Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. One has to look at this matter in the context of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which Ireland has ratified. When discussing the ratification of that convention, many Members made the point that it would be inconsistent for Ireland to ratify it without actually putting in place the nuts and bolts that actually make a difference and that this would have to be done in a timely way. There were concerns at the time in that regard.

While it is welcome that the National Disability Inclusion Strategy 2017-2021 provides commitments on a number of key objectives, there are areas it does not address comprehensively or were matters remain outstanding. I understand there will be a mid-term review of the national disability inclusion strategy by the end of this year, which will consider ways that it may need to be revised to ensure, as far as possible within that timeframe, a full implementation of the UN convention. That would seem to be an opportunity to address this issue.

One such area must be the operation of the wards of court system. The Committee of Public Accounts and the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality have spent a significant amount of time on this issue. It has been frustrating because the area is one step removed. This is the very point being made, for example with regard to auditing by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Committee of Public Accounts found it is not under its remit, the Comptroller and Auditor General does not report to the committee on the wards of court system, and therefore its members do not have the information to interrogate it. A system of interrogation needs to happen where one can be absolutely sure that it is not just a dry report and one can tease things out. This is why the demand was made for that kind of oversight. It was very welcome that the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality took ownership of preparing this report and it was quite proper that the Committee of Public Accounts did not duplicate that work. Today is the opportunity for us to debate it.

The establishment of the decision support service is critically important. The Minister has said this would be established and work on it is intended to commence in 2020. This will be provided over a three-year period, with a handover to the decision support service for the existing wards of court system. Will the Minister indicate if this handover is intended to be gradual? Money is going into the system, which is budgeted for, and more money has been promised and then it would be concluded. How is that intended to happen in reality? Must the service be completely up and running or will taking on responsibility be achieved through a gradual rolling out or moving across from the current system? Perhaps the Minister will address this point.

While the new decision support system is in line with the UN convention and therefore is very welcome, in reality a four-year timeline for the changeover will seem like a lifetime for people who are in need of a decision sooner. It creates significant difficulties, especially for people who are older and looking after a family member, who usually is a younger person, and providing care. These are not disinterested parties. Is it possible for this changeover to happen quicker? I believe it must be done quicker. What are the nuts and bolts of this process that would mean it could take that length of time?

The Minister will be aware there are legitimate reasons for many people not wishing to enter the wards of court system. Some of these reasons include a feeling of loss of control, areas of secrecy and the exclusion of the person's family members on whom he or she relies to be his or her support. They are key people who make decisions on their behalf and who they trust. As has been referenced here on several occasions, there is also the fact that we use language such as Lunacy Regulation (Ireland) Act 1871.

Other concerns may not be as emotive but are certainly important. The Committee of Public Accounts has written reports on such issues, namely, the financial arrangement and management of people's funds. I agree with Deputy Fleming with regard to the people who have specialist expertise in this area. There are large question marks in this regard and people want to be satisfied about how money has been used, how it has been invested and if it has worked to the benefit of the person who is the ward of court. If there is a doubt on that, which there is, I believe it is legitimate that such doubts need to be fully vindicated. There is no external complaints system for the oversight of the wards of court at present and it is very hard to see how one can guarantee accountability in circumstances where people cannot have sight of how the system is working. The courts can be a very cold place and by their very nature are rules based. We need to see the person at the centre of all of this.

As the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality has examined in detail the issues and has given solid recommendations, the changeover from the wards of court system to the new decision support system, as recommended under the UN convention, must be completed as a matter of urgency.

The courts take quite a paternalistic "we know best" approach when a person is trying to plan the care of a loved one. That person does not quite know what there is to work with and, for example, does not know what supports will be available from the State. It creates a degree of stress that could be dealt with by additional information and an assurance that there is proper management and proper investment for funds that are available. Even having the knowledge of what is available will be important for such persons.

Significantly, the report charts an approach but there is a difference between influence and power. We are acutely aware of that on this side of the House. The power to do things lies on the Minister's side of the House. If one thing was to come from today's debate, it should be a commitment by the Minister to an earlier delivery of the changeover to the new system, which is nestled in the UN convention. It is critical that this be accelerated.

See this speech in context