Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone for being with us today. It has been one of the most revealing and frankly unnerving sessions we have had. The failure of the justice and penal system to recognise and respond to people with disabilities is quite shocking. In some cases it seems to amount to people being punished because they have an unidentified or unsupported disability or even an identified one. The witnesses' insights and recommendations are invaluable in helping us to prepare reports and hold authorities to account.

Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD, aims to ensure that people with disabilities can make their own decisions. Given that the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) (Amendment) Bill 2022 is being rushed through the Dáil at the moment I will mainly focus my questions on that. My first question is primarily for the Mental Health Commission. A significant source of concern was reflected in the Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth during pre-legislative scrutiny about the lack of engagement with disabled people's organisations, DPOs, in developing the decision support service draft code of practice. There was actually no engagement with DPOs on that. Could Mr. Farrelly clarify whether governance arrangements are in place to ensure that decision support services are engaging meaningfully with disabled people and their representative organisations in the performance of their functions? I refer especially to organisations speaking to the experience of people with intellectual disabilities of mental health services, and neurodivergent and older people.

The Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015 retains the use of substitute decision making but General Comment No. 1 on Article 12 of the UNCRPD took Article 12 to prohibit substitute decision-making. When Ireland ratified the convention in 2018 the State entered a declaration permitting the retention of substitute decision-making. I am curious to know the commission's position on substitute decision-making. If anyone else wants to come in on that as well, that would be great.

Another area of concern is the exclusion from the Bill of people involuntarily detained. The Government plans to leave changes in this area to legislation amending the Mental Health Act. I am wondering if the witnesses would agree that this is unhelpful and stigmatising to other people with mental health difficulties in realising rights around will and preferences. Should the Government address these issues in the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) (Amendment) Bill 2022? Finally, the Assisted Decision-Making Act 2015 is about valuing an individual's will and preference. Do the witnesses have suggestions or examples, perhaps from other countries, of how this can be achieved in carceral settings, be it imprisonment or those involuntarily detained? How do we take their capacity to make decisions seriously?