Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I strongly support the amendment because it is a significant one and its inclusion would add to the legislation. When we are talking about social services and basically services for people with disabilities — I am referring to all people with disabilities — we should reflect on what has been the reality for the past 20 years, namely, that this State has been a cold house for people with disabilities. There have been years of exclusion of this sector. It has been accepted by most politicians in this House and people outside it that for more than 20 years people with disabilities have been excluded. We need to do something to bring them in from the cold to the mainstream of Irish society. That requirement should always remain at the core of the legislation.

When we discuss services and talk about assisting people, particularly people with disabilities, from a very young age, I urge the Minister of State to note that all good practice nationally and internationally has shown that early intervention is essential for people with disabilities, particularly speech and language and other such services.

We must acknowledge that some amazing developments have occurred in terms of examples of good practice in Irish society. It has been proven that where services are delivered at an early stage to people with disabilities, major changes have occurred. I know from my experience in the case of Down's syndrome and from being a parent that if a child with Down's syndrome receives quality early intervention services, major progress can be made in the child's speech and language, reading ability and literacy level and in respect of other such issues. These are important aspects of the debate when discussing services. The recent Special Olympics proved that there are thousands of people here with disability who have had major personal achievements over the past ten or 15 years. If one compares the situation now with that ten, 20 or 30 years ago, when many people with disability were left out of mainstream society, it shows there has been major progress. There are examples in this Bill of good practices that should be developed.

I draw attention to the reality for many people with disability and to the many barriers before them. We need to identify ways to overcome these barriers. We must change attitudes to disability and to people with disability because there is still much misinformation and prejudice. We must recognise and protect the rights of people with disability. We must also recognise the benefits of this legislation are not only for people with disability but for society as a whole. When we discuss services for people with disability, we must keep in mind these key important points.

The services about which we talk in the context of this amendment, including home care, respite care, personal care and social supports, are very important for many people with disability. In the disability sector, approximately 861 people need day care service, approximately 1,014 need respite care and 462 are without any service. Approximately 300 people with intellectual disability are in psychiatric hospitals, which is totally inappropriate. These are not huge numbers. We can tackle the problems in the disability sector. It is not a huge issue.

On the way funding is spent providing the services, it seems to be easier to get money for capital projects than to fund respite or day care services about which I am concerned. Is it a political issue? Building a building, an office or a swimming pool for people with disability is grand but there is always a big problem when it comes to the 462 people who are without any service or when it comes to the 861 people in need of respite and day care. I do not know whether the problem is the management or the way the money is spent within the services. However, these are the issues about which I constantly get complaints from people with disability and their families.

This amendment specifically deals with home and respite care. I emphasise the importance of home care. It is better to have support services in a person's home, where possible, than to place him or her in a residential unit. It is also more economic to provide services in a person's home or locality than to send him or her 100 km or, in some cases, 180 km to get a service. That type of scenario, which was acceptable 20 or 30 years ago, is not on anymore. I do not accept families of children with disability should have to travel from Mayo to Dublin to get services or that visually impaired children should have to travel to the North to get services. How dare anybody say that to a family with a child with a disability. Would the family of a child without a disability ship their child out of their family home from Monday to Friday to get a service? That would not happen in a million years. It is, therefore, unacceptable for families of children with disability to accept this level of service. This amendment raises all these issues. I do not like to harp on the economic issue but one hears it regularly when one raises the cost of services and the question of finance. One then watches programmes on television and sees the squandering of public money.

Elderly people, particularly those with physical disability, can be better cared for in their homes than in residential units, which should only be a last resort for the majority of them. We must put the supports into the community. There are examples of good practice whereby small houses were bought in communities, supports and services were provided and people were taken out of residential units. These moves have been progressive but we need to develop these services and stop whingeing about the cost because the majority of people with disability are sick to the teeth hearing about it each time the issue of finance and to where resources are appropriated comes up. One does not raise the issue of cost when demanding a primary school place on 1 September for one's four-year old child. I do not accept families of disability must put up with this type of nonsense.

It has been a cold house for families with children with disability. As a parent of a daughter with a disability, I know how people had to fight, kick and scream for services ten or 15 years ago. Although I am critical of this legislation, I hope it ends those days once and for all, that is, that we end the cold house for children and adults with disability and their families. We should bring them in, turn on the heat and make them part of mainstream Irish society. Amendment No. 39 is part of that inclusion effort and I urge Members to support it.

See this speech in context