Dr. Nicky Scaramuzzi:

Although, €64 million is a lot of money. It is giving an awful lot. This is a scheme for life. You have people who improve who are still availing of this scheme. We recently revoked it from someone who had done a marathon. The Revenue Commissioners let us know. I do not think anything like this should apply for an entire lifespan. There is a need to review things, especially with children. The premise is that people are going to be the same with their disability, but some people will get better, other people will get worse and technology will improve things. The concept has changed since this scheme was put together. As we say to people, being disabled in the 1950s was different from being disabled in the 1980s or 1990s. The whole definition of disability has absolutely expanded to include many more people than was the case 50 years ago. We need to build that into a scheme that grows, changes and looks at function. The most important thing to get across today is that it should be about function, not diagnosis. One person with multiple sclerosis can function perfectly well, whereas another person with multiple sclerosis might be in a wheelchair and need a hoist to be transferred. The actual words of the diagnosis should not be relevant. It should be about what a person can do; for example, what a person with a hoist transfer needs in order to be able to get to work as a coder in a software company. It should be about the different things needed by a person who has really bad balance issues.

It does not necessarily have to be very expensive. For the lifespan of a car, people could have an adaptation and be allowed to renew it every five years or whatever period is sensible. That would work.