Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)

The Disability Bill 2004, first published in September of that year but only now being debated, must be dramatically changed if it is to be of benefit to those it proposes to protect. The Bill was first promoted as a Government guarantee for disabled people in 1997. Its predecessor was published in 2001 by the then Minister of State, Deputy Mary Wallace. However, it was subsequently withdrawn following overwhelming rejection by disability organisations and activists.

In March 2002, an expert consultation team was given the task of consulting with all stakeholders and reporting to the Government. At the same time, the National Disability Authority was asked to facilitate meaningful dialogue at national level with people with disabilities, their families, carers and service providers. From that arose an umbrella group called the disability legislation consultative group. After many false starts and promises, the Bill was launched, with much fanfare about the promise of multi-annual funding, by the Taoiseach and most of the Cabinet. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, was also present.

However, the Bill falls far short of what the consultation group recommended. Many of the disability groups want Fine Gael to once again reject this Bill. We will not do so. That would be an excuse to delay it further. One legal expert stated the Bill is the most convoluted, turgid, incomprehensible legislation the person had ever read. Its complexity was intentional and avoidable. If this was the response of a legal expert to the Bill, how will an ordinary person be able to deal with it? It will be even more difficult for somebody with a disability.

Fine Gael hopes it will have the opportunity, on Committee Stage, to insert reasonable amendments to make the Bill workable. Total rejection of the Bill will only give the Government an opportunity to put the problem on the long finger. We expect to have dialogue with the Minister and subsequent improvement of the Bill. If the Bill is enacted as published, many new officials and structures will be put in place but there are few guarantees that services will be delivered to those who need them. Judging by statements made by Ministers, the Government appears to be more uneasy about administrative structures than meeting the needs of the persons assessed.

There is no timeframe for when their needs might be met. Instead of providing for realistic targets, the Bill, supposedly the best legislation for people with a disability since the foundation of the State, is 80% concerned with the State running away from its responsibilities and the remainder is a small attempt to give a little. The complaints system provided for in the Bill is too complex and must be simplified to make it more easily accessible. There is another plethora of officialdom in the complaints process and this threatens to exclude rather than include.

If the Bill is to have meaning, it must provide for ring fencing of disability specific resources. Political promises have been made but if no commitment is enshrined in the Bill, those promises might be meaningless given the Government's past history. The Government has an unenviable record of producing major plans with a great deal of fanfare only for them gradually to be shelved as more urgent, short-term political priorities arise. As evidence, we need only consider the €30 million spent by the previous Minister for Health and Children on 115 reports, not including a further 35 which have yet to be costed. We cannot allow this to happen again. The Bill must provide for a clear statutory duty on all Departments and public bodies to include people with disabilities in their plans and services with appropriate monitoring and accountability. "Public services" in this context should be defined to include all public services provided in the public system by statutory and non-statutory entities.

There has been much talk in the Dáil during the debate on the Disability Bill of massive increases in resources over the past few years in an effort to suggest that all the problems have been solved. Such contentions do not reflect the reality on the ground. Parents often must pay for their children's assessments while others cannot access respite. Restrictions on carer's allowance continue to be imposed. Many carers feel abandoned and isolated. While the new respite grant announced in the budget represents a degree of admission that this problem exists, it is another example of the provision of too little too late from an economy which makes so much money available through increased tax yields. In the recent Asian disaster, the Irish demonstrated as a people their commitment to those in need by giving voluntarily three times the amount the Government committed. Similarly, the Irish taxpayer would support the Government if it made a genuine attempt to deal with disability once and for all.

In putting together my contribution to this debate, I returned to disability groups. I have in my hand a notice for a meeting next Tuesday night which reads as follows:

People with disabilities, their families, carers and service staff need your support. This year the Government are committed to seeing the Disability Bill 2004 enacted into legislation. The Bill as it stands is fundamentally flawed. Since the Bill's publication last year all sectors of the disability community have expressed their grave concern that it contained little of what had been identified as essential for such legislation. The Government asked the disability community what was needed. They told them but were ignored again. What is more, the funding package announced in the budget falls far short of dealing with current waiting lists not to mention further needs.

The circular reflects the extreme concern of disability groups that they were not listened to. People want to see the disabled looked after well.

I cannot help but refer to the disability group in my constituency chaired by Mr. Dan Rogan which has shown the way on how to best use funds to ensure that people with disabilities are looked after. Mr. Rogan has worked closely with Mr. Billy Davey, an executive of the North Eastern Health Board, to use voluntary housing funds to take over a house in Tiernaneil in north Monaghan to accommodate disabled persons. Staff were provided by the health board. It is an example which should be considered in a national context. They have done a tremendous job and I pay tribute to the work of voluntary groups with locals. A number of housing places have been supplied in a tripartite agreement among the voluntary sector, the health board and Monaghan County Council. A great service is provided for those in need.

I mention this example in the context of a meeting I had to attend in my constituency recently. It was not until I arrived that I realised how great a service was being provided by the voluntary group in question in conjunction with the statutory bodies. Approximately 40 people have been accommodated, some of whom had to come to north Monaghan as facilities were not available elsewhere. I do not blame the Government solely. It was shown in north Monaghan that the voluntary sector could lead the way. Every effort must be made to ensure that those in need are properly looked after.

