James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This long overdue motion to ratify the UN convention is welcome. I commend my party colleagues, Deputies Margaret Murphy O'Mahony and Fiona O'Loughlin, who have persistently called on the Government to ratify the convention. Ratification alone will not end the systemic discrimination that people with disabilities face day in, day out in this country nor will it lead to a short-term improvement in their lives. Access to respite services remains elusive for many, waiting lists for vital treatment continue to increase and barriers continue to impede people with disabilities from fully participating in our society. It is encouraging that the Government is starting to recognise the need to adopt a forward looking model of disability and to move away from the more paternalistic approach. However, as my party's spokesperson on mental health, it is deeply concerning that the Government's commitment may fall short of addressing the lack of rights for people with mental health disabilities. The UN convention sets out the need to avoid any unlawful arbitrary deprivation of liberty, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty. However, the Government's roadmap to the convention noted an intended declaration on involuntary detention. Liberty and security of the person is one of the most precious rights to which everyone is entitled. Any declaration in respect of Article 14 of the convention brings into question the Government's commitment to improve services for people with mental health disabilities. The UN has made it crystal clear that any reservation to Article 14 is incompatible with the convention.

In September 2014, the UNCRPD committee stated:

It is contrary to Article 14 to allow for the detention of persons with disabilities based on the perceived danger of persons to themselves or to others. The involuntary detention of persons with disabilities based on presumptions of risk or dangerousness tied to disability labels is contrary to the right to liberty. For example, it is wrong to detain someone just because they are diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.

If the proposed declaration is made, questions need to be asked. Why are people with mental health disabilities being singled out? Why are they left behind consistently? Why is the Government keen to disrespect the rights of people with disabilities to equal physical and mental integrity?

In 2013, the international human rights organisation, Mental Disability Advocacy Center, published a legal opinion on Norway's declaration or reservation to the UN convention. It found that the reservation was incompatible with the "object and purpose" of the convention. However, the Government has signalled that it will make a declaration on involuntary detention similar to the situation in Norway.

There is no health without mental health and the ratification of the convention with an exclusion declaration on the rights of those with mental health illness will mean it is incomplete, partly incompatible with the convention and those with mental health disabilities will be sidelined. The Minister of State referred to certain reservations, declarations and notifications in his opening contribution. They were not clarified and, therefore, I ask that he clarifies each of them, explains why and how they are compatible with the convention and, in particular, addresses the issue of Article 14. I hope a declaration is not pursued in respect of the article, but if it is, clarification is very much needed.

See this speech in context