Full accessibility ensures that public transportation accommodates people with disabilities by providing necessary facilities and services. Proponents argue that it ensures equal access, promotes independence for people with disabilities, and complies with disability rights. Opponents argue that it can be costly to implement and maintain and may require significant modifications to existing systems.
@B4B9G5P4wks4W
No, but public transportation bodies should be compassionate nevertheless, without being required.
No they would be banned unless if they in a wheelchair and can talk etc. just have they legs broken or cut off
@B2ZHWGD2mos2MO
Yes, for publicly owned public transport. Privatised options should be allowed to coexist without the same requirements.
@B2PSGJR3mos3MO
Yes, with a transition period to allow for required upgrades rather than replacing existing functioning systems
@B2CRG6DOne Nation3mos3MO
No. Australia is already one of the best. Only include this for new infrastructure
It depends on circumstance and only do when viable to implement.
@9WXVR3Z6mos6MO
No. But suitable alternatives should be available for those with disabilities
@9WBCNY86mos6MO
No, but must provide alternative accessible public transportation to those that need them
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
