David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

—affirming the rights of people with disabilities as equal citizens of the State;

—supporting the recent call by the members of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities for the immediate publication of the Disability Bill and the acceleration of their programme for positive change in the provision of services;

—noting the firm and explicit commitments in the programme for Government to:

—complete the programme of expansion of appropriate care places for people with disabilities, with, in particular, the ending of the inappropriate use of psychiatric hospitals for persons with intellectual disabilities; and

—complete consultations on the Disabilities Bill and will bring the amended Bill through the Oireachtas and include provisions for rights of assessment, appeals, provision and enforcement;

—noting the lack of progress in both areas and the evident unwillingness of the Government to bring in truly rights-based legislation;

—conscious that there is a continuing and growing crisis in the legitimate demands of people with disabilities for appropriate and responsive housing, employment, residential care, respite care, training and education services;

—aware of the number of families under extreme stress and hardship as a consequence of coping with intellectual and other disabilities;

—aware of the incidence of poverty and high levels of unemployment among people with disabilities; and

—believing that there is systemic failure in the practical provision and delivery of support and services to many thousands of people with intellectual, physical and sensory disability and aware that much of the investment in disability services is eaten up by the need to cope with emergencies, and that service providers are unable to plan for new services in any area;

calls on the Government to:

(a) immediately bring forward the Disability Bill; and

(b) at the same time, to convene a disability summit of all stakeholders in the disability movement, each of whom would be entitled to attend and participate as equal partners.

This summit and national debate should be held in public, and it should consist of representative bodies who advocate for people with disabilities, State agencies, including the NDA, service providers, social partners and policy makers, including both Government and the Oireachtas;

the summit, which could operate in plenary and committee sessions, should have an independent, agreed and high level chairperson, and should last no longer than a month;

the Government would be required to place before the summit a detailed set of plans, across all relevant Departments and public bodies, with a view to achieving agreement and consensus on the following objective:

—a national strategy for the progressive realisation of rights to provision over an agreed timeframe, setting in place the capacity-building measures necessary, identifying the capital and current resources needed and preparing a plan to eliminate all waiting lists for services within three years and including:

—a national accommodation and support strategy for people with disabilities, including facilitating liaison between local authorities and voluntary and State agencies which support people with mental illness and the young chronic sick;

—a national process to standardise the application of DPG, including the provision for 100% grant aid where this is necessary;

—adequate resources for local authorities to fully implement the Barcelona Declaration;

—a cost of disability allowance; and

—the provision of education in an appropriate setting with the necessary and appropriate services for children with special educational needs.

I wish to share time with Deputies O'Sullivan and Cuffe.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This motion, which is in the names of the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and the Green Party, was designed to unite, not divide, this House. I regret that in its lengthy amendment the Government has chosen to reject the central premise of the motion, that of the convening of a disability summit on publication of the disability Bill. Such a summit would allow for the examination of the Government's plans to allow for the progressive realisation of rights to services, which is long overdue. If the Government had been willing, it would have shown good faith. It would have proved to people with disabilities and their families that the Government was willing to engage in partnership with them in a genuine attempt to reach an equitable solution. The Government talks a good deal about the Opposition bringing forward constructive suggestions, but the Opposition has come together to put forward constructive suggestions in good faith.

It is deeply disappointing that the Government has resorted to listing its achievements in a self-congratulatory manner rather than addressing what needs to be done to ensure equal citizenship rights for people with disabilities. The "Look at all we've done for you" tone comes through loud and clear. It is patronising.

In the past 40 years, men have walked on the moon, we have sent robots to the surface of Mars, we have seen the end of apartheid, the demolition of the Berlin Wall, the explosion of the information age with the Internet and huge strides in medical science, nanotechnology and so on. Ireland is at the cutting edge of this technology and it has taken its place proudly among the nations of the earth. As the country holding the EU Presidency, we recently welcomed an additional ten countries to the Union. The people of Ireland have created the economic miracle of a stable economy, high growth rates, massive Exchequer surpluses and record employment levels. We have achieved much and have been encouraged to celebrate. In the context of those national and international achievements we have every reason to be ashamed of the fact that in the middle of the fourth year of the 21st century we are still debating ways to vindicate the rights of people with disabilities.

We have no reason to be proud that one in every ten citizens in our country does not enjoy the same rights as the other nine. We should be thoroughly ashamed that in prosperous Ireland, the envy of the EU, television programmes such as the recent "Prime Time" documentary show the stark reality of the lack of basic services for children with intellectual disability and the lack of respite care and other supports for their families. It should be to our eternal shame that in 21st century Ireland, people like Charlie and Ann Cooley can only contemplate death for themselves and their intellectually disabled son rather than leave him to the vagaries of a State care system in which they have no faith.

In December 1997, the then Minister for Health, Deputy Cowen, stated:

It is not acceptable that a parent of a son or daughter with a mental handicap should have to worry about who will look after their child when they are no longer able to care for him or her. I intend to ensure that their fears are allayed.

Eight years later, circumstances have not changed. To be fair, the short-lived Cowen plan made a small dent in some waiting lists, but the money soon drained away and the strategy has run into the sand again. Other political choices took over. Few fears have been allayed.

Last year, this country was awash with colour, enthusiasm and celebration, and rightly so. We all remember it. We "Shared the Feeling" of the Special Olympics wholeheartedly. The opening and closing ceremonies in Dublin made us cheer and cry simultaneously. The athletes demonstrated their extraordinary talents and abilities. We saw legions of volunteers, and host towns went to great lengths to make their guests feel at home. The sun shone, the world was watching and we, perhaps deservedly, felt good about ourselves. It was fitting, in the European Year of People with Disabilities, that we would showcase the Special Olympics and focus on ability, not disability. There was, genuinely, a place for everyone, and we were all assured that life would never be the same again for people with disabilities. To an extent, that is true. The Special Olympics brought into sharp and glorious focus the achievements possible when people with disabilities are given the opportunity, support and resources they need to achieve their full potential. It was not a new message, but it was perhaps better visually displayed. Hopes were high last year; 2003 was a "feel good" year.

The year 1997 was a "feel good" year too. It was a "feel good" year for people with disabilities and for carers and advocates. The Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities reported in 1997. The report was a landmark document with over 400 recommendations. The most pivotal recommendation was the enactment of a Disability Bill to set out the rights of people with a disability and a means of redress for those whose rights are denied. Hopes were high. At last, equal citizenship rights were on the horizon, if not immediately, then surely within a short time. The economy had improved. The lean years were over. Surely the time had come. That was eight years ago.

The commission stated:

This in an ambitious report which, when the recommendations are implemented, should change the world for many people with disabilities, including their families and carers. That is no less than people with disabilities deserve and what they, as equal citizens of this State, are entitled to.

The reality is different. Much of the hope has abated and anger and frustration has taken its place. Unfortunately for many, the world has not changed. Two years since the last Bill was withdrawn, we wait in vain for the disability Bill as another Government deadline flies by.

The Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities took the unprecedented step of meeting again, in public, this year to urge the Government to publish the disability Bill. It expressed disappointment that the rate of change for people with disabilities was so slow. It deplored the lack of citizenship rights and urged the Government in this regard. Unfortunately, the Government, while repeatedly promising to publish the Bill, has failed to deliver. We are told there has been ongoing consultation, that the Bill is before Cabinet, that changes need to be made, that it is a priority and that we will have it some day soon, but not yet. We need to get real. We all know that the main fear of the Government is what it will cost to vindicate the rights of our citizens with a disability. That, it appears, is the bottom line about which the Government is worried.

I remind the Government that we are committed in international law to vindicate the rights of our citizens with disabilities. Ireland is a signatory to the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Through that covenant we are obliged to take positive action to reduce structural disadvantages and to give appropriate preferential treatment to people with disabilities to allow them to participate fully within society. The covenant also reminds us that we will almost invariably have to spend more money to help overcome the barriers. Policy choices have to be made. I say to the Minister of State opposite that we should no longer avoid the choices.

