Seanad debates

Wednesday, 7 May 2014

Services for People with Disabilities: Motion

 

5:25 pm

Photo of Labhrás Ó MurchúLabhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am glad this motion has been tabled and in particular, that it is being debated in a spirit of responsibility and not political confrontation. It is important to appreciate that Members are talking about full rights as a citizen, not second-class citizenship in any sense. The real mark of a properly-functioning republic is it should cherish all sections of society equally and none more so than those who are most challenged in life. It probably is one reason I feel somewhat disheartened when people who experience disability must come to the gates of Leinster House - at great discomfort for and inconvenience to themselves - to demand what are their rights as a citizen. They really are coming for these rights, in addition to, as Senator MacSharry pointed out, the promises which have been made not by one single Government but by all Governments down through the years. There is no misunderstanding as to what are the issues in this regard because they have been debated repeatedly. There have been many committees and commissions down through the years and exactly what are the rights, requirements and necessities of this particular section of society have all been well documented. When one considers that between 18.5% and 19% of the population experience some level of disability, it is clear this pertains to a sizeable number of people. Much of what Members know would not have come to their notice without the representative organisations that bring to Members' notice the inadequacies, where such exist, the requirements and so on. All Members are aware that if one has experience of disability, one's cost of living is more expensive. This is a fundamental and well-documented issue because one must deal with adaptation, extra assistance and so on. However, the more I studied the Special Olympics down through the years and saw the sheer tenacity of character, dedication and commitment of people in the Special Olympics, the more I realised what they are capable of achieving against all the odds. Therefore, that properly-functioning republic I mentioned at the outset should take cognisance precisely of the great potential that exists within that section of the population comprising 18.5% to 19% of the total. Down through the years, I have watched representatives, particularly those who are experiencing disability themselves, put forward their cases in radio and television programmes and newspaper interviews. Moreover, a number of Members have direct experience in this regard. One cannot but say Members are aware of their responsibility. Today's debate really is only a blip on the radar because nothing particularly huge will come out of this, except what Members might do. It is important that they might coalesce all the efforts of legislators, because this is the only way in which some things that must be achieved will be achieved.

As for budgets, the bottom line should be that we absolutely sustain and maintain the core assistance to which this section of society is entitled. Any erosion of this would be completely against this debate and would be completely against the spirit of international legislation, from which Ireland appears to be backing off a little. This must be the starting point of any budgetary consideration and does not take into account the expansion of the assistance and the subventions that are required. Down through the years, the State has committed itself to having an employment target of 3% within the public sector for people who experience disabilities. In so far as progress has been made in this regard, it is known that those who took up those jobs were completely qualified for them. In my experience, one does not get into the area of differentiating in any way with the service that is provided.

The only reason we set a target of 3%, or any target for that matter, is that we did not deal with equality in respect of these people in the past. That is what we mean by equality and what I meant when I spoke about treating all sections of society equally. I was not asking that we give greater recognition to these people because if they get equal recognition, they will get their rights and that is what we are working towards.

There is a great opportunity in the Seanad when we have debates such as this and can leave the politics, partisanship and personalities to one side to discuss important issues such as this one. I know the Minister of State would be exceptionally well positioned and well focused on looking after those who are most vulnerable in society. One expects she and her officials will convey to the Minister the views they hear during this debate. They will hear that this issue is not a political football by any means. If we set targets we must implement them.

When I look back on where we have come from, we have made huge progress. Most of what is involved is of a tangible nature in being able to deal with the physical difficulties which come our way. Addressing the physical difficulties, certainly in the context of new planning legislation and in remedial works to existing buildings, is being advanced, although not necessarily fast enough. If we do not deal with the physical challenges people face, people who experience disabilities will not be able to take up certain types of employment. Likewise, they will not be able to live a full social life. The bottom line on all of this is social justice. Everything we talk about in terms of responsibility is underpinned by social justice, human rights, the rights of the individual. If we can move forward with that type of linguistic expression, we will get rid of compartmentalising a section of citizens who should not find themselves in that position. They should find that they are centre stage and mainstream, that they are not considered an afterthought or peripheral, and that they are central to every item of legislation, policy and budgetary consideration.

I am glad we are having this debate. I welcome the representatives who are present in the Visitors Gallery because any strategy we implement must be done in partnership with the representatives of that section of society in the same way as we did with the trade union movement during the good years of the Celtic tiger. That is exactly what we did. It is more important that such implementation does not take place in isolation from those who have the most knowledge, the most experience and the broadest understanding of how they can lead a full productive life. When a strategy is well founded and well meaning I do not believe any politician or public representative deliberately sets out on an issue such as this one to cloud over what must be done, but sometimes the implementation document is a bit lean on being inclusive of those who must be included. The strategy exists and if there is a weakness it is in its implementation. I suggest that even if it means pushing out the parameters a little on what normal procedures and protocol might be, there are times when one must be a little more ambitious and radical on issues such as this one. We are all aware of the recessionary constraints and we would only be exploiting a situation if we did not keep that in the back of our minds but there are times, even with the moneys available-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.