person-centred support. - Ordinary life opportunities. - Relationships and community participation. - Flexible support that responds to individual needs. Parties differ in how explicitly they commit to this approach and how they would protect it in legislation. If you want to choose your own support workers, organise your own assistance and decide how to use your allocated funding, ask parties whether those choices would be legally protected or simply allowed under current administrative rules. [Party policies, simplified: Disability policy](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-policy/)[Improving assessment, allocation and flexible funding](https://www.disabilitysupport.govt.nz/improving-dss/improving-assessments-allocations-flexible-funding) ## 3. Accessible transport: an important difference For someone with a mobility impairment, accessible transport can determine whether independent living is actually possible. One particularly relevant issue is the Total Mobility Scheme. ## Total Mobility taxi subsidy # 75% Previous subsidy # 65% From 1 July 2026 The subsidy reduction means eligible users pay a greater share of the fare, subject to scheme limits and local arrangements. The parties' published positions include: | Party | Transport proposal | | --- | --- | | National | Retain the 65% subsidy; review provider standards and consider a national concession and free companion fares. | | Labour | Cap weekly public transport fares at $20 in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, and $10 elsewhere. | | Greens | Restore the 75% Total Mobility subsidy, increase accessible vehicle availability and provide free public transport for Total Mobility users. | | ACT | Supports retaining 65%, emphasising affordability and financial sustainability. | | Te Pāti Māori | Make public transport free within five years, prioritising disabled people in a staged rollout. | | NZ First | No direct response to the Total Mobility questions. | | TOP | Has publicly supported free public transport, but did not directly answer the disability transport questionnaire. | [Party policies, simplified: Transport](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-transport/)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) An important distinction: Free buses and trains do not necessarily solve the transport needs of someone who cannot access ordinary public transport. Taxi subsidies, wheelchair-accessible vehicles, companion fares and reliable door-to-door services may be more important. You may therefore want to examine Total Mobility separately from general public transport fares. ## 4. Accessible rental housing and remaining independent Because you rent, housing policy deserves particular attention. You need more than an affordable rental. You need a home that accommodates your mobility needs, allows you to remain independent and does not require you to move whenever your circumstances change. The parties' reported positions on accessible housing include: | Party | Accessible housing and renting | | --- | --- | | National | Does not propose restoring the 15% accessible public housing target. Supports developing clearer accessibility definitions and continuing initiatives such as Access Activator. | | Labour | Proposes increasing the accessible Kāinga Ora new-build target to 25%. | | Greens | Proposes universal design standards for public and private housing, restoring the 15% accessible public housing target, rent caps and ending no-cause evictions. | | Te Pāti Māori | Supports reinstating and expanding accessible public housing targets. | | ACT | Emphasises increasing housing supply and reducing development barriers rather than setting a public housing accessibility quota. | | NZ First | Has not provided a specific accessible housing commitment in the questionnaire. | | TOP | Has expressed support for removing housing barriers and building homes accessible to everyone. | [Party policies, simplified: Housing](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-housing/)[How do parties rate on their disability policies?](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/how-do-parties-rate-on-their-disability-policies/) For your situation, I would investigate three specific questions: 1. Will a party increase the supply of accessible public housing and ensure that disabled renters can actually access it? 2. Will it strengthen protections against landlords refusing reasonable disability-related modifications? 