TRANSPORT COMMITTEE REPORT Government Response
The Government recognises the importance of increasing the availability of wheelchair accessible vehicles [WAVs] to ensure disabled passengers can travel safely, reliably, and with confidence.
Introducing a single national minimum fleet requirement for WAV provision would not come without challenges. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee has stressed the importance of a mixed fleet to meet the needs of disabled passengers best. The demand for wheelchair accessible services varies significantly across areas, reflecting local demographics, travel patterns, and the availability of alternative accessible transport options, particularly in rural areas.
There are operational challenges in delivering consistent WAV availability. These include the fact that many PHV drivers are self-employed and own their vehicles, the need to ensure coverage at different times of day, and the concentration of demand at specific times, such as peak travel periods and home to school transport. These factors mean that a minimum fleet proportion would not necessarily guarantee the availability of accessible service when and where it is needed.
The Government is committed to exploring
approaches to increasing WAV provision and will consider all options as part of our ongoing reforms to ensure demand for these vital services is met.
Recommendation 15
The plan should also be accompanied by additional funding, delivered through licensing authorities, to help drivers meet the costs of acquiring, adapting, and maintaining WAVs.
Government Response
The Government acknowledges the financial challenges associated with the provision of wheelchair accessible vehicles [WAVs], including the higher upfront costs of purchase or conversion, as well as ongoing maintenance and operational costs. These factors can act as barriers to wider adoption, particularly for PHV drivers who own the cars they drive.
The Department will continue to explore a range of alternatives to support and incentivise the uptake of WAVs as part of its broader policy development.
64 Recommendation 16
Accessibility in the broadest sense also means giving users the widest variety of options for finding out about and booking services both digital and non- digital. The department should consider including provision of a range of booking options by operators in the national standards.
Government Response
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring passengers can access taxis and PHVs through a range of booking channels. Providing a variety of booking options can help ensure services are accessible to all passengers, including those who may have different needs, or preferences. The Government will explore the feasibility of including such requirements in the national standards consultation.
The Department will engage with licensing authorities, operators, passenger groups, and disability stakeholders to ensure any proposals are practical, evidence based and deliver meaningful improvements in access to services.
Recommendation 17
The introduction of national standards should be accompanied by a single national complaint and incident reporting portal for taxi and private hire services. It should be digitally inclusive, route reports to the responsible authority, and include clear service standards for acknowledgement, updates, and resolution.
Government Response
The Government supports improvements to complaints and incident reporting across the taxi and PHVs, recognising their importance for passenger safety, confidence, and effective oversight.
The Government agrees with the principle of a more consistent and accessible approach, including the potential for a national system. Complaints should be considered in the first instance by the relevant operator and or licensing authority, with a potential national system providing a route for escalation where resolution has not been achieved or where issues indicate broader systemic or safeguarding concerns.
The Government will consider this, among a range of options, as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny process.
NOVEMBER 2026 PHTM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82