People with disabilities are spouses, parents, children, students, workers, consumers, tenants, householders, passengers, taxpayers, patients, neighbours, friends and families, but they are not treated equally. Unemployment rates are higher, educational supports are more difficult to access and basic services are lacking.

We disable people by not providing the appropriate supports they need to reach their potential. We further disable people by placing barriers in their way. We need to work to release the potential of people, not disable them further. I call on the Minister of State to join us in that task. We want to help the Government in this way. We do not want to politicise this issue.

How can we stand over the fact that only 42% of people with a disability are in employment, half the rate of employment among the rest of the population? Is there any excuse for the fact that households headed by a person with a disability are even more at risk of poverty? According to the Combat Poverty Agency they are the highest risk group, even higher than they were ten years ago? In a country awash with money, it is damning that two thirds of households headed by a person with a disability fall below the 60% median income line.

These figures are scandalous. I am sure none of us in this House likes what they say about us, our priorities and the kind of Ireland we have become. Why, after ten years of continuous economic growth, are disability and poverty still inextricably linked? Why are people with disabilities and their families still marginalised within society? How can the Government claim to rest on its laurels in the face of such stark facts?

The Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities recommended three forms of payment to people with a disability, among them a cost of disability payment. This recommendation echoed the terms of a 1993 UN resolution which said, "States should ensure that the provision of support services takes into account the costs frequently incurred by persons with disabilities and their families as a result of disability." The National Disability Authority's recently published research report into the cost of disability endorses the commission's recommendation that participation should be facilitated. There is no sign of a cost of disability allowance nor any promise of one in the Government's list of achievements and promises which forms the basis of its hollow amendment to this motion.

People with disabilities should not have to rely on the goodwill of the general public. They should not have to try over and over again to convince the Government that, as equal citizens of the State, they should enjoy the same rights and privileges as their able fellow citizens. We need the disability Bill to impose a duty on those who would provide public services to include the needs of our citizens with disabilities. One of those who made a submission to the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities said, "People with disabilities do not want to be pitied, nor do they want their disabilities to be dismissed as of little importance. All that is required is a little respect and basic needs and rights. Surely that is not too much to ask."

This evening's motion says it is not too much to ask. Basic rights and needs are not too much to ask of any civilised, prosperous, grown-up society like ours. It is not simply a question of money. It is a question of joined up Government and of creating for ourselves a more civilised society where we recognise the human rights and dignity of people with a disability and in which we give them the support and, where necessary, the care they need. It is a mark of a mature society not simply to apportion blame or claim credit. We should share responsibility and commitment and work towards a vision and a programme of action to achieve the common good. The common good demands that we vindicate the rights of people with disabilities and ensure that people who are marginalised excluded and under-valued are allowed to achieve their full potential and are supported in doing so.

Despite all the Government says it has done, the United Nations committee on economic, social and cultural rights sounded its worries about the persistence of discrimination against people with physical and mental disabilities in Ireland in 2002. That is hardly surprising when we have people confined to psychiatric hospitals whose mental health would allow them to live well in the community, when people with intellectual disabilities are still living inappropriately in psychiatric facilities, when we have a major social crisis caused by the persistent marginalisation of people with a disability, when our ability — or more correctly, the political will — to accommodate them properly and meaningfully in society is largely absent. For years, people with disabilities have listened to words such as "mainstream", "integrate", "empower" and "enable". It is now time for action.

The Government has nothing to fear from the publication of the disability Bill. Perhaps the Government is playing politics with its Bill. It is unlikely that the Bill, as published, will be the magical solution to all the problems experienced by people with disabilities. Why has the Government postponed publication of the Bill until after the local elections? The Government should publish the Bill and let us debate it. There is no legislation that cannot be improved. I urge the Minister to publish the Bill and to take example from the Minister for Education and Science who, to his credit, will send a very different Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill to the Seanad from that which was first published. The Joint Committee on Education and Science heard 52 submissions on the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill. The select committee had lengthy discussions on Committee Stage and the Minister has changed the focus of the Bill and has changed its title. It has become much more positive. There is nothing wrong with debating a Bill. I ask the Government to publish the disability Bill, bring it to the House and let us debate it and improve it, if necessary. Let us work together. This should not be a political issue but by postponing publication of the Bill the Government is making it one. The Minister for Education and Science engaged with the select committee on Committee Stage and the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill has been improved dramatically.

In tandem with the publication of the Bill and its passage through the House, we need to have a disability summit. This would engage the disability sector and the Government in the implementation of the Bill. It would mean the Government would have to produce another national development plan, effectively a national development plan for people with a disability. None exists at present, as the "Prime Time" documentary showed. This would show that the Government means to deliver the services and that people with disabilities would not have to wait and hope on every budget day for a famine or a feast to fund services. This has been the pattern over the past decade and we must break out of this mind set.

Such engagement would also negate the consistent background briefing which says that rights are too expensive, that we would break the country if we gave rights or that people with disabilities will clog up the courts, spending scarce resources on taking the Government to task. There is no need for such confrontational talk. There is no reason to think a rights based disability Bill would lead to further litigation. In fact, the lack of a Bill leaves people with no option other than to go to court. Three or four of the families featured in the "Prime Time" documentary ended their submissions by saying they had to go to court. Families are being forced into court in an attempt to get services, support and rights. That is not good enough.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a disgrace.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is need for planning and for inclusion of people with disabilities in that planning. There is no dispute in this House about what needs to be done. What is in dispute is when. Unless the Bill is accompanied by real engagement in an action plan within an identified time frame, it will fail. Should that happen it will be tragedy for the disability sector and will set back progress for years.

I pay tribute to the disability legislation consultation group who have worked so hard to convince the Government that the Bill must provide real rights. Its document, Equal Citizens, is a clear blueprint for the legislation and for the progressive realisation of rights. No one expects all rights to appear tomorrow with the wave of a magic wand. However, there should not be barriers to inclusion. It is the political and moral duty of the State to in every way possible enable and encourage independent living for everyone with a disability. I commend the work done by the centres for independent living. To make independence a reality we must create a system that asks people not what they have but what they need to fulfil their potential.

We acknowledge that there has been massive investment by the Government but this improvement is coming from a very low base. The needs are still as great as ever. It is clear there is a lack of accountability in how the money is spent and the Government must address this issue. In the Dáil only last week, the Taoiseach underlined this when he said the €1.2 billion he claimed was spent in the disability sector "must be doing something". There is a clear need to ensure that the money Voted by this House is spent in a cost effective way and, above all, delivers appropriate services and supports to the people for whom it was intended. The Government, the Minister or the Department gives money to the various service providers who then provide services. However, even the Minister for Health and Children recently expressed his concern regarding accountability in the spending of this money. I do not claim that service providers are doing anything wrong but we must know where the money is going. Is it being spent properly and do service providers need assistance in deciding how it is spent?

The Government must immediately make plans to provide the kind of money that will accelerate the necessary change in tangible and practical ways. We need a new timetable of change that will allow people to take full advantage of educational and employment opportunities and lead to real service provision.

Incremental developments, dependent solely on economic growth, will not resolve this crisis. This is all a matter of political choice. Choices such as spending €52 million on electronic voting and millions of euros on Abbotstown or on Punchestown are made easily. It should be no hardship to plan with and for people with disabilities to vindicate their rights.

There is no further time to delay; the time is now. The Government should publish the Bill, agree to the summit and prove to people with disabilities that it has the will and the way to make the Bill work.

