Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

If those needs are not being addressed, the legislation is flawed. However, to get back to the central tenet of my argument, that was just one Bill. This is the second Bill and the third is the Comhairle (Amendment) Bill 2004. The idea of divide-and-rule is also a central piece of the Government's argument. Give people a piece of everything and the impression is conveyed that all is being done. By dividing up the resources and the legislative inputs as regards how people will access services or have their rights conferred on them, the Government is just engaging in a smokescreen. This rights deficit issue is a fairly repugnant concept in a republic since they should exist automatically. We should not go around this type of carousel in the Chamber as regards how such rights are defined and properly resourced.

In trying to access their rights, citizens of this State who live with disabilities will have to go through a myriad of legislation to try to vindicate what should be their natural rights. The Government stands indicted for not only failing to properly resource services for people with disabilities but also providing a defective legislative framework in this regard.

If the Government has engaged in effective consultation with the disability sector and the groups which represent it, why is there such constant lobbying of Deputies about the unsatisfactory nature of the legislation? Why will a major meeting, almost of rally proportions, of the people involved in the disabilities sector be held next week in this city to express their unhappiness with this Bill? If this was a truly representative Government, we would not have seen a Bill of this type before the House. Those whom this Bill is meant to serve would have welcomed it had the Government engaged in effective consultation.

Given the personal interest of the Minister for Finance and the budgetary package, there was at least a recognition that resources had to be increased, and that was done, but they are still somewhat short of what is necessary. The Government seems to be missing the bigger picture, however. The provision of the resources for people with disabilities is only part of the picture. In framing legislation to meet the needs of people with disabilities, not alone have current needs to be considered, but also how the rights of those concerned can be conferred well into the future.

It is unlikely there will be major legislation dealing with disability for another generation. Members of voluntary organisations dealing with disability have had to put up with a virtual history of reports. It is ten years since the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, with its hundreds of recommendations, most of which have never seen the light of day. All of them require a particular political focus and on most of them the Government seems incapable or unwilling to deliver.

Given that the coalition is made up of two parties, one of which is prepared to shape itself ideologically to the whims of its current partner at the time, we must question the views of some members of the Cabinet who appear to query the existence of certain rights if they come with a price tag. Of course there is a wide variety of rights that all citizens should have. There are civic and political rights, but there are also economic and social rights. It is in this area that the Government has proven negligent in the day-to-day delivery of services. With this Bill, insult is added to injury on the lot of people with disabilities and, more importantly, their families.

Members of the Government have pointed out some areas of advancement that the Bill has achieved over the original aborted Bill. It is churlish not to acknowledge that some effort has been made to meet existing concerns. However, there appears to be some political philosophical wall that the Government is not prepared to go beyond. It will tweak around the edges and throw a few euro here and there so that the perception seems somewhat better, but it is not prepared to address the reality. The reality for one person in 12, or 8% of Irish society, is that their ability to be full citizens is compromised by the way the Government allows them to access and enjoy their rights. It can be seen every day as regards access to employment, with up to 80% of the disability sector unable to gain such access. It can be seen in terms of how they access public transport — usually there is no such access. It can be seen in housing, in terms of the basic rights and needs that most citizens expect. Most of all it is seen in terms of shortage of resources and lack of infrastructure and a legislative base to ensure resources are provided on a regular basis for the specialist services these people require. The Government can take no pride in putting a Bill before the House and using its majority to have the legislation passed. The Bill changes very little as regards how people with disabilities can improve their lot as citizens.

It is not a matter for me, as a Member of this House, for the Opposition or for my party in particular to table amendments to the Bill. Given the views of the Disability Legislation Consultative Group, this is a Bill that does not need amendments. It needs to be withdrawn because of its fundamental flaws.

See this speech in context