Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I accept the fact that the Minister stated in his reply: "I understand that Gheel has indicated to the HSE ... [that the funding is insufficient] to cover the cost of leasing suitable premises for five hubs needed to accommodate these 24 young people." He has accepted that they have a major problem. Does he accept that the HSE has offered funding at a level that is at least 50% lower than what was assessed on a needs basis by the Gheel service providers? Is he aware that Gheel carried out an in-depth study on the needs of each new service user and its own funding requirements in order to meet its capacity deficits to cater for the growth in autism referrals? This seems to have been ignored by the HSE. It is a simple mathematics exercise to correct the provision of a service.

The HSE issued the New Directions policy in 2012, setting out what is the appropriate model of care for those with special needs and a separate policy document setting out the required provision for people with autism but it has left funding woefully short in contradiction of these new policy commitments. This is the first year in which adequate funding is not being provided. I cannot accept an inferior service to that of previous years for other school leavers. This means that school leavers, in particular, in previous years had the provision of a full service. It is the service provided to the children specifically that is being threatened. That is blatant discrimination.

The HSE has known about the number of school leavers in 2015 for many years, via primary school returns and the national intellectual disability database, and it has not done any planning to cater for the increase in the number despite recent policy documents stating otherwise. I would make the point again that if these were third level students in Trinity or UCD they would have an automatic access to such a service in the autumn, but this is not happening for young people with intellectual disability and that is blatant discrimination.

See this speech in context