A man with a disability wrote the following on the eve of the budget of 1999:

Recognising the daily evidence of the spending power which is now all around us, how long more do you expect us to keep faith with the political process? Given the present booming state of our economy, how much longer are we expected to wait for delivery on commitments made a decade ago? Let us have no more false promises. Let budget day be the start of real, honest and sustained action to deliver on a long overdue commitment.

Has anything changed?

We need early intervention. The CABAS school in Cork, which has been operating on a pilot basis for years, is doing terrific work and needs to be established on a permanent basis. Many similar schools need to be provided.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be easy to begin a speech like this with recrimination. People with disabilities and their families feel let down and betrayed by promises made and broken, hardships and stresses that have been ignored and by a commitment to rights abandoned. Those of us who know families that struggle with the consequences of disability know only too well the pain and frustration they feel.

I do not intend to recriminate. The motion before the House, in the drafting of which the Labour Party participated fully, is, as Deputy Stanton said, about making progress and not about scoring points. I begin, therefore, by urging the Government to consider carefully this motion which not alone has the support of the Opposition but also of a great many people within the disability movement. In a sense the motion represents a sacrifice for them too because instead of insisting on rights now, it points the way towards the progressive realisation of rights. It demonstrates how a consensus might be developed around a strategy for dealing, once and for all, with an area of neglect and disadvantage that has been a blight on public policy throughout the years of our economic growth and prosperity.

Last year was the European Year of People with Disabilities. The year commenced with a protest and ended with a summit. The protest was a solemn occasion when a large number of families from all around the country came to the launch of the European Year of People with Disabilities at the Mansion House to express their fears for the future. Many of us met those parents, as we have done time and again. The questions have not changed. "What happens to my child when I die?" "How do I cope with my child when he or she still needs to be helped to do many of the things others take for granted and I am crippled with arthritis or otherwise unable to do the things I used to do?" "How, when I am elderly, do I cope with the shouting, the suffering, the violence, the incontinence, the emotional distress that my child's disability causes?" "How do I make policy makers understand that my child will need help and support through the many years of my ageing?"

Throughout last year some of those questions seemed to fade into the background as some of the other achievements took over. There was the highlight of the year, the Special Olympics World Summer Games, and the groundswell of public and community support it engendered. The games in many ways reflected a view throughout Ireland that people with intellectual disabilities are an integral and respected part of our community, citizens of real achievement. In the aftermath of the games additional money was provided for much-needed services. Throughout the year there was a form of dialogue on the development of a long-promised and keenly-awaited disability Bill.

At different times in that dialogue it seemed that real progress was going to be made. For instance, following a meeting with the Disability Legislation Consultative Group on 15 July last year, the Taoiseach was reported in the following day's newspapers as saying he was committed to rights-based legislation. A spokesperson for the Taoiseach said he favoured the greater access to courts to enforce rights upheld by the Bill's appeals mechanism. However, as the year went on the language began to change. The year ended with a summit organised by the National Disability Authority in the Royal Hospital, Kilmainham. The summit was opened by the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea, and closed by the Taoiseach, both of whom made long speeches and managed to avoid mentioning the previous explicit commitment to rights-based legislation. By the end of the European year the term "rights" had disappeared entirely from the Government lexicon and had been replaced by phrases such as "positive action measures" and "cross-cutting policies".

Throughout the European Year of People with Disabilities, waiting lists for essential services across all forms of disability remained almost stagnant. There is no need for me to repeat the figures here. What must be stressed again and again is that despite the huge level of community support for people with disabilities, they continue to be neglected at every level of public policy. The hallmarks of public policy have been insufficient resources, no strategic thinking, no planning and no political commitment to rights. Government Ministers, when they speak of the issue of disability, now refer to an annual investment of a €1 billion. From where did this figure come and how is it made up? Is the Government lumping together direct income payments, tax allowances, capital investment in access to public buildings and so on to make up a figure that looks far larger than it actually is? The truth is that no service-providing agency in Ireland in any area of disability service is able to plan for the future. Every service-providing agency is dealing with emergencies and only emergencies. None have been able to offer new places in residential care, training, education or sheltered or other forms of employment.

There are so many different forms of disability that affect life in so many ways and the response of Government and the community must be multifaceted. That was the reason for the establishment of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities — the majority of the members of which had a disability — under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice Flood, the first time such a body had ever been established in Ireland.

As Members are aware, the commission made 402 recommendations, many of which have been implemented in one form or another in the intervening years. Its core recommendation, however, has been at the heart of the disability movement's struggle. It is noteworthy that members of the commission saw fit to come together last month to remind us that the commitment to rights-based legislation has still not been honoured. Why is that so? Why has it proven so difficult to make progress on this objective to which every party in this House is committed and which is explicitly promised in the programme for Government? The first answer is to be found in a quotation from Towards Equal Citizenship, a booklet published by the Government in early 2000 which reviewed the progress made in implementing the commission's recommendations. In terms of the legal entitlement to assessment and a statement of needs, it states:

The Department of Finance cannot accept these recommendations which imply the underpinning by law of access to and provision of services for people with disabilities as a right. This right, if given a statutory basis, would be prohibitively expensive for the Exchequer and could lead to requests from other persons seeking access to health and other services without regard to the eventual cost of providing these services.

Put simply, the Department of Finance, then and now, views people with disabilities as some sort of appalling vista. It believes any concept of rights for people with disabilities will bankrupt the State; any notion that a woman with a brain-injured husband should have an automatic right to our support is, apparently, a threat to our national security; and any idea that an adult with an intellectual disability should have our support to live as independently as possible is seditious. However, the people of Ireland hold a different view to that of the Department of Finance on such matters. None of that is true. The introduction of a comprehensive set of rights for people with disabilities would not bankrupt the State, it would challenge the system to respond appropriately and not before time.

It is because so much time has passed and because the system has failed to respond that the Labour Party, with the Green Party and Fine Gael, proposes the motion before the House tonight. We all know, though the Government will still not admit it, that no comprehensive set of rights will be enacted by this Government. For ideological and political reasons, it has decided to add it to the list of broken promises. That need not happen. The Opposition believes real progress will be made if the Government is prepared to sit down with people with disabilities, their advocates and families, and public bodies in this area and to treat them all as equal partners in the development of a comprehensive strategy. People with disabilities have long since come to the view that rights will not happen overnight.

The greatest insult they have been offered is the often-repeated assertion by Ministers that if they are granted rights, they will spend all their time running to the courts. Surely the time has come for all the points scoring, evasion and broken promises to stop. A proper, meaningful engagement, built around the twin concepts of progressive realisation of rights and an agreed strategy to put resources in place, is the best way forward. On behalf of the Labour Party I commend the motion to the House.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One rarely encounters despair on the doorsteps anymore; one encounters anger, frustration and unhappiness. However, when one encounters the parents of a child with a disability one often then encounters despair. It is in their eyes and in their inability to articulate the depth of anger, depression and despair they experience in caring for a loved one. That despair will be there until there is rights based legislation on the Statute Book.

Those who care for a loved one with a disability are locked into a cycle of care 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. They are locked by a padlock of dependency. For many, there is no way out of that cycle. We must offer hope to them.

I am all too well aware of the issue of disability as I have a younger sister who has a disability. She has seven siblings and we were able to help with her care so there was not an onus on our parents. Our family was fortunate enough not to be in a poverty cycle when caring for her. She is fortunate enough to live in a Camphill community in County Kilkenny. She is privileged to be there but that should not be the case. It should not be a matter of luck or having a family with resources. It should be a right. That right has been denied to many people in Ireland today. The reality for many is to be institutionalised. The reality for many is poverty. The reality for many is despair.

Why is the Government raising false hopes by saying the legislation will be before the House imminently, in the spring, in the autumn, in the next spring and now perhaps in the summer. Why raise those false hopes for so many people? Why is there a sliding date for the publication of the legislation? Why is there no financial commitment? If strong legislation is to be enacted, why is Deputy McCreevy, the Minister for Finance, not putting the money aside to ensure the legislation will have some clout and weight?

