Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the witnesses for their contributions. Ms Walsh said the aspiration is for ordinary lives in ordinary places with ordinary people. My experience is with people going into employment on a community employment scheme. They are afraid to ask about security of tenure and whether they will be employed afterwards because they are afraid to rock the boat. In some instances, informal arrangements are in place and nobody really wants to ask the question in case asking the question brings about a termination, especially if the funding is extended in an unofficial or informal manner. That is not on and needs to end. Everyone has the right to know about their future and if they will still be working there rather than in such temporary arrangements. That is where I have encountered it, working with families of people with Down's syndrome or autism. We need to ensure people are supported to live their best lives, to borrow that phrase from Cheeverstown.

How radical does our thinking need to be? My background is in employment law and in assisting companies with ethical audits to ensure the goods they source do not involve human trafficking etc. Big companies oblige smaller suppliers to overcome hurdles to ensure they are proofed against reputational damage. There may be a template in that. To secure a public contract through eTenders or similar, there may be an opportunity to introduce radical thinking requiring employers to demonstrate they have looked at all their job descriptions and determined how to enable people with disabilities to apply for and secure those jobs. We should do something radical and different and have this in any application so that we are forcing it.

We introduced quotas for female candidates in elections because otherwise it would not happen. We should be thinking about a radical shake-up here. When we consider the marginalisation and poverty that comes with disability, we need to address that for everybody not just the person themselves but also the families who fear for what the future will look like when they are older and want to ensure some kind of security. How radical do we need to be? I want to enable that conversation and I would welcome the witnesses' comments.

In her presentation Ms Hynes outlined that she deals with Departments. I would like her to elaborate on that. Obviously, the Minister of State is obliging all Departments to prepare themselves for the adoption of the optional protocol. She has reassured us that they are all engaging radically. If Ms Hynes has been involved in supporting that, I would like to hear that.

Mr. Kelly's presentation was inspirational and challenging. I love that he wants to be the person to go in and train companies. Is his organisation funded to do that? Should it be? What can we call for on his behalf to ensure that? At the moment we have the threshold of employment accessibility whereby disabled people should not be discriminated against but clearly that is not working. As an employment lawyer, I have been on both sides of the table, on behalf of the employer and the employee. To enable him to command even more authority than he has as president of the ability board, should we require employers to prove they have engaged with the potential for diversity of employment that would enhance their employment as well as having a diverse workforce? Would Mr. Kelly like to see us do anything like that?