Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will take up the debate from where we left it last night.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said last night, any improvement in the rights of people with disabilities is welcome. A number of measures in the Bill are to be welcomed. I went through them so I will not repeat them. However, in many other respects, if I may put this as baldly as it deserves to be put, the Bill is an insult to people affected by disability.

People have waited unnecessarily for ten years because of the unwillingness of successive Governments, most recently those led by Fine Gael, to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities when there was no legal impediment to doing so. A red herring argument was put forward about the need to get the legislative ducks in a row to effect legislative equality across a range of areas as a prerequisite to ratification. I put it to the Minister of State that this is and remains a complete red herring, a con job and a ruse to avoid ratification, which was promised but which we are still not getting. We were supposed to get it by Christmas. This is a deliberate delaying tactic by Fine Gael. Tragically, the Minister of State, who has a record on this, is being used as the mudguard to continue these delaying tactics. In this respect, the Bill is an attempt at a cosmetic glossing over of the continued refusal of the Government to ratify and its delay in doing so. Fine Gael, probably as well as Fianna Fáil before it, has been worried about what it sees as the cost and political implications that would flow from ratification. Ratification would result in the relevant UN monitoring body standing over the Government, issuing reports year after year showing how successive Governments have failed and continue to fail people with disabilities, fail to vindicate their rights and fail to establish full legal and social equality for them. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind but that this is the case. When one considers what has happened to people with disabilities under the impact of austerity, many of the measures taken, far from improving the rights of people with disabilities, substantially worsened their situation.

The Government was well aware that it would have had serious problems implementing those austerity cuts if it had ratified the UN Convention because it would been called out on them and would have been many times over in serious breach of its commitments under the convention. One can see the list of attacks affecting people with disabilities in recent years: cuts to the motorised transport grants, to the mobility allowance, to medical card entitlements and to millions of hours in home help. Thankfully the attempt to cut personal assistance services failed but only because of the direct action protest by people with disabilities outside this House which forced the Government to row back on that. There have been other cuts across a range of services that have affected people with disabilities disproportionately, most obviously the cuts in housing and the lack of adapted social housing, as well as multiple cuts to the health service, public transport and social protection such as the exceptional needs payment, the fuel allowance and the Christmas bonus. In education there have been caps on special needs assistants, SNAs, and resource hours. There are cuts in the domiciliary care allowance and so on. This carries on now.

The mooted plans to take the staff out of DART stations affect people with disabilities. This affects the Minister of State's constituency. He should get on it. We will have a protest in a couple of weeks' time and we hope there will be protests up and down the DART line about this. It has very particular pertinence to disability rights and the question of access to public transport, the right to independent living and so on. Access to the DART is already inadequate. We had meetings in our area with the representatives of the DART on how to improve accessibility. The representative gave us commitments and promises to improve the situation. At the moment one has to give 24 hours' notice which severely limits people's freedom to travel especially if there are any hitches or delays. Critically, the ability of the DART service to respond to and improve that situation depends on having staff in the stations. Does the Minister of State know there is a plan to remove staff from DART stations? How the hell will they improve or even maintain access for people in wheelchairs if they remove staff? Sandycove-Glasthule and Grand Canal Dock are the first on the hit list. How will people phone the DART stations?

One of our suggestions to the DART representative was to have a direct line to the DART station or a text mechanism whereby the person could quickly, and at short notice, notify the DART stations that people with wheelchairs want to use them. That is not going to work if there are no staff in the DART stations, not to mind all the other health and safety issues or accidents. It will be bad for a range of people in terms of DART services but it will further degrade and deteriorate the access of people in wheelchairs and with other disabilities to DART stations. The Minister of State should start ringing the alarm bells that this will not be acceptable. There will be protests. I urge anybody who is on a DART line to start mobilising their community to ensure staff are not taken out of the DART stations as planned.