My colleague spoke of references to prohibitive expenses by the Department of Finance. Why is it that after the lull in the Celtic tiger economy, it is the least well-off in society who are deemed to be those who will have to wait a little longer? There should be different priorities in 21st century Ireland.

Why did Deputy Kirk have the audacity to say last week at the Disability Federation of Ireland conference in Croke Park that there should not be rights because of the danger of clogging up the courts? He said that at a gathering of carers of people with a disability.

The Green Party asks the Government to introduce strong legislation to ensure that people do not take recourse to the courts, to ensure that people are given the rights that have been denied them for so long. For years voluntary bodies and community networks have been doing Trojan work in the area of disability. I am humbled by their commitment, determination and progress. Unless that legislation enshrines those rights in law, that legislation is empty and seriously deficient.

Article 1 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights states: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights states in Articles 11, 12 and 13, that everyone has the right to an adequate standard of living, including housing; the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; the right to education. It is difficult to believe that Ireland, as a signatory to this convention, has failed its most vulnerable citizens by not ensuring their access to all those rights.

The disability allowance is currently one third the average industrial wage and I question that standard of living. I agree with the recommendations that disability allowance should be benchmarked at 50% of the average industrial wage, which would amount to a payment of more than €250 per week. Many people are subsisting on one third of that sum. According to the ESRI, more than half of all households headed by an ill or disabled person are living at or below the 60% poverty line. Just because a person is disabled does not mean he eats less, wants less desirable things, or uses less heat than others. The Government must believe this is the case because why else would it provide an allowance for persons with disabilities that is less than one third the average industrial wage?

The issue of housing must be addressed. New buildings must be fully accessible and prepared for a lifetime of living. I am not convinced that enough attention is being paid to those considerations. I am not convinced that enough attention is being paid to the issue of enforcement, to ensure that buildings are being built which are truly accessible to people with disabilities. On the question of retrofitting and making existing buildings accessible to those with disabilities, some local authorities have ceased to accept applications for the disability grant. Why would a Government put its signature to a convention that promotes these very basic requirements and yet deny people access to those rights? A house which cannot be accessed and is not prepared for one's needs is not truly a home.

Whether it be education, housing, an adequate standard of living or health, two vital ingredients are required to ensure that people with disabilities can meet their needs: they are funding and support. That commitment is required from Government.

Collective responsibility is required from all Departments to ensure that people with disabilities are fully supported in all aspects of life. A centralised records system to link health and education is required to ensure information is available on the needs of people with disabilities. There are no available statistics on the number of child carers in Ireland. A comparative study of practices, resources and support mechanisms in other countries is required.

I pay tribute to the disability legislation consultation group. It has provided a list of priorities and a blueprint for what is required in the legislation. I call on the Government to act without delay and not to make empty promises about legislation being imminent, in the spring, next month, early in the next session. I ask the Government to put the funding and legislation in place to ensure that those with disabilities are recognised as human beings with the rights due to any citizen in Irish society.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

" —endorses the Government's intention to circulate a Disability Bill to the Oireachtas as soon as possible to support and underpin participation by people with disabilities in society;

—notes that the Bill will, among other things:

—establish systems for assessment of need, service provision, and redress, including enforcement;

—facilitate access to public buildings, services and information;

—include a statutory basis for six key sectoral plans in the areas of the built environment; passenger transport, including marine transport; services to be provided by the health boards; social services including advocacy and sign language interpretation services; and training and employment services;

— limit the use of genetic data;

—put targets for the employment of people with disabilities in the public service on a statutory basis; and

—provide for a Centre for Excellence in Universal Design;

—acknowledges the complexity and cross cutting nature of the issues involved in preparing the Disability Bill;

—recognises the value of the Government's broad ranging consultation process with the disability sector, particularly through the DLCG, a group representative of people with disabilities, their families, carers and service providers;

—recognises the need for the further development of services to people with intellectual, physical and sensory disabilities, autism and mental illness and commends the actions taken by this Government and the former Government since 1997 in meeting this commitment, which include the allocation of additional funding of approximately €733 million;

—approves the Government's commitment to put in place an enhanced level of health service provision in line with the programme for Government;

—notes that the Government is committed to working with all stakeholders to providing the maximum support to people with disabilities in accessing vocational training and employment services, and ensure that people with disabilities get every opportunity possible to reach their full potential in the open labour market thereby increasing their independence and allowing them to play their full part in the world of work;

—commends Government policy on the mainstreaming of vocational training and employment service provision to people with disabilities involving:

—developing the skills of people with disabilities to enable them to access employment;

—stimulating awareness amongst employers of the contribution which people with disabilities can make to their businesses and encouraging companies to more actively consider recruiting people with disabilities; and

—providing specific employment supports for people with disabilities and employers;

—welcomes the fact that FÁS helped over 3,000 people with disabilities to find employment and over 1,900 people placed in training, in 2003;

—acknowledges the achievements of the Government in introducing action plans for social and affordable housing for the period 2004-2008 that will make provision for the responses of each local authority in relation to their social and affordable housing programmes including the elderly and persons with a disability;

—notes the significant improvement of the funding and conditions relating to the disabled persons grant scheme since 1998:

—the maximum grant has doubled from €10,158 to €20,320;

—increased levels of demand with expenditure on scheme increasing from €13 million for 2,455 grants in 1998 to €50 million for 5,739 grants in 2003;

—welcomes the substantial growth in the resources which are directed towards the education of children with disabilities in the form of more than 200 extra learning support teachers, more than 2,400 extra resource teachers and an extra 1,000 special needs assistants, when compared with the levels employed in 1998;

—welcomes the framework being put in place by the Government to underpin the equal participation by people with disabilities in Irish society including:

—the proposed Disability Bill;

—the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2003 which is currently at Report Stage in the Dáil;

—the Comhairle (Amendment) Bill which is being prepared in the Department of Social and Family Affairs in relation to the provision of advocacy services;

—sectoral plans for key public services; and

— equality legislation to be updated by the Equality Bill, 2004 which is currently at Second Stage in the Dáil."

The proposed motion is very broad-ranging, and covers legislative proposals, policy development, service provision and some of the social, family and personal difficulties which undoubtedly arise for certain people with disabilities. I propose to deal with the issues as they relate to the disability Bill and the framework for disability service provision. Other speakers will cover the range of issues that span the roles of several other Departments. I will focus on how Government policy has developed in recent years to effectively promote and safeguard the right of people with disabilities to equal treatment and how our current strategy will enhance the infrastructure for service delivery, improve accessibility and introduce a number of related positive actions.

Deputies will be aware of the Government's commitment to prepare a disability Bill which will support the social inclusion of people with disabilities. This was spelt out clearly in An Agreed Programme for Government which states that the Government will "complete consultations on the Disabilities Bill and will bring the amended Bill through the Oireachtas and include provisions for rights of assessment, appeals, provision and enforcement." The intention is to give statutory effect to a range of important policies as they relate to people with disabilities, establish systems for assessment of need and service provision and specify appropriate administrative infrastructure.

The Bill will also address other important issues, including access to public buildings, information and mainstream public services, the use of genetic testing data, positive action for public service employment and the concept of universal design. The Bill will provide a statutory basis for sectoral planning regarding services of particular importance to people with disabilities, namely, transport, training and employment, health and personal social services, social welfare, advocacy and physical infrastructure.

The Government has progressively advanced the disability equality agenda in recent years, building on the conclusions of the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities of 1996. To date, there have been three important phases in the process. First, the enactment of anti-discrimination legislation and, second, the mainstreaming of service delivery for people with disabilities. The third phase in the process centres on strengthening service delivery and involves the preparation of a broad-ranging positive action framework, one element of which is the disability Bill.

