Mr. Niall Brunell:

The question of national policy alignment was one of the key issues we had in mind when we analysed the Bill. This goes to the heart of mainstream provision. We will really push the message across the next national disability strategy at a whole-of-government level that what the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD, envisions in terms of social inclusion requires mainstreaming. We need to apply that when looking at our delivery of specialist services as well. There is a difficulty in seeking to carve out one cohort of disabled people and then target that cohort, in the absence of wider targeting - if I can put it that way - that leads to a couple of issues.

One is a genuine exposure to legal challenges. We have seen other measures where schemes have been put in place that have not been properly cognisant or properly inclusive, and have subsequently been successfully challenged. That is a risk that lurks at the back of any sort of impairment-specific measures. We also have the principles and policies of the United Nations Convention, which does not look at medicalised terminology in the first place. It looks at a social model conception of disability and Ireland has ratified the convention so that is where we are coming from on these issues. If we take the progressing disability services plan and roadmap, what that has meant is a shift away from focusing on diagnoses to focusing on need as being the basis of assessment. It is about meeting people in all of their circumstances at the time they walk in the door and not ignoring medical diagnoses, because obviously there is a medical element to care requirements, but not necessarily being overly focused or led by them.

The action plan and PDS roadmap are mainstream-focused and very cognisant of the needs of people with autism. However, I think we need to be conscious when we are talking about the bespoke needs of autistic people we need to be careful about what the evidence base for having that conversation is. We could be talking about any specific impairment grouping, asking how the bespoke needs of that cohort are being looked after in the mainstream, and where the strategy is for such a condition, and such a condition.

In terms of how the Government has approached that issue, we know for example that there is significant demographic change going on with autism. We know that there is a very clear increase in the prevalence rates of autism and that requires an appropriate response. That is the evidence basis for looking at specific measures. When we talk about alignment with the national policy we are talking about headline documents in the action plan and the PDS roadmap that are advancing services in a mainstream fashion. We are talking about an autism innovation strategy that is looking at where the specific needs of autistic people may or may not be being met in those structures. That applies to our own documents in terms of service delivery but also at a whole-of-government level in other areas, that for example the Joint Committee on Autism reported on in its final report. We know that there are other areas where mainstream provision either does not properly understand the issues facing autistic people, does not understand autistic people themselves, or is not properly cognisant of how to address them. That is where we are coming from in terms of policy alignment.