Several public service routes have been degraded in our area and all over the country. That will disproportionately hit the rights, freedoms, liberties and so on of people with disabilities. If we ratified the UN convention, we would be called out on such issues. Questions would be asked about that and a range of other things. That is why Fine Gael has not ratified it and does not want to ratify it. It is delaying it. I have been informed by a lady who is in the Public Gallery that the Government wants derogations on several areas in order that when it does ratify, it can slip out of some of its commitments because it does not want to do what is necessary in terms of resources and legislation to copperfasten the rights in the convention.

I smell a rat. The proof of this is to arrive with a half-written Bill. It is quite extraordinary. Some of the key areas that have been drawn to my attention include deprivation of liberty, the use of restraint in schools, involuntary sectioning and so on. We need a great deal of input on these and other issues from people with disabilities and those who advocate on their behalf. The point of the legislative process, when done properly in several stages, is precisely to have real buy-in from those affected. If that is true in general, it is all the more true when it comes to disability, and the convention specifies that people with the lived experience of disability must have a key role in the monitoring and preparation of the legislation. We are doing this the wrong way around, for cynical reasons. Where is the real consultation on the range of legislative areas that affect people with disabilities? It is all crammed into a little Committee Stage for last minute half-baked legislation that will be rammed through, instead of time being taken over that legislation with real buy-in, involvement, consultation and it being driven by people with disabilities. It should be done properly and the ratification should be happening now which would put pressure on the Government to get the legislation right and to be called out on it when it fails to vindicate the rights of people with disabilities and to establish the equality they deserve.

I am hearing frustration, anger, fury and justified cynicism about what is going on here. At best this is cosmetic at worst, a con trick being played on people to make it look as if we are doing something, because the truth is the Government was put under pressure before Christmas, and has been for many years, by disability advocacy groups demanding this ratification. There has been an indefensible ten year delay, yet still there are delaying tactics and this half-baked Bill. If the Minister of State were on the other side of the House, he would be saying what I am saying now. He knows what is going on. It has to be called. We need the ratification, not more excuses. The Government should just do it. Then let us prepare the legislation properly with the involvement and buy-in of, and indeed driven by, people with the lived experience of disability. Amendments will flow on Committee Stage but this is being done in the wrong way. We need ratification. The chorus of voices demanding that will increase when the inadequacy or cynicism of the way this legislation is being dealt with becomes more apparent over the coming weeks.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The debate on this Bill is extremely important. The digest that has been produced to accompany this legislation confirms that approximately 600,000 people in this country, or 13% of the population, have a disability. The exact figure depends on the definition of "disability" that is used. The figure is much higher if a broader definition is used. The digest continues:

Of people aged 15 and over with a disability, 21% were at work. This compares to 50% for the overall population aged 15 and over.

Those figures are damning. The system is set up to disable people who have a disability all the more. When we passed the universal declaration in Galway a long time ago - I think it was in 2002, which is 15 years ago - we tried to change the language to facilitate universal design. The mantra at the time - it was more than a mantra - was "good design enables and bad design disables". The exact same point can be made in the context of the Government's failure to introduce legislation to empower people, which is what the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities sets out to achieve. I do not need to preach to the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, because he is fully aware that the UN convention represents a paradigm shift from the medical model to a rights-based approach under the social model. This involves a move away from regarding people with disabilities as people who require assistance due to their impairments to regarding them as holders of rights who are entitled to social integration under the social model.

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has welcomed the general approach to promotion, protection and monitoring that is signalled in the Bill before the House. It is a reflection on us and an indictment of the political system that in 2017, well into the 21st century, we are still arguing about what should and should not be contained in legislation of this nature. Ireland started off on a very good footing in this respect ten years ago when it was one of the first countries to sign the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I want to pay tribute to the various civil groups, including the Centre for Disability Law and Policy in Galway and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, that were instrumental in shaping the language of the convention. Our record since then has been appalling, however. While I accept the bona fides of the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, and acknowledge his experience in this area, I agree substantially with what my colleague, Deputy Boyd Barrett, has said about this Bill.

