Bradfield NSW
Wheelchair / step-free access at federal polling places, from the AEC’s own per-polling-place data. A literal count and percentage breakdown only — not a score, not a ranking against other divisions.
Benchmark: JSCEM’s own standard, not RioLabs’ judgment
The Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) recommended in its June 2026 interim report (Recommendation 13) that “the majority of polling places in each electorate are physically accessible.” This site uses that recommendation as a published baseline for comparison — it is JSCEM’s benchmark, not a RioLabs accessibility judgment, and it is not a compliance target: nothing exists to comply with until the government responds. Government response to Recommendation 13: pending as of 2026-07-17.
Current polling places in Bradfield
| Rating | Polling places |
|---|---|
| Full | 38 of 47 (80.9%) |
| Assisted | 8 of 47 (17.0%) |
| None | 1 of 47 (2.1%) |
| Not stated | 0 of 47 (0.0%) |
1 of 47 (2.1%) polling places in Bradfield are rated None for wheelchair access in the AEC’s own data. We report that as a literal count only. We do not convert it into a distance-based headline (e.g. a “nearest accessible booth is N km away” framing), we do not name or single out the venue, and we do not rank Bradfield against any other division on this basis. Where a None-rated venue may be a voter’s only practical local option, the honest way to say that is plainly, in words, not as a raw kilometre figure — see About for the full house style on this.
2022 baseline (reference only — not a trend)
Our archive also holds a 2022 federal-election snapshot for Bradfield. We show its literal breakdown below on its own, not side-by-side with the current figures above as a change or trend. The compact’s trend gate is closed: the apparent national shift in the Full-access share between 2022 and now is larger than the AEC’s own public wording of “around 20% increase,” which suggests a possible category or assessment-framework change between snapshots rather than a real-world change of that size. See About for the full explanation. Nothing here computes or claims a delta between the two years.
| Rating | Polling places |
|---|---|
| Full | 17 of 44 (38.6%) |
| Assisted | 21 of 44 (47.7%) |
| None | 6 of 44 (13.6%) |
| Not stated | 0 of 44 (0.0%) |
What this page does not claim
- No accessibility score, index, or rating — only the AEC's own Full / Assisted / None / not-stated categories, counted literally.
- No ranking of Bradfield against any other division; the only comparative surface anywhere on this site is the national distribution shown on the index page.
- No distance or travel-time headline, and no estimate of how many people are affected — the AEC's dataset counts polling places, not voters or disability prevalence.
- No 2022-to-current trend or change claim (see above).
Provenance
- Current snapshot: archive/aec-polling-places-current/2026-07-19/prdelms.gaz.statics.260701.09.00.02.csv, captured
2026-07-18T04:46:47Z, SHA-256
7343de48f014d823… - 2022 baseline snapshot: archive/aec-polling-places-2022-federal-election/2026-07-19/prdelms.gaz.statics.220521.09.00.01.csv, captured
2026-07-18T04:46:47Z, SHA-256
b1a4b04723c2463c…
Every figure on this site traces to one of these two AEC source files. Roster rule: Status in {Current, Appointment}.