# 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 2 November 2026 [NZ Election 2026 · Edition 8 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/8) ## ChatGPT Answer ID: 7d166867-92ab-4f7e-ac59-a33473b22efe # Comparing New Zealand parties on disability policy – 2026 For someone with a mobility impairment who rents and wants to remain independent, I would focus on four connected issues: 1. Funding and support: Will you be able to obtain enough funding for personal assistance, household tasks, equipment, respite and other daily needs? 2. Eligibility: Will assessments recognise your actual support needs, and will you retain access if your circumstances or the rules change? 3. Choice and control: Can you decide who provides your support, when it happens and how your individual funding is used? 4. Independent living: Will accessible transport, affordable accessible rental housing and community-based support enable you to live independently rather than rely on residential care? There are important differences between the parties. One particularly important distinction is that supporting individualised funding is not necessarily the same as guaranteeing adequate funding or making eligibility easier. The comparison below reflects policies and announcements available as at 2 November 2026, ahead of the general election on 7 November 2026. ## 1. Party-by-party comparison The main parties covered are National, Labour, ACT, the Greens, New Zealand First, Te Pāti Māori and The Opportunities Party (TOP). ### National Party Approach: Financial sustainability, nationally consistent assessments and some restored flexibility. - Funding: The Government reports more than $2.1 billion in additional Disability Support Services funding across successive Budgets. Budget 2025 also provided $240 million over four years for residential disability care. - Eligibility: National has introduced nationally consistent needs assessments, intended to reduce regional differences in decisions. - Individual choice: Following the 2024 controversy over flexible funding restrictions, some purchasing restrictions were removed. National says it supports choice and control within allocated budgets. - Housing: No specific commitment to require accessible rental housing or a substantial increase in accessible homes has been identified. - Transport: No specific new disability transport accessibility commitment has been identified. Its election transport proposals include public transport safety initiatives. Important consideration: National's emphasis is on maintaining a financially sustainable support system and consistency. You would want to ask how it will ensure that consistent assessments do not result in people receiving insufficient support. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Disability Policies of New Zealand’s Political Parties – 2026](https://drnz.co.nz/disability-policies-of-new-zealands-political-parties-2026/) ### Labour Party Approach: Rights-based disability support, Enabling Good Lives and legislative reform. - Funding: Labour has committed to replacing the current Disability Support Services legislative framework with one developed alongside disabled people, carers and disability organisations. It has also committed to restoring pay equity legislation for care and support workers. - Eligibility: Labour proposes ending annual benefit renewals for people with verified permanent disabilities. - Individual choice: Labour supports Enabling Good Lives principles, including choice and control. It intends to repeal the current Disability Support Services Act and develop replacement legislation. - Housing: At least 25% of new Kāinga Ora homes would have to meet accessible design standards. Labour also proposes stronger rental protections, including ending no-cause evictions. - Transport: A proposed weekly public transport fare cap of $20 in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch and $10 elsewhere, beginning July 2027. This is a general fare policy, not a guarantee of accessible vehicles or services. Important consideration: Labour has made specific commitments around permanent disability benefit reviews, accessible public housing and legislative reform. Its proposed replacement funding framework still needs further detail. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### ACT Party Approach: Individual responsibility, direct individualised funding and reduced bureaucracy. - Funding: ACT favours individualised, cash-like funding that gives people greater direct control over support budgets. - Eligibility: ACT proposes independent medical certification against defined criteria for health and disability benefits, with reassessment of existing recipients. Its announced policy anticipates substantial savings from this approach. - Individual choice: Supports direct funding and fewer administrative restrictions, but also tighter spending oversight. - Housing: No specific accessible rental housing or disability housing policy has been identified. - Transport: No specific disability-related transport accessibility programme has been identified. Important consideration: ACT's position raises two distinct questions: how much freedom you would have to manage your funding, and whether you could continue qualifying for it under its proposed assessment and reassessment system. Sources: [Disability Policies of New Zealand’s Political Parties – 2026](https://drnz.co.nz/disability-policies-of-new-zealands-political-parties-2026/)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### Green Party Approach: Disability rights, self-determination, accessible communities