Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Bill which deals with a vital service. I am sorry it was not possible, despite efforts over four years, to achieve full consensus with the groups involved which would have been a much preferable way of proceeding. At the end of the day the Government has a responsibility, having listened and consulted exhaustively with everyone, to do what it considers best.

Everyone of us has knowledge, sometimes in our own families, of people who are disabled. I have a nephew who was born mildly disabled but after an accident at the age of 11 became severely disabled and for all practical purposes is 90% deaf and dumb. He is now grown up and lives across the water in the north west of England. This has enabled me to see what services can be provided for people in that position, modern methods of communication, means of increasing mobility such as vehicles enabling people to get around and sheltered accommodation.

The position here is that there are some excellent services. In a local context I praise the sheltered employment provided by the Moorehaven centre in Tipperary town which gives a daily routine and gainful occupation to many people who are mildly disabled. Recently I was asked to present certificates at the vocational school to students some of whom were mildly disabled and one could see their immense pride and pleasure.

As a random example, the National Federation of Voluntary Bodies has published its analysis of need for services and supports for people with intellectual disability 2005-08. One short paragraph which sums up the position reads:

There was significant investment in new services development over the period 1999-2002 and much was achieved as outlined in Section 3 of this analysis. However, there are still 2,284 people who are either without services or without a major element of service. It is vital that they be identified as immediate priorities.

I, like every other Member, fully support the priority given in investment and resources to the area of disability.

Although much has been done, I am sure we are all conscious of and have met people such as families and parents who are put to the pin of their collar to try to look after somebody who is quite seriously disabled and who are not able to access the services they need. Resources are the main answer to the problem but people also need systems where they can effectively access their rights. I do not hesitate to talk about rights. The issue that has been debated is more how those rights are to be vindicated, from the Government and health and other social services — primarily through the administrative system — but not excluding the court in the last resort.

The spirit of the Constitution as shown in the directive principles of social policy is that the application of those principles in the making of laws should be the care of the Oireachtas exclusively and not be cognisable by courts. We know that the legal system is very costly and often cumbersome. I do not think it is necessarily the best system for vindicating these type of rights to services any more than perhaps it is the best way of vindicating people's rights to personal insurance compensation, which the House discussed on the setting up of the PIAB.

I speak as financial spokesperson but I do not think it possible to make absolute commitments, regardless of circumstances, of rights to resources. I remember when the programme for Government was being put together between Fianna Fáil and Labour in 1993, much of which was taken over subsequently by the rainbow coalition. There was an override clause in respect of every commitment that it would be subject to the state of the public finances and that none of the commitments in that programme was of an absolute character.

As technology develops and as people's understanding and treatments become more sophisticated, needs are not static. We have developed all sorts of needs that perhaps our parents or grandparents were not aware of having and the systems were not there to provide them. Needs have a degree of objectivity but not an absolute one because they evolve and this is good. If one can find better ways of dealing with problems to enable people to live fuller lives, then that is all to the good.

While I regret that many groups are disappointed with this legislation, I hope, nonetheless, that it will be the basis for ongoing, substantial and badly needed improvements in services and in the resources for the provision of those services. On that basis, I welcome the Bill.