There is absolutely no legal impediment preventing the Government from signing the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on behalf of Ireland. I suggest it has been decided as a matter of policy not to sign it. When we sign it, a greater level of responsibility will be placed on our shoulders to do things we have not done, such as the rolling out of facilities and the championing of the word "equality". I am inclined to agree with Deputy Boyd Barrett that we should ratify the convention now. We signed it ten years ago. There is absolutely nothing to stop us ratifying it, other than that it would leave us open to exposure before UN committees for our failure to bring in the appropriate legislation. I am not referring solely to this legislation. For example, the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015 has yet to be fully enforced. To a certain extent, we are playing a game here. There is a certain amount of cur i gcéill and hypocrisy i gceist here because we do not wish to be exposed. I suggest that our exposure as a country would be a small price to pay for the much more important forcing of the situation that would come from ratifying the convention.

Some aspects of this Bill are welcome. Clearly, it is welcome that deafness will not be a barrier to serving on a jury. I welcome the removal of archaic language, particularly in respect of people of unsound mind. I am pleased that the quota that applies to the Garda is being extended to the civilian side. While there are some positive provisions in the Bill, I have serious concerns about how it is progressing. My concerns are one thing, but the concerns of the Centre for Disability Law and Policy in Galway, which has substantial experience in this area, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, Inclusion Ireland and various other civil groups are much more important. My voice and the other voices in here are simply speaking on behalf of organisations that have accepted the bona fides of each Government with which they have worked, only to find themselves now looking at a Bill from which significant segments have been omitted. I refer, for example, to the need to introduce legislation pertaining to the deprivation of liberty. I am aware from my previous life in the law area of the shocking gap that exists. We have protections for people with mental illnesses going into psychiatric hospitals, protections for prisoners and - theoretically - protections for children being taken into care. However, we have absolutely no protections for people with disabilities or older people with Alzheimer's disease going into nursing homes or other institutions. There is a complete gap in our law in such areas. We have compounded that by leaving it out of this Bill. I understand it will be introduced on Committee Stage, along with other sections.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The removal of an important part of what we signed up to - maximum communication with people with disabilities - compounds the insult to people with disabilities. I remind the House that Article 33 of the UN convention enshrines the right of people with disabilities to participate in the decision-making process entirely separately from the organisations that represent them. Sections of great importance have been omitted from the Bill and will not be discussed until Committee Stage, with all that entails in terms of restricting people's rights. It is worth noting in this context that the word "equality" has been left out of the name of this Bill. I have no idea how the Minister of State could stand over the omission of the word "equality" from a Bill of this nature. Similarly, we do not know what reservations or derogations the Government intends to seek. That is extremely important, but it has been completely left out.

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission is being partly given an independent monitoring role. It is being given a general monitoring role, but not a specific role in monitoring the implementation of this legislation. I wonder if we have learned anything from the debacle that followed the publication of the wonderful A Vision for Change document in 2006. We are still awaiting the promised review of A Vision for Change, which ran out in January 2016. It was a very positive document that set out just about every possible action that should be taken. The people who came forward to work with the Government of the day were very sceptical because it is easy to produce a good document. An essential part of A Vision for Change was the independent monitoring mechanism that sat for two periods of three years. Those involved did a very good job. Unfortunately, they had to highlight that the progress being made was slow, tardy and insufficient. Rather than praising and cherishing the independent monitoring body and giving it more resources, we abolished it. We learned nothing. Over a year has passed since A Vision for Change ran out and we are still waiting on the independent review. If we are serious about monitoring this legislation after it has been passed, it is absolutely vital for us to give the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission the fullest possible role in the independent monitoring mechanism that is being provided for in this Bill. Concern has been expressed about the decision to make the Department of Justice and Equality the focal point in this context. Clearly, responsibility in this area should not lie in that Department. I am open to suggestions on where it should lie. It has been proposed that it should lie at the heart of the Government in the Department of the Taoiseach. A similar approach has been taken in the case of the Irish language, although I will not comment on how helpful or efficient that has been. It was theoretically a very good idea. We should be going in a similar direction in this case.

I have mentioned the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015, which was introduced with great fanfare.

It remains substantially unimplemented, so will the Minister of State comment on it?

