Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ombudsman and welcome him back. We have taken on our previous engagement with him and we have been pressing in regard to the Wasted Lives report. I have had the opportunity to meet the next Ombudsman through the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure Reform and Taoiseach. At that committee I was glad to see there was a commitment to follow through on all the recommendations that Mr. Tyndall has made. It will be important that all of the recommendations in his report as Ombudsman are followed through so that the sustained pressure that he describes as necessary is kept on.

A couple of points in this report struck me, as well as one that was not in the report but is an issue and I wonder has he thoughts on it. My former colleague, John Dolan, when he was a Member of my Civil Engagement Group in the Seanad, highlighted the disability accessibility dimension of transport contracts when they were being awarded, particularly in rural Ireland. In fact we had legislation on it. It is a useful point to look at, not just in terms of this issue but the knock-on effect which is that public duty on equality and human rights that public bodies have, that they also need to follow that through when they are contracting or procuring services. They need to make sure that any public service that the public receives is there on an equitable basis and is there for everybody. Does the witness think there has been learning from that embarrassment in the past? Have there been improvements in the practices? What should be learned from that for other areas of public service delivery which tend to work with private contractors in the way that transport does?

I am also very struck by the point on age. That point about you move to just being an older person and those additional supports you need become harder to access because the attitude is well, you have a bus pass that should do you. Will the witness talk about the importance of making sure that age does not become a barrier or be allowed to become a barrier to these specific schemes even though there are also many other barriers to these schemes? The idea of doing this audit of your hands, legs and arms must be quite distressing for people especially those who potentially may have rehabilitative aspirations in regard to their future mobility. They may need this in order to stay active and stay in the world and do the things that are important to them, and who may well hope to have some improvement along the line. They should not have this is a bar or threshold. Will the witness comment on those issues?

I think the same thing that Senator McGreehan touched on which is, why are these measures always incrementally rolled out, piloted, done to a small degree, rather than made to a large scale? When we give a support to a business sector for example, we do not give it to five companies out of 50, we give it to a sector. Yet, and this was in the Wasted Lives report, we have this incremental, slow roll-out of something we know is needed. Will the witness just comment on those points please?