Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I apologise for being late. I heard everything that was said in the meeting while I travelled in the car on my way here. To say I did more than hear it would be madness. I managed to take some notes when I was stopped at red lights.

I have spoken to Mr. Harris before about these issues. A huge amount of work has been done by members of the committee. Fair play to the Chairman, who has always given me the leniency for which I generally push. We have had repetition of discussion of certain issues, which has been positive. Mr. Harris has given a really good synopsis of all the points. We could probably deal with a lot of the issues if people were nicer and had good manners. I remember hearing a member of An Garda Síochána talking about traffic calming. He said if people had good manners, we would not need half of the measures. Unfortunately, it is not the situation that people will always show good manners. We need to look at legislation to set in train a process in law. Mr. Harris made a point about charities. If people need something as a right, we must be able to provide them with it. It cannot operate on the basis of whether providers choose to offer a service, which can lead to outliers, whether in a charity, school or whatever the particular set-up might be.

We have talked about the AON process. The workforce planning work needs to be done. We have all had interactions with the Minister, as I am sure has Mr. Harris. Even if we get this right from today, it will be four or five years down the line before we see an impact. A number of the occupational therapists and speech and language therapists who have spoken to the committee said there is no problem with reviewing the AON process. They asked that we also review the provision of therapies, what we can provide in the short term and what is the best means of getting access for people. We all know there are issues in schools. Some of that has been addressed insofar as we will see the provision of more autism units. We have spoken about bespoke approaches and being able to change things. We need to have free flow in schools in order that children can go from an autism unit back into mainstream or whatever suits the particular case.

Mr. Harris referenced the issue of silos within the system. Children may fall under the care of the CDNT or under primary care. Some end up in a ridiculous situation whereby they need a service or a strategy to deal with anxiety, for example, but because they do not fit into a particular box, they cannot be seen. That is not good enough. I accept that we do not have all the people and all the locations in place to provide all the particular services. We need to have a real conversation about how we offer services and what we can offer in the short term, while also ensuring we have the workforce planning and the focus on throughput. Otherwise, there is no point in talking about these issues. A lot of people would not be overly concerned about not getting 37 hours out of the AON if they got sufficient support to cover what they need. As Mr. Harris said, children and their families need to understand exactly what they need to do and the trajectory of the process.

The idea of a plan for life is an important issue. We want a system that is more holistic. A number of witnesses who came before the committee spoke about different systems in America and elsewhere. In the case of a child aged 14 to 16, say, we should, as much as it is possible to do so, have a plan for meeting his or her needs, and that plan should move with people as they transition through life. It should cover every part of the system, from education right through to employment. There are decent pilot projects being run by Trinity College and others but the State services are not in action. We are talking about people's lives. We need to be able to provide a roadmap from cradle to grave. I accept it is easily said. It is a big part of what needs to be done.

There are also straightforward and simple things that can be done. Reasonable accommodation means people should be able to access regular services that are not autism-specific. Going back to employment, there are issues with the grants and how people can apply for them. Some people cannot get the grant or avail of assistive technology at a point at which they could learn to use it before going into employment. There is no holistic approach in that regard. With a bit of sense and flexibility, we could have something better and we could have a real conversation that goes beyond what we can and cannot provide at the moment. I am very taken with assistive technologies. However, we all know there will not be enough provision.

When dealing with psychologists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and so on, particular strategies are developed for individual children. My son Turlough had the odd appointment for speech and language therapy. His mother might go with him one week and I would go another week. We had to do it in the middle of all the other things that were going on and we probably did not take in enough. If there were further engagement, such as via telephone, for example, it would add a bit of reinforcement. The information could be shared with SNAs, teachers and all the others who play a part in the child's life. I am not saying those people should take over the roles of therapists but we need to find a better way to do all of this.

I have made my points in a completely disjointed way. I will not show Mr. Harris the notes I took. He would need a map to follow them. We are failing our citizens. There must be a system from cradle to grave. We can fix services and everything else but there needs to be a broader view. There are positives. We have seen what has been introduced here to make Leinster House a more autism-friendly place, although there still is a fair amount of work to be done. A lot more people are aware of autism and are willing to offer reasonable accommodations. Mr. Harris spoke about the bad-case scenario of people being put off by noise, stimming and whatever else. However, I have seen a hell of a lot more people who have come around to the idea of accommodating autism and who recognise what is involved. That might be because they know someone with autism, perhaps in their own family, or they have just become more aware of it generally. That awareness aspect is helpful.

As per usual, I have pontificated for a long time. If Mr. Harris can take questions out of what I said, I will be highly impressed. I will be even more impressed if he can answer them.