Very specific questions have been asked by civil society but I will not read all of them into the record. Practically every Deputy has read them, which is testimony to the work on the ground of the various groups that are so concerned about this. They have not gone on a party political basis but have done their best to educate each and every Deputy in the Chamber. The Deputies have the questions that have not been answered. I was watching the Minister of State's reaction intently when the questions were put about what structured communication had taken place, as civil society feels there has not been a structured approach. The Minister of State shook his head vehemently and I presume he is arguing there has been such a structured approach. I accept his bona fides but if the organisations on the ground tell each of us that it has not happened, there is a problem somewhere with the understanding of what "communication" means.

There are other questions that we were specifically asked to read out. I will not read all of them but I will refer to them. The first, as I noted, related to a formal structured consultation process, which the groups argue has not taken place. The groups have asked specifically about what reservations or derogations will be sought and the absence of specific legislation relating to the deprivation of liberty. I have mentioned some of these issues and the groups put them in a question format. All of those questions should be answered in written form immediately and before this Bill progresses. These are just practical questions and we must acknowledge work on the ground from people who are challenged every day not just by a disability but by the utter failure of all of us to provide a society that allows them to participate. We are all responsible for that, although the Government should have the majority of this responsibility. Similarly, with the recent McCabe issue, specific practical questions were asked that were not answered. It helps people to come on board if they see questions being answered when they are asked. I ask that this be done immediately. It must be important to the groups if they have asked every Deputy to read these questions in the Dáil.

I hope the Minister of State will have listened to all of us and taken on board the serious concerns we have all expressed. Nobody has played politics with this. I hope the Government will consider ratifying the convention immediately if we are truly sincere about what we want. There is no legal obstacle to ratifying it so let us do it. We can then have a true roadmap for the implementation of the necessary legislation that will allow us to go proudly before a United Nations committee and say that not only have we signed and ratified it but we have done our bit with legislation.

Hildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know there are justifiable complaints about the time the legislation has taken in getting here, I am glad this day has arrived. To be frank, when Fine Gael came to office, the economy was imploding to such an extent that this issue was not progressed as speedily as was warranted. It should also be stated that whereas other countries have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, we in Ireland are always conscious of having our domestic house in order before we do such things. There would be little point in ratifying the convention and introducing legislation to rectify errors or gaps afterwards.

At this point I offer words of appreciation to a Galway native and world expert in disability law, Professor Gerard Quinn of the National University of Ireland, Galway. He was instrumental in the drafting of the disability convention, both as part of an international group of disability non-governmental organisations and as part of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission. Anybody familiar with the history of the convention will know what an enormous contribution he made. With regard to the legislation, there are a number of areas that the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission would like amended or have greater emphasis put upon. The same applies to various disabilities representative groups. I know the Minister of State will take due cognisance of these as the Bill goes through the House, as there are other issues not included in the published Bill that will be taken as amendments.

I will clarify one issue. There has been a discussion about Ireland having obligations under European Union, EU, law because the Union has for the first time signed up to the international human rights treaty. That is only partially true. The EU has oversight in terms of existing competencies and this treaty does not create any more. I very much welcome this legislation and look forward to its speedy passage through the House.

Declan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Since entering the Dáil 12 months ago this weekend, I have mooted that this Dáil should be a champion for those with disabilities. We should speak of varying abilities rather than disability. During my 35 years working as a primary school teacher I viewed children with a disability as young people of varying abilities and always focused on their abilities rather than their disabilities.

As has been said, this is half a Bill and it is being rushed through without being fully drafted to be ready for enactment to honour the ratification of the United Nations convention. We in Ireland signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2007, and Fianna Fáil broadly supports the provisions of this Bill to address the remaining legislative barriers to Ireland’s ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. There is an urgency here as the convention followed decades of work by the United Nations to change attitudes and approaches to persons with varying degrees of abilities. We must move away from viewing persons with disability as "objects" of charity, medical treatment and social protection towards viewing persons with varying degrees of disabilities as "subjects" with rights, who can claim those rights and make their own decisions for their lives, where possible, as well as being active members of our communities. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has been very strong on this point.

