Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. Like all Members, I have received a large volume of correspondence on this issue. I concede I am not an expert on the proposals but we must ensure that at the end of the parliamentary process we will pass a Bill of which we can all be proud and which will have a positive impact on the lives of the tens of thousands of people across the island of Ireland who suffer from various disabilities.

It is important to stress there will be no political gain for any side arising from this debate and nor should we seek such a gain. In the past decades since the issues of disability and disability rights have come to the fore, every Government and political party has been guilty by omission in not providing resources and guilty of lack of attention. We all have a political duty to try to redress the balance to ensure that the disabled in our community are given a fair crack of the whip.

The concept of republicanism is often debated in this House and elsewhere. It is a word that has been debased by others. If we wish to have a true republic and ensure that all citizens of the Republic have equal access to services, equal opportunity in life and equal chances to succeed, then this legislation is a core of that argument. If this is to be truly an Irish Republic, we must ensure the Disability Bill offers a real opportunity and way forward to those people who are meant to benefit from it.

I fully accept the Minister of State and his colleagues in Government want this Bill to work. There is no point in being in Government or in bringing forward legislation if one does not expect it to work. However, the Minister of State knows as well as I that grave doubt exists among many of the disabled people and among many of the groups advocating their rights about the long-term impact of this legislation. Would we be having this debate in the weeks following the Special Olympics when probably for the first time in the history of the State the country as a whole concentrated on the role of the disabled and their achievements? I think we would be treading with more caution because the public would expect more from us and from this legislation.

If resources were open-ended and if we were guaranteed the Celtic tiger would continue roaring into the next decade and into the future, we would not need to be worried about legislation because the rising tide would lift all boats. However, it must be accepted that the Government purse strings will tighten again when the Celtic tiger will not roar as strongly as it did for the last five or six years. Unless the maximum guarantees are included in this legislation, the weakest in society such as the disabled may well suffer. This has been the history of the response of all Governments to marginalised people. When the time for cutbacks comes, those people who cannot speak loudest, suffer. This is the reason so many groups representing the disabled are concerned about this legislation which they regard as not sufficiently rights-based. It is so dependent on resources which may become scarce again, they are genuinely fearful that no matter what are the political intentions of the Government and Taoiseach, without stronger guarantees it all may come to naught. This is a genuine worry for us all.

The case for the legislation not being rights-based has been made by a number of people. I listened to the Minister of State's contribution yesterday and a very balanced contribution this morning by Senator Dardis. The Minister of State argues that no other country offers such a rights-based approach. I accept this may be the case. I listened with interest to the debate on the situation in South Africa where the apparent rights-based legislation does not work in practice. The challenge for politicians is to put in place a Bill which will be a world leader. Just because these proposals have not been implemented elsewhere does not mean we cannot be the pioneers of rights-based legislation. It would be admirable if the Government and the Members of the Oireachtas lived up to their names as republicans and enacted legislation which would result in Ireland being the best place in the world to live if one was disabled. We should aspire to this.

This legislation will be an improvement but the message from those who know best, the disabled, their supporters and representatives, is that there is a long way to go. In the course of his contribution the Minister of State outlined possible Government amendments which would be welcome. The issue which keeps returning is that of rights-based rather than resource-based legislation. We have been politically unable to satisfy the call from the disabled groups and their representatives. This is to be regretted and something upon which the Minister of State must further reflect.

The Minister of State correctly said the Bill is part of a broader strategy. It is a major piece of a jigsaw. I welcome the other parts of the strategy such as the Bill to amend the Comhairle Act 2000 and the six sectoral plans. I acknowledge the 2004 budget allowed for a major financial blueprint by way of the multi-annual investment programme which any fair-minded person would welcome as a major step forward. We await with interest to see how these sectoral plans work and the difference they will make. As work progresses towards the next budget and the next Finance Bill, we look forward to seeing the continuation of the investment programme. I hope to see a clearer picture in the near future and a clearer picture of how Departments will spend the additional welcome moneys.

Those of us who were members of local authorities and who were dealing on an almost daily basis with issues such as disabled person's grants note with anxiety and disappointment that regardless of legislation, sectoral plans and multi-annual investment programmes, we receive correspondence from constituents who are refused a disabled person's grant because of lack of funding at local authority level. This type of issue is the proof of the pudding. Can those issues be addressed and resolved? This is the political challenge. What recourse to further adjudication or further assessment will be available when such applications are rejected by a Government body. As the Government attempts to make further progress on reaching the target of 4% of disabled persons employed in the public service, we should meet the representatives of the Departments of Finance, and Enterprise, Trade and Employment, and the various employer groups to see if we can introduce a meaningful incentive for private sector employers to increase their intake of disabled employees. While it may not be possible or constitutionally appropriate to apply a 4% minimum on private employers, tens of thousands of admirably suitable disabled persons are available and we should give a genuine incentive to employers to look with absolute favour on those people. The Government is examining the issue of tax reliefs and incentives, which are now generally regarded as being negative terms. However, if we could use any kind of tax relief, incentive or other approach to encourage private sector employers to employ disabled persons it would represent a meaningful step forward.

On Committee Stage I am sure we will reflect in much greater depth on the issues concerning the disability groups and those they represent. We cannot get away from the issue of rights-based versus resource-based legislation, which appears to be the sticking point. When the Minister of State with responsibility for this area in the previous Government, Deputy Mary Wallace, introduced her legislation it was met with great disappointment and was subsequently withdrawn, which apparently resulted, perhaps unfairly, in her political demotion. As a result of that episode and the ongoing dialogue involving the Government and the interdepartmental committee, it was expected that all the issues would be addressed in the Bill before the House. The message we are getting on this side of the House — I am sure the same is true for backbenchers on the Government side — is that all the issues have not been addressed.

I ask the Minister of State to keep listening. The groups for whom this Bill is designed to provide support and encouragement deserve no less than him listening to their concerns on an ongoing basis. While we are nearing the end of the legislative stage, it is not too late to introduce meaningful amendments. In his contribution the Minister of State mentioned five issues that had been raised with him and the Taoiseach and which were agreed to be considered including the following: the need to provide for a face-to-face interview to review each applicant's service statement; additional powers for the complaints officer, which would allow him or her to recommend the timing of the service or assessment; and to review concerns about the wording of section 5(4). At a minimum I hope the Minister of State will table amendments in that regard.

While I recognise that the Disability Bill is a first step, I reiterate the point I am hearing from constituents and others that it is not enough. It provides hope and comes from a political desire on the part of all of us to give people meaningful help. However, it does not provide the guarantees required. For all of the good points and glories of this country, we have never given sufficient recognition or support to its disabled community. We have an opportunity to redress that matter. We are taking some positive steps in this legislation but not enough. I hope the Minister of State will try to offer a little more as it would make a significant difference to those most affected.