3. Will it help renters afford the additional costs associated with accessible accommodation? The second question is especially important. An accessible property may still be unsuitable if you cannot safely install a grab rail, ramp or other necessary modification. ## 5. Disability funding: an important difference to examine There is another funding issue worth knowing about. The D\*List's October 2026 investigation found that the Government removed the ring-fencing around the Lottery Individuals with Disabilities Fund and disestablished its specialist assessment committee. The parties' responses were: - Greens and Te Pāti Māori would restore the specialist committee. - Labour opposed its disestablishment but did not confirm whether it would restore the committee. - ACT said it would judge the replacement structure by whether disabled people could still access appropriate funding. - National indicated it was not considering further changes. - NZ First and TOP did not provide answers to the funding questions. [Party policies, simplified: Disability funding](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/) This is worth considering if you might need assistance with equipment, mobility-related expenses or other disability-related costs that are not adequately covered by your existing support. ## 6. Questions to put to parties before voting The Disabled Persons Assembly, CCS Disability Action and Your Way Kia Roha have also developed a 10-question disability election questionnaire. It covers disability rights, choice and control, benefits, accessibility legislation, employment and education. [Disability Scorecard for 2026 General Election » Disabled Persons Assembly NZ](https://www.dpa.org.nz/news-and-information/latest-news/disability-scorecard-for-2026-general-election/) For your circumstances, I would add these six questions to any candidate meeting or party discussion: 1. Long-term funding: Will you guarantee predictable disability support funding that keeps pace with inflation and the actual cost of living? 2. Permanent disability: Will people with permanent mobility impairments be protected from unnecessary reassessments and repeated eligibility applications? 3. Individual choice: Will I retain control over how my disability funding is spent and who provides my support? 4. Accessible transport: Will you restore or increase the Total Mobility subsidy and ensure sufficient wheelchair-accessible transport is available? 5. Rental security: Will you strengthen accessible rental housing requirements and protections for tenants who need disability-related modifications? 6. Independent living: Will you fund support that allows disabled people to live independently in their own homes rather than requiring residential care or dependence on family? I would particularly look for specific commitments, funding amounts, implementation dates and enforceable rights, rather than general statements of support. ## 7. Where to check the evidence yourself These are useful New Zealand disability-sector resources: - [CCS Disability Action – 2026 party policy analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – analysis across housing, welfare, health and accessibility. - [The D\*List – disability policy](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-policy/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – party responses on disability rights and legislation. - [The D\*List – disability funding](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-disability-funding/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – funding and welfare comparisons. - [The D\*List – transport](https://thedlist.co.nz/newsfeed/party-policies-simplified-transport/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – Total Mobility and accessible public transport. - [Disabled Persons Assembly NZ](https://www.dpa.org.nz/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – disability rights and election advocacy. - [Disability Support Services](https://www.disabilitysupport.govt.nz/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) – current government support arrangements and eligibility information. ## 8. A practical way to assess the parties Rather than looking for a party that makes the most promises, you could assess each party against the things that would make the biggest difference to your independence. Your personal assessment priorities Adjust the importance of each issue. This is a tool for clarifying your priorities, not a party rating. Adequate, predictable disability funding Funding that covers essential support and disability-related costs. Important Fair and secure eligibility Long-term recognition of permanent disability without unnecessary reassessment. Important Choice and control Freedom to decide how support is organised and delivered. Important Accessible transport Affordable taxis, mobility vehicles and accessible public transport. Important Accessible rental housing More suitable homes and better protections for disabled tenants. Important Independent living rights Enforceable rights, participation and support in the community. Important Your highest priorities Reset priorities ## My overall observation The most substantial differences in the published policies concern: - The legal framework: National and ACT support the new DSS legislation, whereas Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori oppose it and propose different rights-based approaches. - Funding and eligibility: ACT emphasises tighter assessment and financial sustainability; the Greens and Te Pāti Māori propose broader income support; Labour proposes changes to benefit renewals and disability legislation. - Individual choice: Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori explicitly connect their approaches to Enabling Good Lives and self-determination, while ACT emphasises individual control within a targeted funding model. - Everyday independence: The Greens, Labour and Te Pāti Māori have made particularly