That the Bill is incomplete, with at least another six sections planned for introduction on Committee Stage, significantly limits the potential for a detailed analysis and debate on those sections, upon which meaningful commentary may be provided by relevant stakeholders, including the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission. Fianna Fáil is committed to the removal of barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully participating in society and exercising their rights and entitlements as citizens. In this regard, why is it taking the Government so long to replace the motorised transport grant that was discontinued in February 2013? At that time people were told an alternative scheme was being devised to replace it and we are now nearly four years on from then. It has been raised in this House on numerous occasions over the past 12 months by many Deputies.

The primary medical certificate scheme relates to a certificate issued by the Health Service Executive, HSE, which certifies that a person is a severely disabled and permanently disabled person for the purposes of Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994. Some of the benefits of this certificate are that one may qualify for a refund of vehicle registration tax, value added tax, VAT, and excise duty if one buys a new or second-hand car. A person may also qualify for exemption of road tax and a refund of VAT on motor fuel up to certain limits. However, the criteria used to determine entitlement to this certificate are severely restrictive and should be re-examined. At least three Deputies raised the issue last week under questions about promised legislation, mentioning its application to blind people and those with various difficulties not covered by the scheme. With regard to disabled persons' grants, such as the housing adaptation grant, a formal national policy must be designed to standardise the administration of the grants throughout the country and their interpretation by local authorities.

Section 4 deals with the duty put on employers and some service providers to accommodate reasonably the needs of people with disabilities. Inclusion Ireland has indicated it is deeply regrettable that Ireland will enter a reservation with regard to reasonable accommodation and different levels of reasonable accommodation, such as "nominal costs" for private services and "disproportionate burden" for public services in employment law, will operate in tandem.

I welcome section 5, which deals with civilian staff in the Garda Síochána, bringing this sector back within Part 5 of the Disability Act, providing a 3% quota of employment for people with disabilities. Regarding other workplace schemes for people with disabilities, I want easier access to the EmployAbility scheme and more assistance for people to retain and keep jobs in the long term. Too many of these schemes are short-term work placements and do not serve the needs of many people with disabilities who want to reside and work in their communities.

As Deputy Catherine Connolly said, the 2011 census found that 13% of the population had a disability, and only 21% of those people aged 15 and over were working. I want to see a much higher percentage of places on work schemes ring-fenced for people with disabilities within their communities where they feel they are making a contribution. A similar figure of 3% or more would allow people who normally would not be able to get permanent work to feel they are making a valuable contribution. They should be allowed permanency on those work schemes where work is not available.

I am dismayed that some extremely important aspects of this Bill are being delayed and will be introduced only on Committee stage. These include deprivation of liberty issues, fitness for trial and tax matters on behalf of incapacitated persons. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, has said, “In the absence of published draft legislation, it is difficult for the Commission to discharge its function to examine legislative proposals under Article 10(2)(e) of the 2014 Act and to make concrete recommendations which can be of utility to the Legislature, particularly in relation to this aspect of reform.” This concern is also shared by Inclusion Ireland, which is concerned about legislative clarity on the issue of deprivation of liberty. The Centre for Disability Law and Policy also has grave concerns about important aspects of the Bill being introduced only on Committee State. In light of these concerns, Fianna Fáil proposes that it may be worthwhile for the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice and Equality to hear in public from interested parties when the amendments are published and before Committee Stage. I respectfully ask that this proposal be considered.

Ireland is in the process, albeit very slowly, of moving from institutionalisation and congregated settings to community living. Adequate supports and services are required if people with disabilities are to live independently, become a part of the community and have a value within the community. I want to see the removal of barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully participating in society and exercising their rights and entitlements as citizens.

I commend the Minister of State's visit to Drogheda, where he viewed the WALK PEER programme and the work being achieved under the programme by students in St. Brigid's school in Ard Easmuinn and St. Ita's special school in Drogheda. The House has constantly called on the Minister of State to enhance and mainstream the programme. Anybody who was there to witness the 100 students, their manner and approach to the programme and the values they achieved from it would know it is a no-brainer to ensure the programme is enhanced. I refer to the issue of a particular situation at St. John of God's in Drumcar, where more than 100 people with long-term intellectual disabilities are in danger of losing access to the property due to HIQA's evaluation of it. This shows the lack of investment for people who may not be able to participate fully in society. We must address the financial issues associated with it.