In the course of recent debate on disability issues, people may to some extent have lost sight of how the measures taken since the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities compare with what the commission recommended. Listening to some commentators, one might be inclined to conclude that no action had been taken to follow up on the commission's work. This impression has been reinforced by recent calls to introduce the disability legislation recommended by the commission. To put the record into some perspective, much of the central focus of the commission's recommendations was for legislation that would eradicate discrimination against people with disabilities. The legislation sought by the commission would outlaw discrimination with particular reference to the provision of services by State and semi-State bodies, private amenities which offer services to the public, the insurance industry as well as in employment and education. The overall thrust of the commission's legislative recommendation was to ensure that discrimination was outlawed and that effective sanctions against any attempted discrimination would be introduced.

While it is true that no legislation has been enacted which has addressed disability discrimination only, Deputies are well aware that strong multi-ground employment equality and equal status legislation has been in place since 1998 and 2000, respectively. It is in this context that many of the recommendations of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities have already been realised. The legislation is among the most advanced in Europe and pre-dates recent EU directives which can be expected to enhance equality legislation in many European countries.

Under the Employment Equality Act 1998 and the Equal Status Act 2000, people who are discriminated against on the grounds of disability or any one of eight other grounds have a statutory right of redress. The equality infrastructure which supports this right comprises two elements, namely, the Equality Authority whose role is to work towards the achievement of equality of opportunities and the elimination of discrimination, and the Equality Tribunal which makes determinations regarding complaints of discrimination and offers mediation in suitable cases.

Some relevant statistics indicate that the equality infrastructure is well used and recognised. In 2003, for instance, complaints on disability grounds accounted for approximately 10% of cases referred to the Equality Tribunal. It is interesting that the numbers of cases referred under the Equal Status Act were nearly double those for employment equality issues. This reflects the fact that employment rights have been widely recognised for some time. In addition, the right to equal treatment in the provision of goods and services is being more actively pursued and receiving appropriate support from statutory bodies.

The enactment of our anti-discrimination legislation was followed in 2000 by the launch by the Taoiseach of a mainstreaming approach to disability service delivery. In this context, mainstreaming means the delivery of service for people with disabilities by public bodies which provide the service for everybody else. The approach replaced a service delivery model which bore the hallmarks of separation and segregation with one that seeks to focus on the integration of services for people with disabilities with the generality of public service provision.

It is worth noting that the mainstreaming principle has been carried through in the preparation of the proposed disability Bill. This work, perhaps more than any other legislation in the past, has required the active and concentrated engagement of a range of Departments, focusing specifically on the most effective ways to enhance mainstream service delivery and support access for people with disabilities.

I note the motion proposed by the Opposition calls for a form of consultative summit on disability issues. Extensive consultations have taken place with representatives of the disability sector about the disability Bill. The Bill is a proposal for legislation and, like other legislation, it is the intention of Government to present it to the Houses of the Oireachtas for debate by elected representatives in the usual manner. I remain to be convinced that the normal legislative process will not provide the appropriate forum for the required debate on the disability Bill.

The disability Bill is part of the present phase of policy development the Government is undertaking to further advance participation in society by persons with disabilities. Recalling the collaborative work of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, the Government has established and maintained close consultation with the disability sector during the preparation of the legislative proposals. In April 2002, an expert consultation team of experts in legal, economic and social affairs was appointed to oversee the consultation process. The team met stakeholders, including the Disability Legislation Consultation Group, the social partners, the community and voluntary sector and relevant Departments and received their views before completing its task in February 2003.

The Disability Legislation Consultation Group is an organisation representative of people with disabilities, their families, carers and service providers which was brought together by the National Disability Authority to facilitate dialogue at national level within the sector and with the Government.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Minister listening to the families?

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In February 2003, the DLCG presented the document, Equal Citizens — Proposals for Core Elements of Disability Legislation. Last year, the group had meetings with a number of members of the Government, including the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and Ministers of State, Deputies Tim O'Malley and O'Dea. Earlier this year, meetings were held between officials and the DLCG at which the group was given an outline of the proposals for legislation. Its views on these proposals were discussed and noted for consideration by the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion which has been tasked by Government with oversight of the Bill in view of its cross-cutting and complex nature. Contact is continuing between the DLCG and the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Why can the Government not publish the Bill?

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should listen to the families.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputies should allow the Minister to continue without interruption.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Much of the discussion about the Bill has centred on a demand for rights-based legislation. Some argue that the legislation must provide access to the courts for the adjudication of individual cases. It has also been forcefully presented that both the needs assessment process and service provision should be free of resource constraints.

At one of the meetings with the DLCG last year, the Taoiseach commented that a more productive dialogue on rights is possible if there is recognition of the complexity of the issues and the relationship between rights and standards. A right of redress in the event of discrimination and well established promotional and redress structures are available in Ireland.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The courts.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The issue proposed in some quarters goes beyond equal access and suggests that individual rights to particular State services should be laid down in law. The Government is entirely supportive of measures to facilitate social inclusion. However, I do not believe an uncritical acceptance of a right to services approach would realise the outcome which all concerned would like to see.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister can speak for himself.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This issue aside, there are considerable commonalities between the Government approach and the range of issues proposed in the DLCG document, Equal Citizens.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How does the Minister reconcile his statement that he does "not believe an uncritical acceptance of a right to services approach would realise the outcome which all concerned would like to see" with the following statement by a parent on television last week, "I can't die and leave that boy behind because I don't know what's going to happen," and the comments of other parents who said they may have to commit suicide and kill their children as well because they cannot leave them to the vagaries of the State?

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am interested in ensuring everybody who has these problems are dealt with appropriately and effectively without wasting resources in litigation.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not happening.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This issue is not about litigation.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the thousands of euro being wasted on legal cases?

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will stand over the Government's record against the shameful, disgraceful record of Labour and Fine Gael in government when they had the opportunity to do something about this but failed to do so.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

These people are being forced into the courts.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Labour and Fine Gael cut funding.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is completely untrue.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People are being forced into the courts.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is the answer to everything.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A central element in a programme to assure equitable service provision for people with disabilities is the assessment of their individual needs. I agree with the view put forward by the DLCG that assessment of need must be independent and that means of complaint, appeal and enforcement are an essential part of that process.

The disability Bill will put effective systems for assessment and redress in place. We have sought to find a way to allow for an effective and independent assessment in framing the Bill. At the same time, we intend to establish a framework that will focus available resources on the provision of services that are most needed.

I am concerned that people with disabilities get the services they need. I am also concerned that levels of service provision are expanded over time so that they respond to identified needs. The Bill will require that each person assessed is provided with a statement of the individual health, personal social service and education services that can be delivered and an indication of the timeframe for their delivery. The Bill will also require that aggregate information about the contents of assessments axed service statements is prepared as a basis for service planning. The contents of individual service statements and the capacity to plan for the development of services are directly linked to the available resources and to political decisions about competing service priorities.

Comparative research published by the Economic and Social Research Institute last year is interesting. The research compared the scenario in other countries, which, like Ireland, have a legal structure based on common law, namely, the US, Australia, New Zealand, the UK and Sweden. The research indicated that even where a person has a right to assessment of their needs, this does not automatically lead to the provision of all the services involved or having the provision of those services enforced by the courts. Each country surveyed has pursued a path that takes account of its individual legal, political and administrative structures.

The disability Bill is part of a comprehensive framework, which will, over time, produce significant positive advances for people with disabilities. Other elements of the framework include the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill 2003, which is awaiting Report Stage in the Dáil — like the disability Bill, this measure provides for an individualised approach to assessment and support services and the Comhairle (amendment) Bill, which will establish advocacy services for people with disabilities and will be published by the Minister for Social and Family Affairs at the same time as the disability Bill.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When?