I am sorry the Minister for Education and Science has just left the Chamber. She raised a number of very important issues in her address to the House. She spoke of how children with special educational needs should be given an automatic response and said this approach had produced a dramatic increase in available supports. She said the total funding for special educational needs this year is €628 million, representing an increase of 12% from 2004. I received a letter addressed to the Taoiseach which was passed to me on behalf of the parents of children attending the Holy Family special school in Cootehill. The school is a brilliant educational facility which caters to two counties. It reads:

Dear Taoiseach,

We as parents of the children who have moderate learning disability, severe profound learning disabilities and autism are extremely concerned about the problems arising due to the lack of space at our school. The situation is now one of crisis. Some of our children are being educated in classrooms measuring 11.9 m2 [nine feet by 11 feet] while the Department of Education and Science has stipulated in a circular that class units should have a minimum space of 55.7 m2. You must appreciate our concerns especially when these small rooms also have to accommodate wheelchairs. These conditions are totally unacceptable.

In addition to the school's cramped conditions, there are also pupils awaiting placement in the school. The number of new children enrolled this year has risen by ten. There are 104 pupils at the school. This far outweighs the number of children leaving. We know the board of management has applied for an extension to the school and this has yet to have the funding sanctioned. This to us is a major priority for our children and the staff. In the meantime, the school has applied for temporary rented accommodation that is some distance from the school and which will also bring its own problems and concerns.

These problems include addressing the various dietary and other needs the children have which require the services of the main school. According to the parents, the temporary accommodation will present many difficulties for children and staff. They are not happy with this state of affairs and seek an assurance that the alternative accommodation will constitute a temporary solution. I emphasise the highest possible standards obtain at the Holy Family school. I know many families in receipt of its services.

The letter to the Taoiseach was accompanied by a personal letter to me which I have no intention of reading. As the families are desperate, I put down a written question to try to help them, but am concerned when I compare the answer I received to the Minister's speech. The Minister replied that her officials were nearing completion of a review of all projects which did not proceed to construction as part of the 2004 school building programme, including the school in question. She stated that all projects were being assessed against the published prioritisation criteria agreed earlier this year with the education partners. I beg the Minister of State to accept that the project in question is a special one for people with special needs which cannot be considered with all the others. It will take approximately €5 million to €6 million over a three-year period to finance the project, and that is the reason I mentioned the total budget available to the Minister to fund education. A sum of €6 million on its own seems significant but out of a budget €628 million, it is not that large. If that sum is spread over three years, it amounts to €2 million a year. The Taoiseach visited that school and his presence was appreciated. I recall Jack Charlton visited that school to open a special classroom. He had an hour to spare when he arrived but, having spent a half hour in the school, he cancelled his appointments for the day and stayed until the school closed. He was a complete outsider but he recognised the great service and facility the school provided. I hope the Minister for Education and Science will understand this case must be a priority. The school cannot be treated similar to all schools. If the Government wants to demonstrate commitment, it must address this case.

I refer to other cases that could demonstrate the Government's commitment to people with handicaps. I came across a young man with spina bifida recently. He got a good job in Dublin but then he wanted to move closer to home for family reasons. He was granted a transfer to a town that does not have a bus service or other facilities. One only has to look at the lad to see he cannot drive a car. One does not need medical expertise to see that, but he has been refused a primary certificate. The system is completely haywire.

An 87 year old neighbour of mine has two handicapped adult children. Her family has suffered many a sad bereavement. She lies awake at night worrying what will happen her children when she passes on. She has had great difficulty getting respite care for them for a few weeks to give herself a rest.

I had a case of a handicapped child waiting for more than year in a small school in County Cavan for a classroom assistant. Recently, well into the current school year, the school got word that it would be provided with a 50% service. The Government states millions of euro have been provided for these services. However, that child was in a special language class in a much larger school and had a full classroom assistant for two years. If the service means anything, the assistant should be transferred immediately.

I and others were fortunate to secure a house for a young blind man on his own beside his place of worship and adjacent to the main road where he can avail of the local bus service. He has made tremendous progress but he needs to make alterations to the house. It would require him buying it but, because of a technicality, the county council cannot sanction his purchase of the house. There has been reference to all the developments that will take place as a result of the legislation but I am afraid it will be tied up in technicalities such as this and, therefore, it will not achieve half of what we would like it to.

The key challenge of the legislation is to put right for the future the continuing wrong that has reduced the life opportunities in Ireland of people with disabilities, their families and carers. It is our duty and responsibility in Government and Opposition to get it right. I hope and expect that the Minister will seriously engage with us in this task on Committee Stage. It is not a solution to just say "no". Every amendment must be examined and we must listen to what people with disabilities and their carers say is necessary. We need to take on board their arguments and suggestions and ensure the legislation is the best possible.

The complaints system is an administrative game of snakes and ladders because it goes on forever. This matter must be addressed so that the complaints system is workable and simple. The Minister referred to international legislation in her speech. However, the European Union has adopted methods to enforce equality as a legal right. People with disabilities want legal rights to ensure they do not have to wait indefinitely for admission to facilities and for the resources needed subsequently.

The legislation requires a great deal of work which we must do together. The Bill, in the eyes of those who understand legislation such as this much better than I, needs to be taken apart and put together again to make sure the best interests of all those it is supposed to serve are served. I have dealt with many people with disabilities as a public representative. Their parents and carers do tremendous work and it is not too much to ask that we should listen to their needs. It will not be possible to put everything they want in the legislation but we should improve it.

See this speech in context