Erin McGreehan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The witnesses are all very welcome. I apologise I was not here for the beginning of their contributions. I was in the Seanad Chamber. My first questions are for the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. We are here to speak about rights-based legislation. We all need to take that approach. What are the changes, now that the Department has been restructured and has taken over more responsibility in the area of health? Are we just changing the title? What restructuring is being done? What reshaping and refocusing will we see in disability services in the HSE? Will we have a rights-based approach and what actions will be taken towards that? Currently, we have a hit-and-miss approach whereby a person is lucky to get an appointment. It would be great if we could see what pathways we will take towards the rights-based model.

With regard to the optional protocol, I will follow on from Deputy Ellis's questions. One of the reservations mentioned was with regard to the silo of responsibilities and the responsibility of the Department of Health. What analysis has the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth done on other Departments? It is the lead Department in this area. What analysis has it been doing on other Departments that are not pulling up their socks, so to speak, with regard to this legislation? We have a responsibility and we should all be moving towards it. Mr. Brunell outlined circumstances for firefighters with regard to reservations. Surely, reservations are not a reason not to ratify the optional protocol and those reservations would be dealt with in national law and discrimination would be dealt with under existing legislation, because the optional protocol is the last case. All local remedies have to be taken care of first. If I cannot drive a car, I will not be able to drive a car or a van. If I am visually impaired, I do not have a licence. That is not discriminatory. It is just the reality. If someone is discriminated against, we have discrimination laws. I am curious as to how we say that would be a reservation. Has the Department got advice from the Attorney General or proper legal advice that such a situation would be one where we would have to go through the optional protocol?

I am not sure if the following issue has been taken up with the Department of Education but we as a State continue to use the word "special". Why do we continue to use the word "special" and not just "education"? Some children have additional needs or a disability. All our children are special, if we are to use that word. The word does not match up with the rights-based approach, the model we push for at this committee, or the UNCRPD.

SNAs are critical to inclusive education. We know we need and will need more of them to ensure we have the inclusive education we wish for. What actions is the Department taking to secure better pay and conditions and supports for SNAs, to acknowledge and recognise their qualifications, and to make sure they have a proper career path in our schools and are seen by the Department, given they are outside the Department, as an important part of the school community?

I will also ask about the follow-through of education from junior infants right up to leaving certificate. We all know a child will leave school. Where are the supports for education follow-on and making sure there is a link between a child leaving school and going on to further or higher education? Where are the changes or focus we need to see? I often find that, with regard to these special classes, a child's ambition is not seen as much.

We have to see to it that all children, no matter what additional needs they have, have an ambition to go on to the best of their ability to wherever they want to go. What work has been going on to make sure that that transition is easy and that there is ambition within the education system for children with additional needs?