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The principle of facilitating people with disabilities to speak in their own voice is of vital importance and the provision of advocacy services will be particularly significant. Sectoral plans for key public services will be published in draft form and I anticipate they will provide an important element in planning future services. Each Department concerned will facilitate consultation before each plan can be finalised for submission to the Oireachtas. I look forward to much constructive consultation and debate in this regard. This is a further illustration of the Government's commitment to adequate consultation and debate.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Consultation means the Government listens.

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The latest element of the framework is the Equality Bill 2004 which updates our existing advanced equality laws to ensure full compliance with EU directives.

I have no doubt about the significant challenge to put in place the framework to enhance service delivery for people with disabilities. The framework is broad, dealing with health, education, employment, advocacy, physical access to buildings and transport. The Government is conscious of the complexity and cross-cutting nature of the issues involved and, to support ministerial engagement throughout the process, referred oversight of the Bill and other elements of the framework to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion. The Government and the Cabinet committee are paying particular attention to the Bill and the views emerging through the consultation process. The Bill will be published as soon as the Government has completed its work.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When will that be?

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Minister a date?

Michael Smith (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have made and continue to make significant progress in advancing the disability equality agenda. I am confident the disability Bill will introduce the systems and structures which will effectively advance the agenda further. The Bill will demonstrate that Ireland can be among the most progressive of its European neighbours. It will establish a statutory basis for assessment, service provision and the infrastructure to effectively deliver key services to those who need them most.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government's commitment to producing a disability Bill was part of the programme agreed with the social partners in Sustaining Progress, and that commitment will be met. The concept of partnership which underpins various national agreements has also been a feature of the preparation of this Bill, which has as its focus the participation of people with disabilities in society. It was acknowledged in Sustaining Progress that "the proposed legislation will require an integrated and concerted cross-departmental approach and action" and this is the principle on which preparation of the Bill has been based. This process has, by its nature been complex and time-consuming, but the time spent in drawing together the different strands of public service activity administered by different Departments will pay dividends in the longer term.

The disability Bill will give statutory effect to a range of important policies as they relate to people with disabilities and will establish systems for assessment of need and service provision as well as specifying the infrastructure for their delivery. The Bill needs to be viewed in the context of the overall framework of measures which are being put in place to reinforce existing disability equality structures. Essential elements in the progress achieved to date have been the enactment of anti-discrimination legislation and the mainstreaming of services for people with disabilities. The current stage of development involves strengthening service delivery through the preparation of a wide-ranging positive action framework, one element of which is the disability Bill.

The legislation will underpin the principle of mainstreaming and provide for positive action measures to remove barriers to equal participation for people with disabilities. It will, as the Government promised in An Agreed Programme for Government, include provisions for rights of assessment, appeals, provision and enforcement. The Bill will establish systems for assessment of need and service provision and specify infrastructure for policy delivery and redress. The Government is convinced of the importance of effective redress mechanisms if services committed in the Bill are not delivered. Statute-based complaints anal appeals structures will be provided.

The Bill will legislate for an independent assessment process giving individuals a right to a needs assessment which would be undertaken without regard to resources. This will be a significant achievement and will benefit individuals in the first place by providing a full picture of their needs while at the same time benefiting future planning of services. As the Minister for Defence stated, the level of service delivery will be affected by the available resources, as is the case with all public services and in other jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the Bill will provide important structures, which will improve the way we approach the resourcing of services for people with disabilities and support and drive the development of capacity over time. It will also provide the basis for a co-ordinated approach to service development and delivery for persons with disabilities. As Deputies would also expect, the Bill will address access issues, particularly in respect of public buildings, services and information for people with disabilities. It is important that public service providers should demonstrate best practice as a model for other sectors of the economy.

The standards for access and mainstream service provision required in the Bill will be founded on National Disability Authority's codes of practice. There have been improvements in the accessibility of public services since the enactment of equality legislation. The provisions of the Bill in this area will act as a driver of change in a programmatic way. In addition, it can be expected that sectoral plans will set out a range of actions to make public transport and physical infrastructure accessible, as well as the enhancement of disability-specific health, social welfare and employment services.

Since the introduction of a mainstreaming approach to service delivery for persons with disabilities, training and employment services for people with disabilities have been restructured. Employment and vocational training policies for people with disabilities are now formulated as part of general labour market policy in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. This is evident in the further development of incentive schemes and supports by that Department.

The Government has also continued to support initiatives to encourage public service employers to achieve a 3% target for the employment of people with disabilities. Although not all sectors have achieved the target, some bodies have surpassed it and, overall, there has been steady progress. The Bill provides an opportunity to give statutory backing to such positive action measures for the recruitment and employment of persons with disabilities in the public service. Such provision would build on existing employment targets and foster concerted action across the public sector.

A minority of people with disabilities have certain genetic conditions and in recent years there have been concerns about the impact of genetic testing on their ability to access certain services, which may reinforce a cycle of poverty and exclusion. In particular, this includes data used for insurance, mortgage and employment purposes. The Bill will aim to remove such barriers by including provisions aimed at enabling people with disabilities to access reasonable insurance cover for the purpose of house purchase, for example. It will eradicate certain loopholes that affect these people and enhance opportunities for economic independence.

The Disability Bill 2001 provided for the establishment of a centre of excellence in universal design to promote and support the adoption of principles in universal design, particularly by the key players who design, plan and construct our environment. Such a centre would respond both to existing Government commitments and to best practice under the e-Europe action plan. As Deputies will expect, a similar provision will be contained in the amended disability Bill.

With a broad policy base on the lines just described, the disability Bill envisaged by the Government will become a powerful catalyst for change for people with disabilities. It is important to recognise that the Bill is but one element, albeit a key element, in the framework being put in place by the Government to underpin the equal participation by people with disabilities in society. Other elements of the framework, with which we are all familiar, include: the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill 2003; the Comhairle (amendment) Bill which will establish advocacy services for people with disabilities; the sectoral plans for key public services; and existing equality legislation and the Equality Bill 2004, which is being dealt with in the House.

Let us consider other elements of the framework. The Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill makes detailed provision for the education of children with special educational needs. The Bill is designed to address children's rights under Article 42 of the Constitution, which already entitles each child to free primary education. It establishes the national council for special education and sets out a range of services which must be provided. It includes a new framework for the assessment of and provision for the needs of children with educational disabilities.

The Comhairle (Amendment) Bill is being prepared in the Department of Social and Family Affairs. It provides for a new service, to be administered by Comhairle, to allow for the assignment of a personal advocate to persons with disabilities who require particular support in accessing social services.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister has not delivered. He had two years to do so.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The personal advocate will assist, support and represent the person in applying for and obtaining a social service and will help pursue any right of review or appeal in connection with that service.

It is intended that outline sectoral plans will be published at the same time as the disability Bill. As I mentioned, the plans are intended to set out a range of actions to make physical infrastructure accessible, as well as enhance disability-specific health, social welfare and employment services. The outline plans are under preparation and will be published by each of the Departments concerned to coincide with the disability Bill.

There will, of course, be consultation with disability interest groups and mainstream service providers before the plans are finalised for submission to the Oireachtas at a later stage. The plans will set out a range of measurable actions that each Department is committed to undertaking in key areas. They will, over time, through a co-ordinated strategy for positive action, help remove barriers to participation by people with disabilities in society. The approach proposed would involve presentation of the final plans to the Oireachtas.

The Equality Bill 2004, which is currently on Second Stage in the Dáil, amends the Employment Equality Act 1998 in accordance with the requirements of an EU directive. The key change regarding employees with disabilities is that the Bill will place a duty on employers to adapt the workplace to facilitate their needs, unless such a measure would impose a disproportionate burden. The task of transposing the directive into Irish legislation has probably been more straightforward than it has been for many other EU countries due to our already advanced anti-discrimination legislation. This achievement is generally recognised throughout the EU.

