Mr. Gabe Cronnelly:

Regarding the last question from Senator Ruane about disabled people registering to vote, unfortunately, as people with disabilities, we have to go around ourselves to people with disabilities that we know to make sure that they are registered. That is part of the failing. It should be advertised in primary care centres, doctors' surgeries and so forth, where there are people with disabilities, as well as in schools. There are also young adults who are reaching voting age, for example, in the migrant community and in the Traveller community. They are allowed to vote in local elections but not in general elections, so we do not get diversity across the board.

I am sure Councillor Bailey will agree with my point on the means test. Means testing for medical cards and so forth is a stumbling block for representation in politics. One's disability does not change, regardless of what work one does. If one goes into work and one's threshold is above a certain amount, one loses one's medical entitlements. When one loses one's medical entitlements, all one is working for then is to pay for one's disability, which is wrong. It is a violation of human rights. As Deputy Wynne stated, that is structural violence of the highest order.

When one goes to an assessment, one is staring at a clinical sheet. I speak for myself as an amputee. What works for me does not work for somebody else. It is the way that we deal with things. The assessment should be broadened to individualise the disability. That is part and parcel of what the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities should do. This goes across education, school, work and so forth. One must give the person with a disability the tools to be fully inclusive. The expertise they have, due to the challenges they face, should not be dismissed anywhere. Again, I can only speak for myself. When one encounters trauma and acquired disability, one has seen both sides of the spectrum, in going from being an able-bodied person to a disabled person. The current structure for those who are called "disabled people" is enabling disabling. Why are the people themselves who have disabilities not asked what way they want to be described, what they want and what they require? The information should not be dismissed because it does not fit on the page. We are all individuals. The needs of a disabled person are a little bit more complex and we need something tailored to suit each and every one of us. There is something wrong if one has to work to pay for a disability, for example, when one goes over a threshold for something or other or there are increases in social welfare payments and that excludes one from something else. One's disability changes as one gets older, but one's entitlements do not. When a person is younger and more able bodied, he or she can do certain things but as he or she gets older, it becomes harder with a disability as the disability is a bit more degenerative in respect of the person's capabilities. They do not change with it. We must start taking an individualised approach to assessments and all along the line to suit each person rather than using a list that is created by an able-bodied person who does not understand disability.