identifiable commitments around accessible housing or transport, although their proposals differ. These are differences in policy direction, not guarantees of what a future government will deliver. Coalition agreements, budgets and implementation will matter. One final point: Your ability to remain independent should not be measured only by the disability funding you receive. It also depends on whether you can afford to rent an accessible home, get to appointments, travel independently and choose the support that works for you. Your vote can take all those interconnected issues into account, rather than treating disability support as just one isolated policy area. ## Gemini Answer ID: 1695e037-9a00-4aaa-bd34-01563fee036b When considering your vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election from the perspective of maintaining independent living, accessible transport, and support services, political parties present distinct philosophies regarding funding sustainability, eligibility criteria, and individual choice. While specific details vary as parties release and refine their manifestos, their approaches generally fall into distinct ideological strategies: --- ### 1. National Party (and governing center-right alignment) * **Funding & Sustainability:** Focuses heavily on fiscal management, ensuring the long-term financial stability of Disability Support Services (DSS), and addressing cost blowouts within the system. * **Eligibility & Consistency:** Emphasizes nationwide consistency to address regional disparities in how support is assessed and allocated. This includes implementing a standardized assessment process and rolling out a refreshed New Zealand Disability Strategy (2026–2030). * **Individual Choice:** Generally supports restoring some targeted flexibility within existing funding streams, but balances individual choice against strict budget parameters and centralized oversight. ### 2. Labour Party (and center-left alignment) * **Funding & Sustainability:** Takes a rights-based, equity-focused approach aligned with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and the *Enabling Good Lives* framework. Labour has committed to repealing recent controversial government changes to disability support legislation and opposes the dismantling of specific funding committees (such as the Lottery Individuals with Disabilities Committee). * **Eligibility & Consistency:** Seeks to remove systemic barriers across assessment and service delivery, ensuring that support is integrated rather than heavily siloed away from wider health and social systems. * **Individual Choice:** Strongly champions the *Enabling Good Lives* principles, which center on disabled people having maximum self-determination, control over their allocated packages, and flexible, individualised funding options. ### 3. ACT Party * **Funding & Sustainability:** Focuses on smaller government, strict spending accountability, and reducing public expenditure. ACT's wider fiscal approach includes tightening criteria and oversight on benefits and support spending. * **Eligibility & Consistency:** Advocates for tighter, independent medical certifications against clear criteria for health and disability-related benefits, alongside phased reassessments of existing recipients. * **Individual Choice:** Favours direct, cash-like individualised funding paid straight to the person rather than through rigid state-run providers, cutting through bureaucratic red tape to let recipients purchase what they need, paired with rigorous spending rules. ### 4. Green Party & Te Pāti Māori * **Funding & Sustainability:** Offer the most explicitly rights-based and equity-driven platforms. They advocate for a massive injection of funding into baseline support, ensuring that disability-related living, transport, and medical costs are fully met regardless of a partner’s income (addressing the "love tax"). Both parties support re-establishing independent funding bodies like the Lottery Individuals with Disabilities Committee. * **Eligibility & Consistency:** Propose moving entirely away from rigid, deficit-based assessments and dismantling work-test penalties or punitive benefit sanctions. They also link disability support directly to broader structural changes like enforceable universal design standards for public and private housing and accessible public transport initiatives. * **Individual Choice:** Fully endorse self-determination under *Enabling Good Lives*, arguing that true choice requires removing financial precarity through higher, livable income support (or guaranteed minimum incomes) so disabled New Zealanders can live safely and independently in the community of their choice. --- ### Summary Checklist for Independent Living: * **If you prioritize flexible, individual-led purchasing power and lower bureaucracy:** Look closely at the policies of parties promoting direct individualised funding models (such as Labour, ACT, and the Greens, though via very different funding pools and welfare safeguards). * **If you prioritize financial security, housing accessibility, and removing strict eligibility tests:** The Green Party and Te Pāti Māori offer expansive rights-based welfare overhauls. * **If you