John Dolan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My apologies for not being here at the beginning but I had read the opening statements in advance. I was in the Committee on Health dealing with disability related issues.

My overriding sense is that we are all fools in some way or other. We make representations about real-life situations. The Department provides material for parliamentary questions and tells the committee about the policy. Nothing substantial, however, seems to move on.

Rebuilding Ireland has a piece about people with disabilities. It is full of strategy, substrategy, process and subprocess, with this one feeding into that one and the other feeding into another. It was telling that it did not mention the 3,919 people with disabilities, the known figure from surveys in 2013, who are waiting for housing. We will tell everyone about the processes, along with our commitments and policies, but we are not going to get dirty and say there is an actual problem.

We have a horrendous housing problem for our general population. We have had the same horrendous housing problem for people with disabilities for decades. The Irish Wheelchair Association, which attended the committee last week, championed and got the first retrofit programme, the disabled persons grant, in the late 1960s and early 1970s. We have trudged along and shoved along since then. That is a sense of the situation.

When it comes to the housing of people with disabilities, is there a difference or nuance between a person holding a primary medical certificate and a person with a medical priority? Are they on the same housing list? Are they weighted the same or differently?

How does the council assess somebody as having a disability to prioritise housing needs? That is a very specific question.

Let me return to the description of the housing strategy. It is stated a template for adapted units for the disabled is "currently being designed" by the council's housing department. This suggests there is none or has not been one. Could we have evidence of the circumstances improving? I acknowledge that quite clear tables have been set out but I cannot see from them that circumstances are getting better for the demographic with needs. I see the numbers concerning different kinds of people with disabilities, the adaptations and the ramps but I cannot see an assessment indicating we are beginning to drain the swamp and that things are getting better, such that the work will be done in five, ten or 20 years. I do not know whether we are treading water. My instinct is that we are losing ground although some extra facilities are being put in. We are receiving factual statistics but they are not being situated in the context of whether we are making progress. The sense of those with disabilities on waiting lists and their families is that circumstances are getting worse, not better. I do not see evidence of an improvement. Page 4 refers to housing adaptation grants for people with disabilities. The table gives figures for the maximum grants for houses erected for more than 12 months and for less than 12 months. If we were addressing the issue, there would be no need to state "less than 12 months" or it would be a much more modest figure because we would be ensuring proactively that developments in the past 12 months are more accessible.

Ms Caroline Timmons and colleagues from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government use language such as, "I wish to assure the committee that the provision of housing is a key priority for the Department." Another individual, perhaps Ms MacLellan, mentioned the competition in regard to priorities. It strikes me that if a Government has said a certain number of individuals will be out of congregated settings by such a date, it will have triaged the situation, decided and indicated a priority, using figures showing what it proposes. Therefore, it should be beyond competition. It is a matter of the Department saying it has considered all the competing factors, nailed its colours to the mast and indicated a date for closing out. God knows, that is what governments do every day of the week. It should go beyond current competing priorities. The main work of the Government is to discriminate and make decisions in budgets and everywhere else indicating what it is doing and the extent to which it is doing so.

There is talk of the national housing strategy being part of a coherent framework. I acknowledge that, on page 4, there is a reference to trends in the right direction. I will not make any particular comments on the Department of Health aspect other than to say over 13,000 young people in nursing homes is the other side of the decongregation coin. The same public body that is trying to get people out is actively putting people in.

Let me focus on one simple point. A small number of children are born every year with a congenital condition or a condition that arises early in life. Typically, their parents have bought a house and are struggling with the associated costs. The point on eligibility or ineligibility is that the disabled grant can in no way help the parents to provide an accessible home for their affected children. The numbers are small. There may be other children in the house. A child might not be living with his or her siblings in a home that is accessible. We have cracked the nut to allow such children to go to local regular schools. I ask all the delegates to think very strongly about some programme that will make it possible for those families to operate as families inside their front doors, never mind addressing the issues outside their front doors.