Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank those who have given testimony on this issue. I should mention I am a former member of the committee on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD. This is an issue that was also discussed there. There are a number of key decision points that are extraordinary to me, including the decision to appeal to the Supreme Court. There is a Supreme Court ruling in this regard. It seems the State, through the Minister for Finance and the board, had been fighting these individuals who were seeking their rights but the board had been expressing very serious concerns. It is part of the culture in Ireland, unfortunately, that individuals have to seek their rights and the State pushes back at every stage. Will the witnesses comment on how difficult the process was given that they agreed with many of the concerns?

I find extraordinary the amendment made in the Finance Act 2020. The witnesses have mentioned there was no notification to the board on this legislation. It is not simply a matter that the criteria identified as problematic were left hanging. These criteria, which were narrow and not adequately delivering people's rights, were included again through new legislation. There was almost a new decision by the Government to make these the criteria for access to the scheme. Do the witnesses agree that such criteria, especially being introduced in 2020 after Ireland had ratified the UNCRPD, was an extraordinarily poor decision? It was a new decision to embed them. The witnesses mentioned they had been very keen to come up with a fairer scheme even if it were to be an interim scheme. Would it have been better if the Minister have engaged with the board prior to making changes to the Finance Bill in 2020? Would the witnesses have been able to engage with him on identifying new criteria that could be applied?