Mr. Adam Harris:

There are a number of areas where we think the Act could be enhanced. Perhaps at a very high level, there are a couple of key examples. I echo the point made by Ms Dempsey about the need to make sure that there is nothing in the Act preventing somebody from accessing his or her school if he or she wants to. That said, we still recognise the need for a range of options and that our system is not at a place yet where all children are able to attend their local school but we believe that option should rest with families.

One thing that is missing from the Act is the voice of the child. While there is a lot of emphasis on the voice of the parent and family, it is now more critical than ever that we really listen to the lived experience and place that at the centre of individual education plan, IEP, planning and planning for future education.

One of the learnings from the Disability Act is that a lot of language within the EPSEN Act does not really commit to concrete timelines or supports. We need to tighten that up so it is very clear when things should happen and that we are taking a rights-based approach.

It is important that we recognise that this is a highly diagnostic and medical model-driven item of legislation and that not every child with additional needs fits into clear diagnostic criteria. There are children within the autism community who must go private because of the huge waiting list to access assessment. This means that families who cannot afford to go private can lose out, so there is a need to balance diagnosis and need to make sure it is as equitable as possible.