Deputies will be aware that the Government has facilitated extensive consultation on disability legislation, as it promised. Contacts are being maintained with the DLCG, the key group representative of disability interest groups, and I hope to meet it again tomorrow.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It told the Minister of State everything it wants——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should allow the Minister of State to speak without interruption.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There has been much debate on the question of rights-based legislation, the complexities of which the Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, has already addressed.

The Bill will establish entitlements to assessment of need, to services set out in a related service statement and to redress if the assessment or the services are not provided. The Bill cannot ignore the reality that funding and resources are finite. Therefore, services will grow as budgetary and staffing constraints are overcome. This approach is grounded in reality and deals with the actual delivery of tangible results.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is down to money.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government is committed to publishing a disability Bill at the earliest possible date.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is there anything new——

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not accept the allegations of a delay. There is no plot to delay the Bill. There is real work taking place across a range of Departments to deliver two Bills — the disability Bill and the Comhairle (amendment) Bill — and six draft sectoral plans. The issues involved are complex and cut across a broad range of policy areas. The Bill remains a Government priority and it will be published as soon as the Government and the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion have completed their work.

Ireland has a strong record in recent years in the area of disability equality. On equality and mainstream service provision, our administrative and legislative provisions compare well with the best European practice. This is evidenced in the European Commission's multiannual action plan, which supports the legitimate demands for equal rights of people with disabilities, especially in employment. The action plan also focuses on the mainstreaming of services for people with disabilities. The EU Commission has indicated that the major priority for the enlarged EU should be the implementation of the employment equality directives in all member states. These two key future objectives of the enlarged EU regarding disability are already law and practice in this country for some years.

The awareness of our population regarding people with disabilities and their right to equality is ahead of that in other European countries and other common law countries. The challenge we as legislators face is to put in place a well-focused, practical framework to enhance service delivery to people with disabilities. I have no doubt the proposed disability Bill will again show this country can be among the most progressive in Europe when it comes to establishing a statutory basis for assessment, service provision and the infrastructure for the effective delivery of those key services. I commend the Government amendment to the House.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share my time with Deputies Olivia Mitchell and McCormack.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In all my time in politics, the single-most disgraceful betrayal of our constituents has been the treatment of people with disabilities and their families. This has been the great betrayal of the past seven years. It has taken seven long years for this Government to do what it said it would do.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the preceding five years, during which the Deputy's party was in power?

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State's party was in power for 20 years.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's party was in power for five. The Deputy had his chance.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He has had 20 years, including the past seven years.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It cut funding for the disabled.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State should allow the Deputy to speak without interruption.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I hate listening to hypocrisy.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We did not interrupt the Minister of State.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not hypocrisy.

Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State is guilty.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is disgraceful. The Minister of State is a total disgrace.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is hypocrisy.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Minister of State to allow the Deputy to speak without interruption.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This has been the biggest betrayal in the past seven years.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

And the five years before them.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Two and a half years ago I asked the then Minister of State, Deputy Mary Wallace, the reason four and a half years had passed without the House seeing the long promised disabilities Bill. I asked if the reason was that the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, and the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, were not prepared to commit the money necessary to deliver a full needs assessment service for all citizens with disability and their families.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The same as Deputy Quinn.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That Minister called me a liar. She said I was misleading the House. That Minister was dismissed but it turned out that she was misleading the House because——

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about Deputy Quinn?

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——you have had numerous chances to do this. This is one of the three or four richest countries——

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

You had five years.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should allow Deputy Broughan to speak without interruption. If Deputy Broughan addressed his remarks through the Chair and not directly to the Minister, we might be able to control the debate.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The ricochets are hitting the Minister.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is not prepared to address the fundamental issue we seek to address this evening. I recall the disgraceful situation early in this Government's term of office and in the budget of 2003. The Government was victorious in the general election and had an overall majority. It could do what it wished and deliver its programme. What happened? The Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, slashed funding across the board, including for St. Michael's House in my constituency and for people with autism. Unbelievably, that happened in the European year for citizens with disability and the year of the Special Olympics. That is how the Government delivered.

There have been seven long barren years. That is the reason Members on the Opposition benches are more determined than ever to replace the Government. A mini-election is taking place at present. People who meet us on the doorsteps tell us to get rid of this miserable Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government — many of them, perhaps one in six or one in seven, bring to our attention a desperate situation involving the health of a member of the family or of a child or relative with disability — but, unfortunately, we cannot do it, we are stuck here for another couple of years and stuck with this Government.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy's party did as much as it did previously, they are better off.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In 2006, Fianna Fáil will be in power for almost 20 years, with just a slight interruption.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's party had five years.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They were 20 long years.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What did it do?

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An awful lot under the former Minister, Mervyn Taylor.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow Deputy Broughan to speak without interruption.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The most disingenuous statement I have seen in a long time is contained in the Minister's proposed amendment to this motion, in which the Government "acknowledges the complexity and cross-cutting nature of the issues involved in preparing the Disability Bill". It took the Government seven long years to realise that but there is still no end in sight.

There was a conference recently in the Mansion House which I was proud to attend with our party spokesperson, Deputy O'Sullivan. We heard, at first hand, what needed to be done from the representatives of citizens with disability and from citizens with disability. It requires relatively small amounts of money. With your background, a Cheann Comhairle, you would readily accede to these demands but the Government will not.

Ireland is an extremely rich country. It is one of the richest in Europe, regardless of whether one calculates it on the basis of GDP or GNP. However, it is a country in which a small population of vulnerable citizens face frustration, distress, fear and pain. They face these conditions as a result of Government choices — there is no other reason. When this Government was formed, it published An Agreed Programme for Government outlining the choices it was prepared to make. On disability it said:

We are committed to building service provision and legislative frameworks which enable people with disabilities to fulfil their potential and make full contribution to the economic and social life of our country.

We will complete the programme of expansion of appropriate care places for people with disabilities, with, in particular, the ending of the inappropriate use of psychiatric hospitals for persons with intellectual disabilities. [That was another badly broken promise.]

We will complete consultations on the Disabilities Bill and will bring the amended Bill through the Oireachtas and include provisions for rights of assessment, appeals, provision and enforcement.

Today is the second anniversary of the day the Government took office, and none of those commitments appears any closer to being honoured today than they were two years ago.

Every waiting list for essential services is either the same or has lengthened. In particular, the nearly 500 people still living in entirely inappropriate conditions in psychiatric hospitals, such as St. Ita's in Portrane, represent a continuing and desperate scandal. From time to time that scandal is highlighted in a graphic manner. The "Prime Time" programme a week ago brought home to many the stark reality of disability in the lives of too many people. We are aware of the statistics and the waiting lists but "Prime Time" performed a valuable public service by putting faces to the statistics and showing the pressure and the pain behind the figures.

What will be done about it? This is not a crisis that can be resolved without money or without a plan. Above all, it cannot be resolved without the political commitment that finally lifts people with disability from the end of the political queue. That is the purpose of this motion. It aims to involve people with disabilities as equal partners in the development of an agreed strategy to begin finally to address the issues facing them within an agreed timeframe and to address those issues on a rights basis. The situation is becoming more urgent and the longer action is delayed, the more trauma many people will experience.

Many of the people with intellectual disability who are in increasingly urgent need of residential facilities are middle aged or older and are depending on increasingly frail and elderly parents. During the past year an agency in Dublin had to take an elderly man into residential care on an emergency basis. It had to treat him as an emergency because his mother, on whom he had depended all his life, had just died at the age of 102 years. There are highly disturbed adults with behavioural and emotional problems, with which their families can no longer cope, who need to be recognised by the State as citizens with the right to support. However, the only support available to them is a lengthening queue.

