Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

It is a fundamental omission from the Bill that one cannot appeal the contents of the assessment. The assessment is the most fundamental right given in the Bill. One can appeal other aspects of the proposed legislation, such as the determination by the assessment officer that a person does not have a disability and so on. The contents of the assessment are key. It is particularly important that one would be able to appeal the contents of the assessment because one cannot appeal this to the courts, which I believe is wrong also.

Planning permission is a case in point. If one applies to a local authority for planing permission and one is not happy with the decision, it can be appealed to An Bord Pleanála. One cannot appeal further to a court on a substantive issue but one can appeal to An Bord Pleanála about the substantive issue of the planning application, planning permission and so on. The fact that the right of court appeal has been closed off makes it even more important that one would have an opportunity to go to an appeals officer about the contents of an assessment. This, in addition to the lack of appeal on the content of the assessment to a court of law — which I also consider a questionable omission from the Bill — is something that may pose a problem in terms of the constitutionality of the proposed legislation. That is the reason I have tabled the amendment.

The contents of the assessment was an issue that was very important to the three groups that withdrew from the DLCG. One of those groups, NAMHI, contacted me in the course of the Committee Stage debate in this House. It was unhappy with the fact that the Minister of State mentioned that just one or two groups withdrew from the DLCG when in fact it was three groups — the Forum of People with Disabilities, the National Parents and Siblings Alliance and NAMHI. They had substantial concerns about the Bill and withdrew from the process because they were not happy with it. They respect the decision of the groups that remained but the fact is that three out of five groups withdrew from the DLCG. The Minister of State's description made it appear a lot less significant than it, in fact, was.