Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the witnesses. This has been interesting. I was struck by Mr. Collumb’s last comment. It comes back to that question of choice. It is important to centre choice, both in terms of how time is used and of the priorities in life for the person with the disability. It strikes me that this is something we have encountered in the committee, in that Ireland drags its heels in delivering things and then the area moves on. We are, therefore, still talking about statutory home care. Now, we are moving towards an era where we need to look at statutory entitlements to personal assistance. Having not delivered the one, the other has now become crucial. It strikes me that this is the problem with some of the piloting. While there is a pilot under way, evidence of the important features already has been gathered. We do not need the pilot to see the importance of personal needs assistants.

Instead of relying even just on pilots, we could also look at models being successfully used in other countries. Sweden is one example. There is a statutory right to personal assistants in Sweden. This is accompanied by personalised budget. Is that model interesting? Is there much to learn in Ireland from that model in Sweden where it is a statutory right and is accompanied by a personalised budget?

I have a question for Mr. Crombie Angus and others, on which any witness can comment. In Sweden, it is possible to hire family members as personal assistants.. How do we balance that? It may well be good to be able to hire family members, but how do we make sure that it is not seen as a family carer role but is different and reflects the real, free choice of the budget holder? How do we ensure that control and leadership sit with the person with a disability? What safeguards can be put in place to ensure that dynamic? I was struck by the comments on the problem of privatised private company services. Does an assistant answer to the person with the disability as his or her employer? It is important that such assistants do, rather than them simply reporting to a private company about the services they have delivered.

How important is it to build into the standardised and good practice models clarity as to where direction comes from?

I was concerned to hear that there are limitations on the budgeting. No project will demonstrate everything that might be possible in personal assistance services because they are limited and constrained in their budgets, as Fionn noted. How can we ensure the learning the State takes from those projects will be supplemented by other, perhaps better practice, examples in other countries, as well as from those who may not be in the demonstration project but who are using personal assistance? Has the Independent Living Movement Ireland or ÁT been consulted on the research that is accompanying or will emerge from the demonstration projects? Are they getting to input such that the pilots are placed in a wider context of the collective lived experience of people who have used personal assistance?

James mentioned assistive technologies and their importance. Will he comment on those that can be used to supplement and support personal assistance services and how that can be done effectively?

I was struck by the point about social and cultural participation and the relationship aspect. It is another dynamic that applies to the family aspect. How can personal assistance services support people in their relationships with others? For example, could they support someone to support his or her family members? How do they support people to be a supportive husband, brother or co-worker, for example? Our guests might comment on how we can maximise the positive impact those using the service can have on others.

To clarify, Article 19 is the core issue. I would welcome comments on how personal assistance services, as opposed to merely care, fulfil the obligations of that article.