David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, and the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Defence, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, sent us the heads of the Bill. I think that was in 2012. We called for submissions and received over 70, which were very detailed. We held two full days of hearings. It was extraordinarily complex and very interesting. Everybody welcomed the value of those hearings. We produced a 700 page report on this issue.

At that time this was called the mental capacity Bill. Then there was talk of calling it the legal capacity Bill. I am delighted to see that it is called the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill because the Title of a Bill sets its tone. I congratulate the Minister on moving in that direction. The Bill is designed for people who have difficulty making a decision, for all kinds of reasons, intellectual disability, mental health issues, brain injury, Alzheimer's disease and so on. Some of these conditions are progressive and as they progress the legislation has to keep in line with that progression because at certain stages people need assisted decision-making, then co-decision making and at the end decisions are made for people. At other times people may have some form of remission, especially if theirs is a mental health issue and can come in and out of the need for assistance of some sort. It is a very complex area indeed.

I would like to see an easy-to-read guide to this legislation because the people whom it is supposed to help might have difficulty in understanding what has been produced in the Bill and in the explanatory memorandum. I ask the Minister of State to consider whether she can cause to be produced an easy-to-read document that those whom this Bill is intended to help could better understand. That is important and has been called for.

Central to this Bill is the will and preference of people to make a decision. That must remain central at all times, even when a person can no longer express him or herself. Years ago, when a son of mine was seven, he did not want to go on a Sunday drive. He said "Dad, when you are old, I will take you to places you do not want to go". We have to put ourselves in that position. I thought about it and after a while I was a bit horrified because I thought that might actually be true. There are older people in nursing homes and other places and this Bill really needs to consider them. Their will and preferences must remain central, even when they can no longer express themselves. We may need to consider their previous decisions and other such matters.

I believe this Bill goes a long way towards that.

My speaking time is limited but, as I spent two full days debating this earlier, I do not need to take too much time here. Nonetheless, I want to make one further point. With regard to the office of the public guardian, the word "guardian" is paternalistic and I ask the Minister to reconsider this and to come up with a different title, in particular given the Title of the Bill changed from the Mental Capacity Bill to the Assisted Decision-Making Bill. The word "guardian" grates with me a little as it is somewhat Victorian and paternalistic. It refers to somebody doing something for a person whereas the whole tone of the Bill is assisting people to make decisions on a continuum as matters move along. I will conclude as I would like to hear what the Minister of State has to say.

See this speech in context