Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

I wish to share time with Senator Mansergh.

I join the other speakers in welcoming this Bill. Coming in late on this debate has given me the opportunity to hear the contributions of many other speakers. Apart from the occasional difference of emphasis, there was unanimity on the need to provide a legal basis for the rights of people with disabilities. Some of the contributions were particularly passionate. I happened to chair the session when Senator McHugh spoke. While he did not deal with the detail of the Bill, he painted a picture of what people with disabilities require in their daily lives. They all require dignity and that must be the focus for the provision of services.

Other speakers referred to their personal experiences, within their families, workplaces or among acquaintances. Some of these descriptions were heart-rending. One must hear the full story and know the challenges the person with a disability faces in his or her home to understand the issue. It was courageous of those who drew on their personal experiences to speak.

Personal experience is important because one can be legalistic and clinical when discussing legislation but the basis of this Bill must be human. Observing the experience of a loved one with a disability casts the Bill in a different light. Most of us have somebody close to us who suffers a physical or mental disability and we know the challenges that person faces. This is particularly so if the person had been healthy but through illness or accident became dependent on the family and the support services. One has seen that person when he or she lived a full and active life, and sees then what happens when that changes.

This was shown publically in the media through the experience of actor Christopher Reeve who, ironically, played the role of Superman but then found himself wheelchair bound. He became totally dependent but was determined to avail of every opportunity to diminish that dependence, even if he could never return to the active life he had known.

This morning on her radio programme Marian Finucane interviewed a gentleman who is developing technology to help people who cannot even turn on a light switch, television or computer. The system traps a signal from the brain and enables the person to turn on the switch by a slight flexing of the arm. It was a complicated subject for a layman to grasp but like Marian Finucane, I felt exuberant when the researcher ran one of the tests with her in the studio and described the process. It is important that the State provide finance for anybody who has an idea to develop technology to help people with disabilities. That is inherent in the spirit of the Bill.

We have each received many letters from various interested parties with views on the Bill. It is evident that they too are drawing on their experience in activities involving people with disabilities. No one, particularly on the Government side, suggested that we cut ourselves off from those views or try to diminish them. The opposite was the case. We tried to extend the parameters of the Bill to encompass these views or ensure that in five years time when it is reviewed there will be an opportunity to revisit them. Five years, however, is a long time, particularly for somebody who feels he or she does not have access to full services, or have full recognition or accessibility or whatever other issue arises.

It will be worthwhile to monitor the implementation of this wonderful legislation. I compliment everybody involved but particularly Senator Kett who has experience of this field. Since I came into the Seanad years ago he has taken every opportunity to press points on this issue. He and the people with whom he associates must have been heard. These are the practitioners. These are the people who are educating and alerting us to the inadequacies of our responses in the past. When it comes to monitoring we should keep the ear close to the ground because these organisations who are at the coalface will be conduit back to Government and legislation.

While we are trying to correct some of the abysmal failures of the past Senator Brady commenced his contribution along the lines that we have not done exactly what we should have done in the past. Part of the problem is that we have not come into contact with the realities. One of the reasons for this is that in some way issues have been played down. I wonder whether some people in the entertainment world and in the media world would try to involve people, not in any sense of tokenism because that would be the worst thing that could happen, in designing their programmes. I pay tribute to RTE on some of its recent programmes which featured people who have impaired sight and other disabilities. They are wonderfully done and are interesting for those of us who do not have those particular problems as they give us an understanding of the difficulties people face.

I often think of Ray MacAnally playing the part of Christy Browne's father in "My Left Foot" in the scene where Christy succeeded in communicating for the first time by using his left foot to write. I recall the absolute excitement and adulation of the father who picks up Christy, throws him across his shoulder and brings him down to the pub to show him off to his friends. In the first instance one thought of Christy as being sidelined and in the next moment he is the hero. It was that same power that brought black people centrally into programmes instead of being seen as the house maid or the house servant. It was the same type of programme that got rid of smoking — the cigarette in the actor's hand. The media has the power to change attitudes, not just of legislators, but all of society. I would like to think the Government would monitor that area to ensure equal rights are given to people who, through no fault of their own, are not able to play a part in a given way. However that does not mean they cannot play an equal part. The same is true of employment. Those of us who have worked alongside a person with disability know full well that after a short time one ignores the disability. One recognises people for their talent and the service they provide.

Let us look at our great role models. Perhaps the Government would consider, in the context of the implementation of the legislation, providing assistance and encouragement wherever a role model is being provided. We saw that in the Special Olympics. I do not know if any Member can remember a time in Ireland — perhaps the late Pope's visit might be comparable — when the whole community was engaged at every level. After a short time one did not think of people with disabilities; one thought of people who would go out and prove they had trained to a point where, with their peers, they could excel. Each and everyone of us drew inspiration from that and we did not stop to think whether they were at a physical disadvantage. This proves it is not just about legislation but about creating awareness and acceptance. We all agreed we had to build on that after the Special Olympics and I am sure that is happening quietly in the background. Perhaps that is the way it should happen.

I said in an unusual discussion recently on sexual orientation when we debated the issue here that people with a different sexual orientation, instead of wanting to be exhibitionist about it, should be integrating into society. People with special needs are the same. They do not want to be seen as exhibition pieces, they want to be fully integrated with backup services and rights in place, not charity. If that were to happen each and everyone of us would benefit. If the whole of society benefits, the mix is right. It is a partnership between citizens of the State and the organisations which represent them at the end of the day. This legislation is a major step forward and perhaps many of the inadequacies that still exist can be confronted in the near future.