Mr. Damien Walshe:

To follow on from that, if we take commitments made in the past, through the White Paper, to the community and voluntary sector as far back as 1995, the State has broadly accepted that communities that experience social exclusion and marginalisation need to be resourced to engage with statutory processes. By and large, the State recognises the collective spaces of marginalised communities as the best space to inform policy development. Mr. Kearns is right. We are only beginning to see the emergence of DPOs to provide that but it is absolutely crucial. As Mr. Kearns mentioned, more than €2 billion goes into the disability industry. That industry lobbies for itself; it does not represent disabled people. It can be seen through DPOs that disabled people want to engage with conversations around climate change, transport and inclusive education. Service providers are not engaging in those conversations because they want to talk about investing in services, many of which are contrary to the principles of the UNCRPD. If we are talking about social justice, there is a need to consider how disabled people's voices are heard and amplified. To have that voice heard will mean a commitment to resource DPOs.

A very good point was made around sustainable development goals on ending poverty, having decent work and reducing inequalities. Disabled people face additional barriers if we make changes to our society to mitigate the potentially disastrous effects of climate change. We need to recognise some people have additional needs, for example, around heating for houses. That has come up through the Indecon report commissioned by the Department of Social Protection that estimated the additional cost disabled people face outside of employment. Those costs were estimated at between €9,000 and €13,000 per annum, depending on people's needs. When we look at climate adaptation, there needs to be a mechanism to recognise that disabled people may require additional supports. On the point around social justice, it is crucial to engage directly with disabled people to think about systemic change, whether it relates to housing, transport, meaningful employment and education. The answers to those problems will come from that collective voice.

To follow on from Deputy Tully's point on individual activists feeling exhausted because they are ignored, we know there is collective power in disabled people coming together in DPOs. As Mr. Kearns can show, at a national level and through some of the work we have done locally, there are often statutory instruments, whether these are local authorities or education and training boards, that are only too willing to see what they can do better to promote inclusion and welcome the opportunity to engage with DPOs at a strategic level. That will be the crucial point.

It is important to have leadership on the legislation. The design manual has existed for more than 15 years and has not been reviewed. It is those kind of key instruments that will determine how our cities and towns will be designed. If they do not have disability, equality and inclusion at their core, then inevitably we will have instances where active travel or cycling, which we all recommend and say should be implemented, will have a deleterious impact on disabled people's ability to get involved in their local communities. We know that shared spaces and floating bus stops are dangerous. We have raised this with a number of local authorities, which seem to be keen to implement strategies that are being raised consistently by DPOs and individual disabled people, but they are still going ahead with that.

We need leadership from this committee that states we need a national conversation on this and, if we are promoting active travel, it cannot at the same time be at the expense of disabled people being able to access their own communities. We know some of the cycling lobby groups are also saying shared spaces are not safe for cyclists. They are not safe for anyone with reduced mobility, or younger or older people. We need to get that message out loud and clear.

There is very much a role for our national human rights institute, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, on this. It has powers under Articles 4.2, 30 and 10. Under Article 10, the IHREC can review existing or new legislation through an equality and human rights lens. It should definitely have a look at the design manual for urban and rural space under Article 10, ask whether it is complying with the UNCRPD. We very much would say it is not. It could also use Article 30. If there are consistent infringements on disabled people's rights by city or local authorities through provision of unsafe spaces, the IHREC can carry out an inquiry under Article 30. We think it should. It should send a message out because we need to move on from saying people could possibly do this, or inclusion as something of a soft sell. We say it is a legal right and there are legal avenues for people to explore. Leadership should be shown, ideally from this committee and the Deputies and Senators present, to hold our institutions to account in carrying out the functions they are legally bound to do.