and Enabling Good Lives. - Funding: Supports expanding individualised funding and removing barriers to disability support. It proposes accessible and timely financial assistance for disability-related living and medical costs. - Eligibility: Supports a high-trust model intended to cover all disabled people, including those with disabling conditions who currently do not receive support. - Individual choice: Strong emphasis on choice, control and self-determination, with less reliance on rigid deficit-based assessments. - Housing: Supports substantially increasing accessible public housing, universal design standards for public and private housing, and stronger rental housing standards. - Transport: Specifically proposes restoring the government subsidy for Total Mobility taxi services to 75% and increasing the number of mobility vehicles to meet demand. It also proposes free bus and train trips for Total Mobility users. Important consideration: The Greens have made explicit commitments covering disability funding, transport assistance, housing accessibility and enforceable rights. You would want to examine the proposed implementation timetable, funding allocations and how the high-trust eligibility model would operate. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### New Zealand First Approach: Practical support, public services, transport infrastructure and a general emphasis on individual needs. - Funding: No comprehensive standalone disability funding policy has been identified. - Eligibility: Its election scorecard responses support informed self-assessment and flexible, person-centred funding. It also supports reviewing benefit income-testing arrangements. - Individual choice: Has explicitly stated support for choice, control and self-determination over disability services. - Housing: No specific accessible rental housing programme has been identified. - Transport: Its transport commitments focus on improving the national rail network rather than specific mobility accessibility measures. Important consideration: NZ First has expressed support for flexible disability funding and accessibility measures, including enforceable accessibility standards. However, there is less detail about the amount of funding, specific eligibility rules and how services would be delivered. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### Te Pāti Māori Approach: Māori-led disability services, self-determination and whānau-centred support. - Funding: Proposes a Māori-led authority to design, oversee and deliver disability services for Māori. - Eligibility: Proposes removing barriers across assessment, funding and service delivery. - Individual choice: Emphasises tino rangatiratanga, with tāngata hauā and whānau hauā central to decisions about their support. - Housing: Proposes accessible design for all new government-built housing, alongside more social housing and Māori housing investment. - Transport: Supports embedding accessibility across transport and public services as part of its wider disability rights approach. Important consideration: Its approach is particularly concerned with who controls disability services and how Māori disabled people and whānau participate in decisions. The technical details of funding allocations and implementation need further examination. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### The Opportunities Party (TOP) Approach: Structural welfare reform, individual autonomy and accessible public services. - Funding: Proposes a Citizen's Income of up to $370 per week for almost all adults, replacing most existing benefits, including Supported Living Allowance, with additional top-up support for disabled people. - Eligibility: Its proposed Tell Us Once system would reduce repeated assessments and requests for the same information for people with long-term support needs. - Individual choice: Supports disabled people making their own decisions, with appropriate assistance, and working with disability organisations on policy design. - Housing: Supports accessible public housing, better rental standards and broader housing reform. - Transport: Proposes free public transport for everyone. Important consideration: TOP's proposed welfare restructuring could affect how you receive disability-related income support. The amount and eligibility rules for disability top-ups would be particularly important to investigate before assessing the practical impact. Sources: [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ## 2. Side-by-side comparison This table summarises the main differences rather than ranking the parties. | Party | Funding and eligibility | Individual choice | Accessible transport | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | National | Existing system funding; consistent assessments | Flexible funding within budgets | No specific new disability commitment identified | | Labour | New rights-based framework; fewer reviews for permanent disabilities | Enabling Good Lives principles | General fare cap | | ACT | Individualised funding; independent medical reassessments | Direct funding and spending autonomy | No specific commitment identified | | Greens | Expanded support; high-trust access model | Strong self-determination | 75% Total Mobility subsidy | | NZ First | Flexible funding; self-assessment principles | Explicit support for choice and control | General rail improvements | | Te Pāti Māori | Māori-led service funding and assessment reform | Māori self-determination | Broader accessibility commitments | | TOP | Citizen's Income and disability top-ups | Supported decision-making | Free public transport | Sources: CCS Disability Action's October 2026 policy analysis and Disability Responsiveness New Zealand's comparison. [Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Disability Policies of New Zealand’s Political Parties – 2026](https://drnz.co.nz/disability-policies-of-new-zealands-political-parties-2026/)[Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources) ## 3. What matters particularly when you rent and want to live independently? There are some important differences between general disability policy and the policies that could directly affect your day-to-day independence. ### A. Accessible transport If you rely on Total Mobility, taxis or accessible public transport, the details matter enormously. The proposals worth examining are: - Greens: Restore the Total Mobility government subsidy to 75%, increase mobility vehicle availability, and provide free public transport for Total Mobility users. - Labour: Introduce a weekly public transport fare cap, but this does not specifically guarantee accessible transport. - TOP: Make public transport free, although free fares alone do not guarantee accessible services. - National, ACT and NZ First: Their identified commitments do not provide equivalent specific new disability transport subsidy proposals. - Te Pāti Māori: Supports broader accessibility across transport, without a similarly detailed transport subsidy commitment identified. One important question for all parties is whether there will be enough accessible vehicles, reliable wheelchair spaces, accessible bus stops and suitable services outside major centres. ### B. Remaining in rental accommodation Accessible housing is not simply about getting a roof over your head. It means being able to use your bathroom, kitchen, entrances and other facilities safely. The specific commitments to examine include: - Labour's proposal that 25% of new Kāinga Ora homes meet accessible design standards. - The Greens' proposed universal design requirements for public and private housing. - Te Pāti Māori's proposal for accessible government-built housing and stronger rental protections. - TOP's support for accessible housing and improved rental standards. Labour and Te Pāti Māori have also proposed stronger protections for tenants against eviction. Te Pāti Māori proposes universal rent control. For a private renter, I would particularly investigate whether parties intend to help fund accessibility modifications, protect tenants against losing modified homes, and increase the availability of accessible rental properties. [Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026)[Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026) ### C. Disability support funding and eligibility This is arguably the most important area to investigate beyond the headline promises. Consider these questions: - Will funding increase in line with the actual cost of support workers? - Will people with permanent disabilities have to undergo repeated assessments? - Will eligibility recognise fluctuating or progressive support needs? - Will people be able to use individualised funding for the support that works best for them? - Will funding be sufficient to employ support workers at appropriate times, including evenings and weekends? - Will support remain available if someone lives alone rather than with family? A particularly important distinction is between Disability Support Services eligibility and income-support eligibility. They are different systems. A party might make benefit assessments easier without necessarily expanding eligibility for personal assistance or other disability services. ## 4. An important resource: the 2026 Disability Election Scorecard Published October 2026 CCS Disability Action, Disabled Persons Assembly NZ and Your Way | Kia Roha have produced a dedicated disability election scorecard. It asks all seven parties the same ten questions, covering: - Disability rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. - Repealing the Disability Support Services legislation. - Individual choice and control. - The financial penalty associated with having a partner. - Disability allowances and cost of living. - Employment and training support. - Accessibility legislation. - Abuse in care. - Emergency preparedness. The responses are presented as Yes, No, Undecided or no clear response, with additional party comments. Importantly, this is a self-reported comparison, not an independent assessment of whether parties have delivered on their promises. 2026 Disability Election Scorecard CCS Disability Action, DPA and Your Way | Kia Roha - [View the scorecard and accessible downloads](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [Read the detailed party policy analysis](https://www.ccsdisabilityaction.org.nz/news/policy-analysis-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [Read the independent disability policy comparison](https://drnz.co.nz/disability-policies-of-new-zealands-political-parties-2026/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) [Election resources](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/election-resources)[Media release: Disability Election Scorecard](https://ccsdisabilityaction.squarespace.com/news/scorecard-media-release)[Disability Policies of New Zealand’s Political Parties – 2026](https://drnz.co.nz/disability-policies-of-new-zealands-political-parties-2026/) ## 5. Questions I would put to candidates before voting These are practical questions that can help distinguish an attractive policy announcement from a commitment that would actually protect your independence. | Issue | Question to ask | | --- | --- | | Funding | Will you guarantee disability support funding keeps pace with the cost of delivering care? | | Eligibility | Will people with permanent disabilities be protected from unnecessary reassessments? | | Individual choice | Will I be able to choose my support workers and manage my own funding? | | Personal assistance | Will support assessments consider my needs throughout the day, including evenings and weekends? | | Transport | Will you guarantee affordable, reliable accessible transport and adequate Total Mobility funding? | | Renting | Will you help renters obtain accessibility modifications without risking their tenancy? | | Housing | Will you increase the supply of affordable accessible rental homes? | | Independence | Will you protect the right to live in the community rather than being pushed towards residential care? | ## 6. My suggested way of evaluating the policies Rather than looking only at which party promises the most funding, I would distinguish three things: 1. Security: Can you depend on receiving the support you have been assessed as needing, without arbitrary reductions or unnecessary reassessments? 2. Autonomy: Can you decide how, when and from whom you receive your support? 3. Practical independence: Can you afford your home, get around your community and access the services you need? A policy might support individualised funding but still leave you without enough money to employ the support workers you need. Likewise, free public transport is of limited practical value if the vehicles and stops are inaccessible. Your ability to remain independent depends on all three areas working together. One final consideration: The election is on Saturday 7 November 2026. You can also contact candidates directly and ask them to explain how their proposals would apply to someone who rents, has mobility-related support needs and wants to remain living independently. The most useful next step would be to examine the actual funding and eligibility proposals in greater depth, particularly whether they protect existing support entitlements or could change access to individualised funding. ## Gemini Answer ID: 9fa06846-4139-490a-a7a3-4e64c1c22efb For disabled New Zealanders navigating renting, independent living, accessible transport, and support services, the major political parties approach the 2026 general election with distinct philosophies. A comparative breakdown of how the parties contrast on disability support funding, eligibility, and individual choice highlights these differences: --- ### 1. National Party * **Approach & Focus:** National's platform centers on fiscal management, bringing financial stability to the Disability Support Services (DSS) system, and standardizing access nationally. Rather than a standalone manifesto, their strategy relies on the refreshed New Zealand Disability Strategy (2026–2030). * **Funding & Individual Choice:** National supports maintaining flexible funding where possible, but within tighter, centrally managed cost parameters to secure long-term system sustainability. Their emphasis is on creating a nationally consistent assessment model to ensure equity across regions. ### 2. Labour Party * **Approach & Focus:** Labour’s policy framework is rights-based and explicitly grounded in the *Enabling Good Lives* (EGL) philosophy and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). * **Eligibility & Choice:** Labour emphasizes individual choice, self-determination, and the expansion of individualised funding. A core platform commitment for Labour is opposing or repealing restrictive structural and legislative changes to disability support introduced by the current political landscape, aiming to protect disabled people's autonomy over their packages. ### 3. Green Party * **Approach & Focus:** The Greens take an expansive, rights-driven welfare and disability stance, aiming to remove silos between disability support, housing, transport, and health. * **Funding & Eligibility:** They advocate for easily accessible, timely income support that covers all disability-related living and medical costs *regardless* of cause or relationship status (targeting the "love tax" where a partner's income impacts support eligibility). They support shifting away from rigid, deficit-based assessments toward full choice and control under Enabling Good Lives. * **Independent Living & Housing:** The Greens explicitly link disability support to housing, advocating for universal design standards across public and private housing to guarantee accessible options in the community. ### 4. ACT New Zealand * **Approach & Focus:** ACT’s philosophy emphasizes individual agency paired with administrative efficiency, a streamlined bureaucracy, and tighter oversight of public spending. * **Funding & Individual Choice:** ACT leans toward direct, highly individualised (cash-like) funding models handed to individuals rather than managed through traditional provider-heavy bureaucracies. However, their broader welfare approach also stresses clearer rules on fund utilization and stricter independent medical criteria for health and disability-related benefit management. ### 5. Te Pāti Māori & New Zealand First * **Te Pāti Māori:** Focuses heavily on systemic equity for *tāngata whaikaha* Māori, aligning disability support with income and employment policies to eliminate poverty, recognizing whānau care as valuable labor, and integrating health/disability services. * **New Zealand First:** Primarily concentrates on broader public health access, senior support, and economic cost-of-living measures, with disability needs largely addressed under general