Respite care is often the only support given to the families involved. It means an occasional break away from home for a week. It is a break from the 24 hour care which the 120,000 outstanding caring citizens provide for people with disability. It can provide enormous relief for families and a chance to gather their strength so they can continue to carry out their work. The care of an adult with intellectual disabilities, often accompanied by physical, emotional or behavioural problems, such as violence, incontinence, shouting and self-infliction of injury, involves 24-hour commitment and dedication. Disability in a family, in the absence of support from the wider community, can mean heartbreak and despair. The "Prime Time" programme graphically displayed this. The time has arrived when even this Government cannot brush cases such as this under the counter.

It has been estimated that approximately €120 million in extra current revenue, with perhaps an additional €80 million in capital revenue, would make significant inroads into waiting lists. It is incredible to consider that in recent months up to €100 million has been wasted, of which €52 million is represented by obsolete voting machines rotting in warehouses, waiting for an election that will never happen. That money could have been spent on these citizens and their families. If the €200 million I mentioned were spent, it would enable people to live in dignity and comfort. It would enable services to be put in place that would contribute to lifelong education to help train people for work and give them hope for the future.

That amount of money, in a budget of up to €30 billion, is a pittance. The amount of additional spending required represents less than 0.5% of our annual budget. In an era when our public finances are still capable of producing massive current budget surpluses — there was good news for the Minister for Finance again a few months ago — it is our shame that we choose to spurn our most vulnerable citizens. Those who should be our first concern are the last concern of the Government. Even if the money is forthcoming, it will take time to build capacity, recruit the specialist teaching and caring staff needed, put the training programmes in place and ensure that the legacy of awareness created by the Special Olympics and the wonderful atmosphere of last summer is developed.

The Government must accept that the time has finally come to confront the need to treat citizens with disability as equal citizens of this Republic. I support the motion.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion tabled by Fine Gael, the Labour Party and the Green Party, which I support unequivocally. Nevertheless I cannot help feeling a certain sense of futility and déjÀ vu as I stand to speak yet again on this topic. I cannot think of any matter that has been the subject of more Private Members' motions than this and yet here we are again. It is a subject that touches virtually all of us as the spectrum of disability is enormous. If it does not touch us directly it touches someone close to us. Therefore, we all strongly and passionately feel the need for change. Uniquely this is a cross-party belief and commitment. However, despite the genuinely universal support for the disabled, nothing ever seems to change for the better. In every aspect of the service there is queuing, rationing and under provision. There is a battle for every service and in some cases there is no provision at all.

This does not come as a surprise to either side of the House and those on this side of the House do not have a monopoly on caring. We are not alone in being outraged, embarrassed and diminished by the growing divergence between the quality of life enjoyed by the majority of us in this modern, proud and prosperous country and the half-life we see being endured by so many of the disabled and their families. However, if we are all so committed, then why do things not get better for the disabled? Why are they always left waiting for better times, an Exchequer surplus, another Celtic tiger, a Special Olympics, or another "Prime Time" exposé? It is because there is no clear overall strategy, implementation plan, or funding linked to a plan for the realisation of clearly articulated and commonly understood objectives.

In seeking this, the motion goes to the very nub of the problem. We need a national strategy for the progressive realisation of rights to provision over an agreed timeframe setting in place the capacity building measures necessary, identifying the capital and current resources needed and preparing a plan to eliminate all waiting lists for services within three years.

Without this we will go on as before, waiting for the pressure on services to build to the point where the many individual private crises explode to become a major public scandal. We will lurch from crisis to crisis and will deal in a fragmented way with individual aspects of disability. As politicians we will be content when we resolve the immediate crisis in one family, yet thousands of families will continue to wait for the next Celtic tiger or sadly until death makes their problem redundant. Even more sadly some families wish for that.

We cannot continue as we have done in the past with the piecemeal response to individual campaigns — concessions given to individual groups in the hope they will go away and leave the Government alone for a while. We cannot continue to have Private Members' motions in response to a "Prime Time" exposé or some other effort by the media to dip into the issue of disability. We need a more permanent solution. The aim must be for a coherent integrated strategy so that no matter what the disability or age of the person, at the very least a floor level of appropriate service will automatically become available to support the patient and family, and it must be a floor with no cracks.

The range of disability is enormous, including disability caused by mental ill health, which is often forgotten, despite being the cause of 20% of all disability. We have intellectual disability, and physical and sensory disability. Some are born disabled and some become disabled as a result of an accident or an illness, perhaps a degenerative and ultimately fatal one. However, whatever the source or the category of disability they all have one thing in common, the impact it has on their families and the extent to which it is a permanent life changing experience not just for the patients but also for their families. The greater the disability the greater the dependence, the greater the impact on the family and the greater the change they must endure.

The diagnosis that a child is disabled is devastating. The diagnosis that a formerly healthy bread winner husband has a degenerative disease is devastating for a young mother with young children. Almost overnight such families are faced with new needs they never expected to have, and are ill-equipped to meet the emotional, psychological, practical, monetary and medical needs. If the carers in such a family do not get support, are left to cope alone and do not get respite, as sure as night follows day, they too will collapse and will not be able to cope. If they collapse, the whole family collapses and becomes the responsibility of the State with all the long-term consequences this implies, particularly for children. So instead of one dependent person, we then have an entire family dependent on the State.

Luckily for the State, this does not happen very often because it is the nature of families, parents and loved ones to give everything and to push their caring role to the very edge of their physical and emotional endurance. I regret to say the State knows this and plays on it. We abuse their love of their dependent person because we know they will keep going. We know they will eventually become too exhausted to sustain campaigns to highlight their plight. We know they will quietly go home and we will not hear from them again until some other case hits the media or there is some other "Prime Time" exposé.

I want to highlight changes urgently required to help families. Every health board should have a care manager as a point of contact for people struck by disability who would co-ordinate all services. Those struck by disability often do not know what services are available or even what services they need. They could include the provision of a wheelchair, social welfare payments, form filling and getting the required documents. People complain that every service seems to require individual forms to be completed. Could this not be streamlined so that at least this aspect of disability is made easier? It seems as if every application is made onerous simply to postpone the determination of eligibility.

There are many other aspects which one of my colleagues or I may be able to raise tomorrow night. I ask the Government to heed this motion and not to insult carers or the disabled by yet again giving us a litany of all it has done for them and all it is going to do. I ask every backbencher who has ever witnessed the despair of carers pushed to the brink, to support the motion and not to allow this scandal, which reflects on all of us, to continue.

Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Why is the Government dragging its heels in publishing the disability Bill and proceeding with a programme for positive improvement in services? I cannot understand why the Government is stalling on this matter. When will the Government end the long outdated and inappropriate use of psychiatric hospitals for people with intellectual disabilities? If the Government engaged in full consultation on the disability Bill, it would enable the amended Bill to pass through the Houses of the Oireachtas. Our motion calls on the Government to:

(a) immediately bring forward the Disability Bill; and

(b) at the same time, to convene a disability summit of all stakeholders in the disability movement, each of whom would be entitled to attend and participate as equal partners.

If the resources are allocated by the Government the health boards can provide the services such as the provision of appropriate care places for people with disabilities. A brand new residential care unit in Clifden in my constituency which was completed a number of years ago, is empty and locked up because the resources to staff it have not been provided to the health board by the Government. The resources have not been provided because those with disabilities are regarded by the Government as a minority. However, many families are affected by this problem.

Another difficulty the Government has placed in the way of people with disabilities is the three-year rule affecting those on employment schemes who are acting as personal assistants to people with disabilities who are living independently. As a result of this ridiculous three-year rule, many of those people must give up a personal assistant who has become used to them, has trained them and is able to assist them to live independently. Some of those people must now move into institutional care because of the ridiculous three-year rule. At the end of the three year period, they are forced to give up their personal assistants. It is unfortunate that I must move the Adjournment as I have a great deal more to say.