Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Ombudsman. It is great to see the work already kicking in. I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Disability Matters and the Joint Committee on Climate Action, where this is also an area of concern. A few of my questions are around the intersection of those areas.

Mr. Deering pointed to the distance that needs to be travelled in terms of public transport reform. Part of that is that question of the last mile and the issue of storage options for transport for that last mile. We need a really radical overhaul of our public transport system. We need initiatives, such as "stop on request", that other countries have to address these issues.

I was also struck during the extensive discussion on electric vehicles by one other aspect of which there was no mention. Many things have changed in these nine years since the motorised transport scheme was suspended and been in somewhat of a limbo. One of those changes is this focus on electric vehicles. It does not seem, however, that prioritising or supporting electrified vehicles, and those could be cars or other types of electrified vehicles for people with disabilities, has been a central part of this debate. I would like to hear some comments on this point.

The other important thing that has happened in the last nine years is that Ireland has now ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD. Under the UNCRPD, it is very much the case that each individual has rights in respect of his or her needs. I ask for a comment on whether this development also points towards the approach of the individual needs assessment which Mr. Deering has been suggesting as a new approach for the disabled drivers and passengers scheme. Again, one of the aspects of the UNCRPD is that there cannot simply be blanket measures. Each person is entitled to realise his or her rights.

When people press for their rights and to improve things, it is sad that the reaction of the State is to shut things down or to go into retreat. It is bad in respect of the context of public trust in their voice and ability to influence the system. Therefore, it is concerning, and not only for the individuals affected. For example, if people point to a legitimate gap in the system, the response is to roll back further. In that regard, I ask Mr. Deering to comment on the suspension of the motorised transport scheme for nine years. One aspect I am particularly interested in is inequality and inconsistency regarding age. This is an issue across many of our systems for people with disabilities. For example, we have problems in our social protection system whereby people at a certain point, namely, pension age, are just described as being "older". In reality, their disability and related needs could then be made invisible by the system. Does Mr. Deering believe that might have been one of the reasons, because it pointed to a wider flaw, for there having been a roll-back from addressing this issue? I ask that because it is a clear issue. Connected to that as well is the issue of employment. There used to be an employment requirement, but I do not think it was often used in practice. Should it be removed from any new scheme?

Regarding the primary medical certificate backlog, which is an issue, we get letters every week about this matter at the Joint Committee on Disability Matters. It is a major issue. One suggestion made is that GP certification should be enough of an interim measure. Should we, instead, be uncoupling the disabled drivers and passengers scheme from the primary medical certificate system, given the backlog and the flaws in it?