prioritize fiscal control, system standardisation, and budget sustainability:** National's approach targets consistent nationwide delivery coupled with fiscal restraint. ## Google AI Mode Answer ID: 29a5ce76-15d5-4451-970c-c1de6265242e When considering how New Zealand's political parties compare on disability support funding, eligibility, and individual choice ahead of the general election, approaches diverge based on each party's broader philosophy around welfare, state spending, and public service delivery. Disability sector organizations—including the Disabled Persons Assembly NZ (DPA), Your Way | Kia Roha, and CCS Disability Action—released the 2026 Disability Election Scorecard to help voters evaluate party commitments. Broadly speaking, the major political blocs approach independent living, funding models, and choice through distinct lenses: * **The Green Party and Te Pāti Māori (TPM)** advocate for significantly expanded, baseline state funding and structural overhauls. The Greens emphasize increasing overall health and welfare budgets, removing relationship status or disability-cause restrictions on income support, and providing timely funding to cover all disability-related living and medical costs. Te Pāti Māori highlights a localized approach, proposing Māori-led authorities to design and deliver culturally responsive services and pushing to decouple disability support from punitive or restrictive welfare debt models. * **The Labour Party** historically positions disability support as a core public service obligation, focusing on protecting and expanding access criteria within the national health and welfare framework, supporting the disability support workforce, and maintaining structured disability-neutral funding models. * **National, ACT, and New Zealand First** generally prioritize fiscal restraint, administrative efficiency, and targeted spending within social services. While supporting core disability infrastructure, parties like ACT and National lean toward market-based choices, tighter fiscal prioritisation, and strict accountability in public spending, which can translate to more constrained eligibility criteria or alternative definitions of individualized funding compared to the progressive and left blocs. Key Dimensions to Weigh * **Funding & Adequacy:** Left-leaning and minor progressive parties (Greens, TPM, Labour) tend to pledge direct increases to overall funding pools and specialized grants to offset the real-world costs of independent living. Centre-right and conservative parties emphasize economic management, targeting resources where need is deemed highest, and managing government spending. * **Eligibility:** Progressive parties advocate for widening access thresholds and simplifying assessment barriers to prevent disabled people from falling into poverty. Centre-right parties favour structured, clearer administrative boundaries around who qualifies for specialized support to ensure fiscal sustainability. * **Individual Choice & Self-Determination:** Models of individual choice (such as flexible individual funding packages) are generally supported across the political spectrum in principle, but differ in execution. Parties like TPM and the Greens advocate for co-designed, community-led, or culturally centred governance of these choices, whereas center-right approaches place heavier emphasis on standardized service delivery and agency oversight. To review individual party positions line-by-line and see specific commitments on accessibility, transport, and support services, you can examine the full non-partisan 2026 Disability Election Scorecard or check the detailed CCS Disability Action 2026 Policy Analysis. Accessible voting logistics and assistance information are also available directly via the [Electoral Commission (Vote NZ)](https://vote.nz/). ## AI Overviews Answer ID: 3afd329b-5ee3-40f9-bb2e-89a83722e6b9 In the lead-up to the **2026 New Zealand general election** , disability support funding, individual choice, and structural legislation have become major flashpoints across political platforms. The recent introduction of the Disability Support Services (DSS) Act by the governing coalition has heavily shaped how political parties are positioning their manifestos around the **Enabling Good Lives** core principles of autonomy and self-determination. thedlist.co.nzParty policies, simplified: Disability policy | The D*ListNZ Political Party Disability Policies 2026 - Inclusive World NZDisability Policies of New Zealand's Political Parties – 2026 The visual table and breakdown below outline how New Zealand's political parties compare across your key pillars of independent living, funding flexibility, and accessible transit. 📊 Party Policy Comparison Overview Political Party| Position on DSS Act / Legislation| Funding & Allowance Stance| Transport & Independent Choice ---|---|---|--- **National Party**| Maintained current system; refreshed Disability Strategy 2026–2030.| Focuses on financial stabilization of the sector and system consistency.| Pledges to support funding choices within fiscally sustainable limits. **Labour Party**| **Pledges to repeal the DSS Act** and co-design a rights-based framework.