health and universal superannuation/senior policies rather than dedicated radical restructuring. --- ### Summary Comparison Table | Party | Core Focus on Disability Support | Stance on Individual Choice & EGL | Funding & Eligibility Approach | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **National** | Financial stability and national consistency | Restoring some flexibility within structured, standardized bounds | Centralized, consistent assessment frameworks to manage system costs | | **Labour** | Rights-based approach tied to UNCRPD and EGL | High emphasis on self-determination and protecting individualised funding models | Opposition to restrictive legislative shifts; defending existing support structures | | **Green** | Comprehensive reform across housing, income, and health | Full choice and control; dismantling rigid, deficit-based testing | Universal coverage of disability-related costs regardless of partner income or origin | | **ACT** | Streamlining bureaucracy and individualized cash-like allocations | High individual autonomy over funding spend, balanced with tighter accountability/eligibility rules | Direct funding to individuals coupled with stricter medical criteria reviews | ## Google AI Mode Answer ID: 1ca93feb-20d3-495b-8ca7-9905670be6c6 Navigating the 2026 New Zealand general election while prioritizing independent living, accessible transport, and individual choice means looking closely at how different political parties approach disability legislation, funding adequacy, and self-determination. Key advocacy groups—including CCS Disability Action, the [Disabled Persons Assembly (DPA)](http://www.dpa.org.nz/), and _Your Way | Kia Roha_ —have surveyed the major political parties on critical issues like funding models, eligibility, and the core principle of _"nothing about us, without us"_. The primary areas of comparison across the political spectrum center on legislative frameworks, financial support, and individual choice: 1\. Legislative Frameworks and Consultation * **Labour & Left/Progressive Parties (Green Party, Te Pāti Māori):** * _Position:_ Strongly critical of recent structural changes and past legislative attempts (such as the Disability Support Services restructuring/bills) implemented without robust community consultation. * _Approach:_ Commit to repealing or rewriting contentious disability support legislation to establish a human-rights-based framework grounded explicitly in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and _Te Tiriti o Waitangi_. They emphasize co-design and mandatory, deep involvement of disabled people’s organizations (DPOs) in setting policy. * **National & Government/Centre-Right Parties (ACT, NZ First):** * _Position:_ Focus more heavily on fiscal sustainability, administrative efficiency, and streamlining service delivery through central or agency-led management. * _Approach:_ While parties like NZ First emphasize person-centered and flexible funding models in principle, centre-right frameworks tend to prioritize managing cost growth within health and social sectors, sometimes drawing criticism from the disability community for a perceived top-down approach rather than community-led co-design. 2\. Individual Choice, Control, and Funding Models * **Self-Determination vs. Bureaucracy:** * Parties like **NZ First** and the **Opportunities Party (TOP)** have expressed support for flexible, individualized, person-centered funding models and informed self-assessment to give disabled people and whānau direct control over how packages are spent, minimizing rigid central bureaucracy. * **The Greens and Labour:** * Align closely with DPO recommendations to ensure flexible, needs-based individual funding packages that account for changing life circumstances without requiring exhausting re-assessments or bureaucratic hurdles. They support expanding access to independent, peer-led navigation services so individuals can direct their own support safely. 3\. Financial Eligibility and Income Tests * **Supported Living Payment & Partner Income Testing:** * A major issue highlighted by the DPA and CCS Disability Action scorecard is the financial penalty disabled people face when entering or maintaining relationships (e.g., partner income testing on the Supported Living Payment). * **The Greens, Labour, and Te Pāti Māori** generally support removing partner income-testing penalties to foster financial autonomy and relationship equity. Centre-right parties place greater emphasis on baseline welfare work-test incentives and fiscal bounds. * **Disability Allowance and Support Funds:** * Progressive and minor opposition parties lean toward increasing both the main Disability Allowance and Child Disability Allowance and widening job/training support fund eligibility. National and ACT focus more on targeting assistance and broader economic management to curb inflation and living costs. 