Professor Eilionóir Flynn:

In terms of the funding landscape our research on this topic was funded by the National Disability Authority, as mentioned. The funding the authority had available was not specific to political participation or to elections; it was about marginalised communities within the disability community. We were interested in elections so we focused our research on that particular space. Once we have completed this part of the research we are eager to do even more work in this area. Unfortunately we do not currently have the resources to deepen this work and to do more comparative work with our colleagues across Europe, to understand disabled people's experiences of voting and standing for election in the European elections, for example, which is research we would really love to do. We are always open to other ways. We have been very creative in finding different pockets of funding that we can use to do our work but doing this kind of work properly takes time and resources. We are always interested in finding more time and more resources for that.

With regard to low-hanging fruit my suggestion, as mentioned by Dr. Price in her opening statement, would be in establishing access to an elected office fund simply to cover the disability-related costs that are faced by disabled electoral candidates, and which are not currently covered and are additional costs that non-disabled candidates do not face. A similar fund has existed, with various names, in the UK through various elections. That would be an easy win and a way to make people feel "Okay, this is something I can actually do and I can run for election". This could, for example, cover the cost of having a sign language interpreter for a deaf candidate so that he or she can canvass with a sign language interpreter. Those costs are significant and otherwise people are trying to meet them themselves. This is really unfair when that is not a cost faced by non-disabled candidates.

On the Senator's query about Ireland's compliance with the UNCRPD, we could be here all day, even on Article 29. I do not believe we are there yet. I do not believe we are there yet on any of the articles of the convention to be frank. Now is a very interesting time given that the Irish Government will be before the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in September. The UN committee will be developing the list of issues for Ireland as the next stage in the dialogue process so now is a great moment to raise these issues with the UN committee, which will be very interested to see what progress Ireland is making on this point. I would also emphasise that we have had some success. It is important to acknowledge that we have now abolished the provision in the Electoral Act that said a person of unsound mind was unfit to stand for election to the Dáil or the Seanad, or in the presidential election. It is really useful that this archaic language is gone and we welcome that but these formal restrictions were not really the main barrier holding people back from actually standing for election, which is the focus of our work. Beyond that, Article 29 is about much more than just elections and voting, much as we are interested in those things in particular. It is about participation in public life and in political life and there are lots of ways to participate in political life, like presenting to a committee such as this. It is about engaging in the development of legislation and policy in a meaningful way and not just a tick-box exercise of a consultation questionnaire that Government Departments need to do. It is about doing so in a more meaningful and diverse way, consulting people to actually understand their views and take them on board, and taking those seriously in the development of laws and policies. This is where we really have much more room to improve when it comes to Article 29.