| Vows to end annual benefit reviews for permanent disabilities.| Promises 6,000+ new social housing units and $4/hour pay rise for care workers. **ACT New Zealand**| Backed current systemic adjustments to reduce central bureaucracy.| Favors direct, individualized funding over public service overheads.| Emphasizes individual choice with strict economic discipline. **Green Party**| Opposed DSS Bill; will introduce Te Tiriti-based disability rights law.| Demands higher income support and enforceable accessibility rules.| **Pledges to restore the 75% Total Mobility taxi scheme subsidy**. **Te Pāti Māori**| Advocates for independent, Māori-led, self-determined frameworks.| Focuses on systemic self-determination (_tino rangatiratanga_).| Demands legally binding accessibility criteria for all public infrastructure. **The Opportunities Party (TOP)**| Strongly opposed and critiqued the government's DSS framework.| Proposes a universal citizen's income and a **$6,000 annual Universal Disability Allowance**.| Focuses on broad, structural accessibility across public spaces and housing. * * * 🔍 Deep Dive on Key Pillars 1\. Funding Models and Financial Security * **National and ACT** place their focus on the long-term economic sustainability of the system. They advocate for a nationally consistent assessment structure to streamline funding, prioritizing targeted financial adjustments rather than broad entitlement expansions. * **Labour** aims to immediately relieve administrative pressure on disabled individuals by ending annual medical reviews for permanent conditions. They also plan to aggressively inject funding into care worker wages via pay-equity adjustments. ccsdisabilityaction.org.nzElection 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis * **The Greens and TOP** are campaigning on direct cash-transfer expansions. The Greens support sweeping increases to baseline welfare rates, while TOP proposes replacing specific benefit hurdles entirely with a structural baseline citizen's income supplemented by a flat $6,000 disability allowance. thespinoff.co.nzHow do the different parties fare on disability issues this election? | The Spinoff 2\. Individual Choice and System Control * **The Enabling Good Lives (EGL) model** remains the gold standard for individual choice in New Zealand, allowing users to direct their own flexible funding allocations. The recent removal of strict purchasing rules for flexible funding (as of April 2026) has given users greater control over daily spending. drnz.co.nzImproving assessment, allocation and flexible funding * **Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori** argue that the current government's legislative updates eroded individual agency by passing regulations without sufficient community consultation. They pledge to co-design all future operational rules alongside disabled persons organizations using a "nothing about us, without us" approach. ccsdisabilityaction.org.nzElection resources * **ACT and New Zealand First** focus on choice through a anti-bureaucracy lens. They push for decentralized, self-directed funding buckets so individuals can bypass state-mandated providers to hire their own independent care teams. drnz.co.nz 3\. Independent Living and Accessible Transport * **Renters and Housing Access:** For a renter requiring physical stability, **Labour** has committed $760 million to expand the Income-Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) alongside community housing developments. **The Greens** are advocating for enforceable universal design requirements on all new public and private residential builds. * **Accessible Transport:** **The Green Party** has made a concrete transit commitment by promising to restore the 75% Total Mobility taxi scheme subsidy (which heavily reduces transport costs for those with severe mobility impairments). **Te Pāti Māori and the Greens** both support introducing firm, legally binding timelines to ensure 100% of New Zealand’s trains, buses, and ferries are physically accessible. drnz.co.nz * * * 🗳️ Logistical Reminders for Voting Day * **Date:** The general election will take place on **Saturday, 7 November 2026**. * **Takeaway and Assisted Voting:** If your mobility makes traveling to a polling center difficult, you can utilize a **takeaway vote** , allowing a trusted helper to fetch and return your ballot papers. Alternatively, you can register for **telephone dictation voting**. You can access comprehensive information regarding accessible spaces and services through the Vote NZ Access 2026 Action Plan. policy.nzPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026 - Policy.nzYou can still vote even if you can't get to a voting place. There ... by Electoral Commission NZ on Facebook - Segment duration: 1 minute 8 seconds - Starts at: 3 seconds - Total duration: 1 minute 12 secondsAccess 2026 - Elections NZ If you would like to look closer into any specific party or area, please let me know: * Would you like the direct links to **a specific party's full disability manifesto**? * Are you looking for more details on the **telephone/assisted voting registration process**? * Do you need information on **renters' rights regarding making accessibility modifications** to a rental property?