Ann Ormonde (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey. I congratulate him, the Government and senior staff in the Department for bringing this detailed and complex legislation before the House. Having read and thought about the Bill many times I consider that we were right to delay it. There was no question of its being railroaded through. This could not have been done. If we had done so, we would not have considered all its aspects.

I welcome the fact that the Bill was based on the framework of existing legislation, including the equality status legislation. Last year we discussed at length education for children with special educational needs. We analysed the educational assessment of such children and considered how we would devise a plan and how it would be implemented. This was to lead up to this major Bill. It had to be done.

I welcomed the discussions on all the relevant issues and problems held by the vast and widely representative Disability Legislation Consultation Group. These included discussions among its own members and discussions with many Ministers, Ministers of State and senior officials. A sub-committee of the Cabinet sat to discuss the issues in question. I am very happy that these discussions were held. Interestingly, the Disability Legislation Consultation Group produced a document called Equal Citizens. I like this title. The document set out all the provisions that would be necessary for the legislation to work. Therefore, to suggest no groundwork was done before we began to prepare this Bill for discussion is incorrect.

We have a good Bill to start with and discuss. Of course there are pitfalls therein. We met the Disability Federation of Ireland and noted that while it is not 100% happy with the legislation, it is happy that some amendments were made. It is more ready for discussion. The Government is a listening Government and the Taoiseach went so far as to launch the mainstreaming process last year. He ensured it would be the basis for this Bill.

I am very pleased that the legislation is built on a good foundation and we are now ready to talk about the Bill proper. However, I am a little concerned over the definition of "disability". The Bill refers to those who have communication difficulties, mobility difficulties or language difficulties. I would have liked the Bill to have enlarged on this a wee bit. Where would the deaf or blind fit into this category? The definitions are not broad enough.

Reference was made to an independent assessment and the making of an assessment regardless of resources. I hope assessors will not adopt a one-size-fits-all approach in their assessments and that these assessments will not be restricted so as to adhere to certain guidelines. I am very concerned over the assessors' brief.

I am trying to think through how the passing on of the independent assessment to the liaison officer will work on the ground. I hope the service statement, which will be produced through the liaison process, will be created with a priority in mind and subject to a certain timescale. Who will be appointed as liaison officers? When will they be appointed and how will they work? Coming from an educational background, I am trying to understand how the process will work on the ground. Perhaps the Minister of State will refer to this in his reply.

I welcome the statement that if the applicant is not satisfied with the independent assessment and with the services provided, he or she has a means of redress by making a complaint to the complaints officer. If this occurs, the complaints officer will try to mediate, if necessary. If this fails, the case will be passed to an appeals officer. It is great to have all these facilities on hand. It is reassuring for disabled persons that their disabilities are being acknowledged, and also reassuring for their families. The legislative provisions in this area serve as a great way forward. I hope the appeals officer, chief executive officer and perhaps the complaints officer can work out a schedule such that appeals can be analysed.

New staff will be appointed as assessment officers, appeals officers, etc. What qualifications will assessment officers have? On educational assessments, the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act made reference to educational psychologists. Will psychologists make assessments of need under the Disability Bill? If so, they will need a broad brief given the range of disabilities that exist. How will we be able to define the qualifications required of someone making an assessment?

Educational psychologists will make assessments in respect of persons with special educational needs up to 18 years of age. Consider the case of persons with special educational needs who are older than this, who are in the education system and perhaps doing quite well but learning at a slower rate than others. When responsibility for the assessment of such persons is transferred to the Department of Health and Children and when they are placed in a different setting, continuity will be required in their education, regardless of the extent of this education. Some can do quite well, including remedial students or those with a reading age of eight or nine at the age of 18, but I would worry that their education or training would be stultified in some way if they were taken out of their existing environment and shifted to another. There should be continuity because relevant persons who are under 18 come under the remit of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act while those who are over 18 will be under the remit of the Disability Bill, when enacted. I am concerned about this because one month can make a difference to the way of life of a person in this category.

I welcome the requirement for certain Ministers to create sectoral plans to facilitate access to employment for those with disabilities. These plans will be monitored. The Disability Federation of Ireland suggested that the feasibility of the plans on the ground be monitored. Timescales are very important regarding service statements and access to employment to ensure there will be no discrimination.

It is rather interesting that there will be a new centre of excellence compelling architects to redesign buildings to make them more accessible. This is to be welcomed, as is the fact that the 3% employment target for recruiting people with disabilities into the public service will be maintained. This reinforces the point that we must have equality of opportunity and equal status for everyone. We must have equal status for everyone and this is the cornerstone of this legislation. The mainstreaming of public bodies and the sectoral plan with the various Departments are comprehensive initiatives. The granting of assessments is crucial for creating confidence with families who may have problems. Ideally such assessments should be granted quickly and their findings implemented within a reasonable timescale.

I welcome this Bill. The National Disability Authority will monitor employment and accessibility. I was also gratified to see the Minister of State has introduced measures as regards rules for broadcasting. With so many different broadcasting organisations on air at present and with the push for tighter and tighter profit margins, I was glad to see the need for access being incorporated into the legislation. Access for people with disabilities might have been one variable that some broadcasters would have been happy to do away with in the rush to cut corners. It is vital this service is maintained.

There are many measures in the Bill, but the overall thrust is very positive. I have no doubt that the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, and the Government are eager for reform and have committed themselves to this piece of legislation. It has been a long time coming but it was well worth the Minister of State's while to do all the homework to bring it to this stage. I wish him well in its implementation. Of course there are areas which we will never get right because there is such a variety of disabilities. However, there is general consensus that a good day's work has been done in bringing this Bill forward and that the necessary preparation has been done in advance. The Bill's provisions will help people in many different ways; for this reason it is worthy of a good discussion in the House today and also on Committee Stage.