Ms Gillian Kearns:

Dr. Hassett and Ms Grehan are better placed to answer on the second point; I do not have the same access requirements. On the first point, the concept of universal design and making places and environments more accessible is well known. This is not new. We are not trying to reinvent the wheel. A rising tide raises all boats. I do training around neurodivergence. No non-neurodivergent person or, in this case, no non-disabled person is going to be harmed by us making our environments, workplaces and education systems more accessible. We know that neurodivergent and disabled people are actively being harmed by the way things are now. Everybody can walk up a ramp. Not everybody can go up stairs. Making environments more accessible for neurodivergent people and changing the ways we do things for disabled people benefits everybody. Most of the innovations we have nowadays were actually developed for disabled people in the first place. Sliding doors and rotating doors - all of these things - were invented for disabled people's access requirements. Texting was invented for disabled people's access. So many things that non-disabled people use and take for granted every day were initially invented to meet the access requirements of disabled people. There is no lack of benefit to making places more accessible, incorporating universal design and including disabled people's collaborative and co-creation approaches. It is what the State is mandated to do under the UNCRPD anyway. Including disabled voices from the get-go will improve outcomes for everybody. It has already been proven in the things we use every day. I will let somebody else come in on transport access.