Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have been listening intently to what has been said. I especially welcome Ms Dennehy to the meeting. She is a very brave person whom I met probably ten years ago. She worked in a jewellers in Tuam at one stage, which is where my wife and I first met her.

I have had conversations with Ms Levin from LightAware in recent years. I will speak to this issue first. Ms Dennehy articulated what her life is like. From my perspective, as a local person, I know the terrain of the environment in which she lives. I have been in her house. I know where she was living in Tuam from where she had to move. They are all very nice places to live. For Elaine, there seem to very few places where she can live and have a life. The sensitivity issue Ms Dennehy suffers from is so severe that when the council was carrying out roadworks and put up temporary lights, it closed off an access avenue for her while that work was taking place. The difficulty with the local authorities is that they will say these are the lights that are now available. There is some old stock of lights available but there is a great lack of awareness of the actual issue.

This issue has been discussed in Europe and elsewhere. There seems to be a drive to install energy-efficient lights everywhere, but that policy may be leaving a trail of destruction in its wake. It is an issue for the specifiers of public lighting, temporary lights and driver feedback display signs. Ms Dennehy had to deal with forecourt lighting, which was being left on all day, a few weeks ago, which meant she could not go into a shop to buy groceries or put petrol in her car. For those who cannot tolerate this lighting, it comes down to very simple things that we take for granted.

There is a large of body of work to be done by legislators to make people aware of this issue. This discussion today is only a step in that direction. I thank the committee for inviting Ms Dennehy and Ms Levin to participate in this session. We need to continue to highlight this issue to bring about change where it needs to be made. The Departments of Transport and the Environment, Climate and Communications, as well as the local authorities, need to be made aware of what is wrong in this respect. In addition, with respect to the lights Ms Dennehy mentioned, we should return to the old-fashioned lights we had for years, which gave light and were effective. We must examine the issue in the context of the impact it will have on people's health if we do not address it. That will be a major task. It may have to be addressed in Europe again but until it is tackled nationally, the local authorities will have to follow whatever policies are in place.

I do not have any questions for Ms Dennehy because I know exactly what the situation is. I cannot imagine the entire situation but she has articulated it to me so often that I do not need to ask any questions. LightAware is an advocacy group based in the UK and maybe we need to encourage it to form a branch in Ireland or take on the Irish situation and try to get it on to the national agenda. No matter how Ms Dennehy describes it, it still does not give the full picture of what she is living through, has lived through and continues to live through. Today is just about telling legislators about it, so well done to her on that.

Ms Cassidy and Ms Browne also spoke about thalidomide and the issues they have. I understand that the housing adaptation grants funded by the local authorities do not cover the cost fully and are also means tested. Someone working and with an income of over €40,000 cannot get any support. It goes back to the UN Convention on Human Rights and the protocols that need to be brought in. Having a person-centred approach to support is the key. Both Ms Cassidy and Ms Browne made that point and I wrote it down. We have been raising the issue of transport support schemes, their demise and the cancellation of some schemes since 2011. Now we find that the primary medical certificate scheme is in disarray as the appeals board has resigned because the scheme was not fit for purpose. We have been doing work on that. We as a committee are putting pressure on but we also need to continue to meet people like the witnesses, who can articulate exactly what they are experiencing in such a comprehensive way. I compliment them on that.

My questions have already been asked so I will not ask the witnesses to answer any questions. I just want to say to them that I and all the members are on this committee because we want to be on it. We were not nominated by anybody. We want to be on it. That is our strongest motivation. I would also say to Ms Dennehy not to lose hope. Sometimes we find that we cannot make progress, and it is going to be a struggle to make progress, but this committee has a better understanding following her presentation and Ms Levin's contribution today. I thank them for that. I do not have any questions as such, unless someone wants to make a comment.