Many years ago, under the old health board system, it was proposed that an advocate for people with disabilities would be promoted for those who do not necessarily have a voice for themselves through their family or otherwise. People in State employment or otherwise would offer themselves to match with people with disabilities to ensure they get correct access and advocacy. It is worth considering this, even in terms of those who step up to the mark getting something in return for putting the voluntary effort into assisting people.

Deputy Catherine Connolly referred to the Barcelona declaration on accessibility and design. The Minister of State's Department must work particularly hard with the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment and the local authorities to address car parking and footpaths in poor repair. In Dundalk, a number of organisations have asked local authority members, Deputies and others to see what it is like to have a disability and see the impact of poor infrastructure. I compliment the voluntary bodies and State organisations too numerous to mention which daily help enhance our disability services.

Many years ago, my local authority was the first to introduce the concept of an age-friendly county. This has been extended across a number of counties. A concept can be difficult to realise and financial constraints do not necessarily allow everything to be achieved. However, if the Dáil were to take on disability and the issues surrounding it, and if it were the focus of every Deputy who is constantly being bombarded at clinics and over the phone by people looking for services, we would be a much better society for it. Integration benefits not only people with disabilities but those who have a greater ability. The effect in terms of understanding disability is probably twice as valuable as the integration that happens regarding education provision.

Fianna Fáil will support the legislation. We would like a lot more to be done. Personally, I believe actions speak louder than words and where there is a will, there is a way. I would like the House to deliver on disability during this Government and beyond. This is my first opportunity to wish the Minister of State well in that regard.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Although I will not need 20 minutes, it was important to avail of a short space of time to make a contribution on people with disabilities. I acknowledge the role the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, played for many years fighting for people in the disability sector. Long before I became a Member of the House I was aware of his fight for people with disabilities. As Minister of State, he has a serious responsibility. He is linking up with many groups up and down the country. Like my colleagues, I welcome the Bill. While there are shortcomings in it, we are on the right road and we must move as quickly as possible.

As has been pointed out, Ireland signed the CRPD in 2007. Since then, successive Governments have emphasised Ireland's commitment to proceed to ratification as quickly as possible, taking into account the need to ensure all necessary legislative requirements under the convention are met.

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its optional protocol were adopted on 13 December 2006 at the Headquarters of the United Nations in New York and were opened for signature on 13 March 2007. I disagree slightly with my good friend Deputy Boyd Barrett, in that Fianna Fáil does not have a difficulty with this and never tried to hold up the signing of the convention. It is extremely important and we must put it into its proper position as soon as possible.

There were 82 signatories to the convention, 44 signatories to the optional protocol and one ratification of the convention. This was the highest number of signatories in history to a UN convention. It is the first comprehensive human rights treaty of the 21st century and is the first human rights convention to be open for signature by regional integration organisations. The convention entered into force on 3 May 2008.

Some points have already been made, but I will make a few general points that I consider to be important. It is good that the Bill is before the House but I believe it is incomplete in some areas. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission is worried that a significant number of provisions in the Bill are due to be introduced on Committee Stage as amendments, which significantly limits the scope for a detailed analysis upon which meaningful commentary can be provided by the commission. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has stated this problem is especially acute in respect of the deprivation of liberty aspect of the Bill. It went on to note:

The human rights and equality implications of how deprivation of liberty is regulated are highly dependent upon the processes and safeguards which will accompany the provision. In order to carry out a meaningful analysis of the adequacy of safeguards from a human rights and equality perspective, it is necessary to consider the particulars of the proposal; including for example, the scope of the reform [which is critical], how detention will be reviewed, the particulars of an appeal mechanism together with the remedies proposed to allow a person to obtain appropriate redress and reparation. In the absence of published draft legislation, it is difficult for the Commission to discharge its function to examine legislative proposals under Article 10(2)(e) of the 2014 Act and to make concrete recommendations which can be of utility to the legislature, particularly in relation to this aspect of reform.