4\. Accessible Transport and Infrastructure * **Enforceable Accessibility Standards:** * Disability sector advocates have long campaigned for comprehensive accessibility legislation with legally enforceable standards covering public transport, built environments, and digital services. * **The Green Party and Labour** have historically been more receptive to enacting formal accessibility legislation, whereas **ACT and National** generally favor voluntary compliance, commercial flexibility, or localized council decision-making over heavy central regulation for infrastructure. * * * How to Evaluate Your Vote Further To see exact party commitments, check the interactive tools provided by the sector: * Review the 2026 Disability Election Scorecard published by CCS Disability Action, DPA, and _Your Way | Kia Roha_ for a direct breakdown of how each party answered specific questions on funding, transport, and rights. * Check the Elections NZ Access 2026 Action Plan to verify accessible voting options (such as telephone dictation voting or accessible digital formats) available for your electorate. ## AI Overviews Answer ID: ef6b5175-36dc-48eb-ab31-c5d7bd097bda **Political parties ahead of the 2026 New Zealand general election present sharply contrasting visions** for how disability support services (DSS) should be funded, who qualifies for them, and how much direct control individuals possess over their budgets. The sector's framework has changed significantly following the coalition government's shift of DSS delivery from Whaikaha (the Ministry for Disabled People) to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). This shift, combined with purchasing rule modifications, has heavily shaped party platforms. * * * Disability Support Comparison Matrix Party| Support Funding| Eligibility Criteria| Individual Choice & Autonomy ---|---|---|--- **National**| **Focuses on fiscal sustainability.** Highlights its $1.1B multi-year funding commitment to clear financial pressures.| **Emphasizes standardized consistency.** Relies on MSD administrative structures rather than separate, specialized agency pipelines.| **Gradually restoring flexible settings.** Shifted from strict 2024 restrictions toward structured framework models. **Labour**| **Pledges structural re-funding.** Vows an immediate $4/hour raise for care workers and a total replacement of current DSS legislative caps.| **Ends annual benefit reviews** for permanent, verified disabilities. Pledges to co-draft eligibility criteria with disabled communities.| **Rejects centralized restrictions.** Vows to completely repeal the current coalition-passed DSS legislation. **Green Party**| **Demands maximum funding injection.** Advocates for a Guaranteed Minimum Income and a major increase to core disability allowances.| **Abolishes health standard restrictions.** Opposes health condition assessments for migrants and refugees; enforces rigid baseline rights.| **Full community self-determination.** Backs comprehensive legal enforcement of accessibility codes and fully independent individualized funding. **ACT**| **Prioritizes smaller government bureaucracy.** Favors strictly managed funding tracks with reduced state infrastructure.| **Applies generalized welfare frameworks.** Resists creating specialized, expanding carve-outs within the broader social security net.| **Promotes direct individualized funding.** Strongly favors direct-to-user cash flow management over centralized state-managed care options. **Te Pāti Māori**| **Advocates for structural funding reallocation.** Focuses heavily on eliminating Crown income-support debt and expanding cultural grants.| **Removes system access barriers.** Designs a specialized framework mapping across assessment, health, and social services.| **Establishes a Māori-led authority.** Mandates that Tangata Hauā centrally self-govern the design and delivery of their services. * * * Core Areas Impacting Independent Living & Renting 1\. Funding Stability vs. Restructuring * **The Coalition Framework (National / ACT / NZ First):** The current government approach focuses on making DSS financially predictable. After the 2024 structural deficits, National committed a long-term $1.1 billion package to stabilize operations, though it transferred service delivery directly under the MSD envelope. * **The Opposition Position (Labour / Greens / Te Pāti Māori):** Left-of-center parties argue that moving delivery to MSD eroded advocacy power. They plan to reverse recent constraints and invest heavily in structural support networks, including immediate pay hikes for independent support staff. 2\. Eligibility, Application Processes, and Welfare * **Simplifying the System:** Labour has committed to eliminating the stress of annual medical review procedures for individuals with permanent, verified physical or mobility impairments. * **Income Reform Alternatives:** Minor parties offer systemic modifications. The Opportunities Party (TOP) champions a Universal Basic Income (UBI) model worth $370/week, complemented by a non-means-tested $6,000 annual disability allowance. The Greens intend to completely separate partner income rules from asset tests when calculating support welfare. 3\. Individual Choice & Renting Realities * **Housing Initiatives:** Because disabled New Zealanders are disproportionately impacted by subpar rental standards and high housing costs, Labour has set a policy targeting that at least 25% of new Kāinga Ora builds meet comprehensive accessibility guidelines. The Greens focus on enacting enforceable, legally binding statutory accommodation and universal physical accessibility laws across public and private spaces. * **Enabling Good Lives (EGL):** A key point of contention is the rollout of the EGL system, which allows individuals to manage their own budgets directly. Left-leaning parties pledge to resume the national rollout of EGL sites that slowed under recent fiscal freezes. * * * If you want to look deeper into the specific transport or renting policies of these parties, please let me know: * Which specific **accessible transport modes** you rely on most (e.g., Total Mobility scheme, wheelchair-accessible trains, or buses)? * Whether your current rental requires **physical modifications**? I can provide the exact party stances on transport subsidies and tenancy modifications to help inform your decision.