Mr. Christy Lynch:

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked about school leavers. The vast majority are people with intellectual disabilities. Most of them are known to our agencies because we, typically, run special schools and respite services. Most of these families are aligned with our agencies in any event and have an expectation that their children will move into some form of adult support programme. This is the first year that no funding was available. For the last few years not enough funding was available, but sometimes a little can be stretched and something achieved. We responded, but our response relates to Deputy Regina Doherty's question as to why we have deficits. In sorting out one problem, we created another.

For example, this year students left school in June, not knowing what was going to happen in September. This was very cruel. We did not know what was going to happen, although we were working very closely with our colleagues in the HSE. One should not have to sit in front of a mother whose daughter is doubly incontinent, uses a wheelchair, has no speech, has significant medical problems and needs to be fed and dressed, and say to that mother, who looks after her daughter 24 hours a day and seven days a week all year round, that she is being put on a waiting list. We are parents' and friends' organisations. We know better than anyone the impact of these things on families. Yes, we responded but in doing so we created other problems.

More and more children with complex medical needs are coming through the school system. There is an increase in the level of autism, bringing high levels of challenging behaviour. We are forcing more people into services, typically day services, that are already overstretched and we are asking fewer staff to deal with more people and more complex people. Real issues are emerging with regard to our viability as companies, because of the deficit. There are also health and safety issues. How far can one stretch a piece of elastic before it snaps and something bad happens? None of us wants to see that.

I have a comment on Deputy Dowds's remarks. I heard the Minister for Health sum this up before last year's budget, when he addressed a group of parents in his constituency. He made the point that people with disabilities were always on the margins, even in the best of times. We agree with that. I was on the board of the National Disability Authority when we launched the national disability strategy with great fanfare in very good days. We needed that strategy because there was an acceptance that we came from a very low base. The Minister made the point that even in times of austerity there are groups in society who need particular protection. Having lost 15% of our budget, we feel, as my colleague has said, that we have done everything that could reasonably be expected to protect front-line services.

For the first time ever in my memory, the Government acknowledged that 1.7% of the 3.7% cut could come off the front line. This was because the HSE, and not the voluntary organisations, told the Government that all the low hanging fruit had been picked. Some of our problems go back to the 1980s, when we had similar austerity and we created huge waiting lists. We never got to the bottom of that, even in the so called good times.

We were asked what we will do. If there is another cut, many of us will go into next year carrying deficits. We are companies so we cannot sustain that. We will have to start taking apart front-line services that are essential to people. If there is another cut on top of that we will have to cut even more. Otherwise, organisations will follow the example of Cregg House, and it will not be the last, and go back to the HSE and say, "Here are the keys; we cannot do this anymore".

A task force is working on a national policy for the reconfiguration of supports to children with disabilities. It is called Progressing Disability Services for Children and Young People. In theory, I agree with what it is attempting to do, which is to bring equity and fairness into the system across the country. The policy is to attempt to pool all therapists, with teams dealing with the age groups 0 to 5 and 5 to 18 in geographical areas. My background is in occupational therapy. We have never had enough therapists in the system. Many therapists are linked to special schools and sometimes parents choose a special school in the hope that their child will get therapy. In the new scenario, all the therapists will be pooled. The moratorium on recruitment has meant we have been losing therapy posts in the last number of years, and we never had enough anyway. Butter that was very thinly spread will be spread much more thinly, and this will be dressed up as equity. Will special schools lose in this scenario? Yes, they will.