Mary Ann O'Brien (Independent)

I, too, commend Senator Mullen, who was the catalyst for this morning's One Day More event. The elephant in the room is the word "abortion". The lives of the babies we heard about this morning would have been terminated. I did not speak myself this morning because it was a time for the parents but I too had a baby that died at two years of age, who I could have terminated when he was in my tummy. His name was Jack Irwin. Because of him we have raised €36 million for the Jack and Jill Children's Foundation. By the way, it has nothing to do with me. I do not do any of the work. My husband, Jonathan, his foundation and all the lovely people throughout Ireland do the work. This shows what can happen. I wish everyone had been there this morning to hear how fragile life is and that we are here to respect human beings. There was great sadness but great dignity portrayed this morning by those wonderful parents. I am not here to talk about that.

I wish to highlight an issue in Fergus Finlay's column yesterday in the Irish Examiner. Last week the Independent Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked a question in the Dáil about the future of young intellectually disabled people who finished school this year and what services would be put in place for them. The Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, replied:

The demand for day services, including rehabilitative training, for school leavers continues to grow. The HSE expects approximately 654 school leavers will require services in 2012. This year disability services are required to cater for demographic pressures such as new services for school leavers from within their existing budgets. In previous years demographic funding was provided to meet this need. The 2012 budgets have been reduced by 3.7% and the moratorium on staff recruitment gives rise to additional challenges in service provision ...The HSE is working with all relevant service providers to maximise the use of available places.

The Cathaoirleach can hear my tone of voice. I do not intend to finish the reply because it is, basically, Civil Service waffle. What does it really mean?

Let us pretend for one moment that we have a profoundly disabled child leaving school this year. The column identified a father in this position. Let us further pretend that one of us is such a father who has been told that there will be no day service for his profoundly disabled son unless dedicated funding is made available for that child. Let us imagine the case of a person who is, unfortunately, in intensive care, wholly dependent on others for her existence and unable to communicate. Let us further imagine that the consultant informs her that he cannot guarantee the continuation of her care beyond the end of the month because the hospital has not been provided with any funding beyond that date. She has no say in the matter. This is what we, the State, are doing to those with intellectual disabilities. It is a life sentence for them.

The young man to whom Fergus Finlay referred was real. He cannot talk, communicate, go to the toilet on his own, dress himself, eat or drink. How is it possible in this day and age that the State could turn its back on him and his family and other children or young adults like him? Are we really as uncivilised as this in 2012? It does not apply only to him. Many families find themselves in that position.

Last week the Leader kindly informed the House that the Government intends to publish the value for money review of disability spending next week. Corrective action must be taken this week to help the 650 families with intellectually disabled young people who are facing into a great deal of uncertainty and a life for hell for their families.