This concern is also shared by Inclusion Ireland, which states:

Legislative clarity is required on the issue of deprivation of liberty. Persons can only be detained in accordance with law e.g. prisoners, involuntary mental patients but in Ireland, persons may be de facto detained not in accordance with law.

These are some of the concerns and others already have been mentioned. I hope the Minister of State will be able to address those matters in the Bill. Fianna Fáil's spokesperson on disability, Deputy Margaret Murphy O'Mahony, also will bring forward amendments on aspects of the Bill.

I will now turn to Fianna Fáil's involvement in standing up for people with disability. We all must acknowledge that more could have been done by everybody but our party has always been committed to creating a more inclusive society and to dismantling barriers across a range of sectors that prevent people with disability from fully participating in society. We all must accept that those barriers have been there for many years. We are now in the process - and getting on well with it - of breaking down those barriers. We need to ensure that people with disabilities are given equality of opportunity so they can participate in society to the best of their wonderful abilities. Fianna Fáil has always been committed to fighting discrimination in all forms. When in government, Fianna Fáil brought forward policies and legislation to advance the rights of people with disabilities. Our vision and proactive approach in government has made a positive impact on the lives of people with disabilities. I will not go into some of the procedures and laws we brought forward but they are there to be seen. They were not enough but they certainly were of help and brought forward this debate over many years, especially when Fianna Fáil was in government.

On a more general point, I have a serious issue with members of the public taking up parking spaces that are allocated for people who have a disability. The facility is abused all over the State. In some towns the law may not be able to deal with it but I would hope that somewhere in the Bill we would look again at parking spaces that are for people with a disability and that the spaces are not abused by other members of the public. It is horrendous. I witnessed such a scene in my town recently where a person with a disability came around to use such a space and it had been taken up by a car, which was driven by a person without a disability. What was worse, the person who had a severe disability had to park almost 400 yd. away, down off a main street, and had to come back a distance in order to conduct her business in the town. I saw this scenario in action and it is deplorable. I condemn those members of the public who willy-nilly drive into these spaces that by law, are there for people who have a disability. I appeal to those of us who do not have a disability to never, ever take up those spaces.

There is an issue with waste refuse services when people have disabilities, both for older people and families who have children with autism. If incontinence is an issue there are disposable nappies and the refuse charges are enormous in this regard. Obviously, people must look after their sick family members. The Minister of State should consider a scheme that could help those people. It is an enormous financial cost on many families and I hear about it a lot in my clinic. I would love if we could do something about this. I do not know if anything could be done in the Bill, but perhaps the Minister of State could discuss it with his Cabinet colleagues and consider a scheme that might, in some way, aid people who are under severe financial strain because of these costs. Maybe action could be taken, in conjunction with local authorities, to help these people.

I will conclude by paying the highest compliment possible to those parents, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters of people who have a disability. In general, Irish families are outstanding in looking after people with disability. We also must acknowledge the generosity of members of the wider public, who constantly annually fundraise for so many causes that support people with disability. Without their effort we would not have many of the services that are in place. While acknowledging the State's role, grant assistance etc., where would we be without those volunteers? Many of those who are involved in the voluntary sector do not have a family member with a disability. This is a tremendous testament to the people who do such work in a voluntary capacity, as well as to the many businesses nationwide who give so much to local community groups who try to help with facilities for people with disability. I think of all the groups in my native town of Strokestown, in Castlerea and in the Roscommon area with the Hub group, the Brothers of Charity services among others, as well as St. Christopher's Services in Longford, of which I am sure the Minister of State is aware. There is huge voluntary effort going in to all of these groups to make life better for those who have a disability. I salute those people here today and congratulate them. I urge more people to come on board to assist in whatever way they can in making life better for members of society who have a disability and to help their families. Sometimes it is not always possible to get the amount of respite care that is needed.

Often, it is family and friends who come in to help parents with respite care.

I wish the Minister of State well with the Bill and want to let him know that amendments will be put forward from this side. I wish him well with his job. We hope the Government does not fall so he can put his programme in place.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do not forget about DART stations.