Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this matter and I welcome the Minister for State, Deputy Fahey, to the House. He is taking a step towards the achievement of a very worthwhile goal.

I was especially impressed with the point made by Senator Kett that we would be surprised at the contribution which people with ability make. I use the word "ability" because of my acquaintance with the Aisling Foundation and the O2 awards, where they refer to people with abilities. The message to be put across, particularly in the area of employment, is that those who have a disability usually have an ability in some other area that far exceeds their disability. If employers can be convinced of this then people who might not have been regarded as being capable of doing a particular job are capable of doing a different job with ability and skill. The benefits of employment rub off in many ways. Customers feel good, as do colleagues. Somebody who was not given a chance before is given a chance and is able to do more than was thought possible.

The sectoral plans will ensure that a building will be accessible because a person often may not be employed because the building was not suitable. The achievement of accessibility in public bodies is the first step which will serve as an example for private bodies to follow.

I was travelling in a taxi last week and I noted that the new taxi regulations or price list was displayed also in braille. This means that someone who in the past was unable to read the price list is now able to decipher it.

The main goal of the sectoral plans will be to change the attitude of the public, employers, those who are not disabled and those who realise an attitudinal change is required and that there is a personal responsibility on us all to ensure we do something.

I speak so frequently in negative terms about how we run our country that I feel an obligation to say something positive when the occasion arises. The sectoral plans are a very useful step forward in creating what people call "joined-up government". Too often when that phrase is used, it means people are bemoaning the absence of it. This initiative is a useful step towards what we should be doing in this particular area.

The sectoral plans address at least two serious problems in how we run the administration of this country. The first is the lack of follow-through after laws have been passed in these Houses. A significant effort is expended on the process of passing new measures into law. In some cases, such as our tax laws, these have an immediate effect. New tax laws are fallen upon by the Revenue Commissioners and implemented immediately in the pursuit of their objective, which is to collect that money. However, in far too many other cases, this immediate follow-up does not take place. In some cases the laws, although passed by these Houses and signed into law by the President, are never commenced by the Minister concerned. There is often a partial commencement with parts of the law having to wait for years to be brought into effect, if indeed they are commenced at all.

One can imagine how an ordinary citizen feels about this. He or she looks at the text of a new law that has been passed by these Houses and signed into law by the President with the reasonable expectation that after all that palaver, the law is now fully in effect. Often, however, this is not the case. The entire law, or significant portions of it, awaits commencement. I have always argued against this practice but I am ready to acknowledge that some measures may need considerable preparatory work before they are commenced. However, these should be very much the exception. In general, the case should be that if we are ready to legislate, we should also be ready to put that legislation into effect. A Legislature exists to make laws of the land, not to stock the shelves of Ministers with measures they can implement in their own time and according to their whim.

However, even when laws are properly and fully commenced, the problem does not end there. We can pass laws and they are properly commenced, but they are not enforced. This was referred to on the Order of Business today. Sometimes it seems that people think passing a law is enough to make things happen automatically. The sad reality is that perhaps most laws must be enforced if they are to work properly. Laws do not usually enforce themselves. It requires a considerable effort of will to make them work and, all too often, that effort and will is lacking. As a result, too many of the measures we pass in this House end up being dead letters.

I have often suggested in my years in this House that some kind of follow-up mechanism to our passing of laws is required. It is remarkable how infrequently we revisit legislation to inquire if it is achieving the purpose we intended for it. I have often drawn attention to the fact that we seem to wash our hands of measures as soon as they have passed through our scrutiny in the legislative process. That is certainly something the House should consider.

In the world of business, this would be a mad way to carry on. People in business make plans all the time and this is the equivalent of the laws we pass in this House, but they would be extraordinarily foolish if they thought that making plans was the whole of their job. Watching over how one's plans work out and changing course to take into account the inevitable problems that arise are essential parts of governance in the commercial sphere, as Senator Brian Hayes said in his contribution. In the public sector it seems these two things have become detached from each other with the result that we huff and puff over the details of the laws we pass but we concern ourselves very little with what happens to them after they leave our scrutiny. The notion of watching what has been done and measuring it and putting deadlines on what has been done to ensure they happen is not evident.

One problem is the lack of follow-through which I see as being addressed for the first time in a serious way by this device of sectoral plans. The sectoral plans are all about implementing the framework set out in the Disability Act 2005. Their object is to nail down the various Departments' commitments under the Act. The idea is to take the necessarily vague aspirations of a broad, general law and turn it into specific acts and specific commitments that will have a real meaning locally. This process is a major step forward.

The second flaw in our administration that the sectoral plans attempt to address is what I might call the "silo effect" of individual Departments. All my colleagues in this House will be familiar with this phenomenon. If a problem falls neatly and completely within the ambit of a single Department, then dealing with that problem is relatively plain sailing. However, as soon as the problem crosses the boundaries of more than one Department, problems immediately arise. If, perish the thought, a problem is a shared concern between as many as five or six Departments, this is a recipe for total chaos.

A reasonable person might be inclined to think that the more people concerned with a problem, the more likely it is that the problem will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately, the very opposite is true. The sad reality is that as soon as a problem is shared by more than one Department, a considerable amount of the energy that should be devoted to resolving the problem is devoted to fighting turf wars. In fighting each other, too many of those involved tend to forget about the real job on which they should focus. This is why we need a Taoiseach. The real achievements of the past 20 years have been made in areas where the Taoiseach of the day, no matter who is in office, has exercised strong leadership. Unfortunately, in our system, we seem to need someone to knock people's heads together and keep them focused on the real job in hand.

The Taoiseach cannot do everything, and that is why an approach such as sectoral plans is so important. This is a device that forces people in their departmental silos, so to speak, to focus on the job they should be focusing on. It concentrates each of their minds on doing what is needed to achieve an overall national objective, instead of wasting energy on in-fighting and territorial disputes. Today the Minister of State set out an objective that will not be achieved until 2011. I can understand the reason for setting out the timeframe. The plan has been set in motion, even though we recognise that it will not be achieved this month or this year.

In addressing both endemic problems in our administration, the sectoral plans initiative is a major step forward. It offers people with disabilities real hope that the actual deliverables from Government will match the promises made. Only time will tell whether this is a real step forward or another false dawn. At this stage I am inclined to be optimistic about the outcome. I sincerely hope I will not be disappointed.

I congratulate the Minister of State on the content of his speech. It will take effort and commitment to ensure that what he intends to happen will be achieved. If that happens we will have done a very good job.