Annie Hoey (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for being here. As a member of the Joint Sub-Committee on Mental Health, I and my committee colleagues, Senator Black and Deputy Wall, have been pushing this particular agenda in respect of advance healthcare directives and voluntary detainment under the Mental Health Act and criminal insanity legislation. The call of everyone on the committee has always been for dignity and respect for the wishes of the patients. A human rights perspective should always be at the heart of mental health care. As the Minister with responsibility for the area, Deputy O'Gorman has been open and diligent, along with his fellow Government members, the Ministers of State, Deputies Butler and Rabbitte.

I note that the Minister said more work is needed on Part 4 of the Mental Health Act. I am sure I am not only speaking on my own behalf when I say that statement is welcome. I am sure members of organisations who are listening are pleased to hear that there are further plans. Does the Minister have a timeline for this? It is a sensitive issue and a lot of work needs to go into it. When is he hoping to have that done? I look forward to working constructively with him in the Seanad, with my Labour Party colleagues in both Houses and in the Joint Sub-Committee on Mental Health.

It would be remiss of me not to take a moment to acknowledge Senator Black, who chairs the joint sub-committee and does incredible work. She has a deft hand and works tirelessly to ensure every voice is heard. It is my privilege to sit on the sub-committee. It is a pleasure to work with the Senator and all my committee colleagues. I also wish to take a moment to acknowledge the work of Mental Health Reform which has tirelessly lobbied members of the sub-committee. It has called for the necessary improvements to mental health services for years. It does incredible work not only in respect of the work we see in its engagement with the sub-committee.

Not everything I have to say is full of pleasantries. I have some concerns regarding this Bill. I will reference the concerns raised with me by the Centre for Disability Law and Policy. Its key issues come from a human rights perspective. As the Minister knows, we cannot, as a nation, talk as often as we do about our human rights record with sincerity if we do not apply a human rights based approach to all sectors of public life. The concerns of the Centre for Disability Law and Policy include the fact that the Bill continues to deny legally binding advanced healthcare directives to people detained under the Mental Health Act and will not abolish the functional tests of mental capacity, which have been confirmed as a violation of human rights by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The centre has also stated the Bill does not guarantee access to justice for people whose decision supporters may be removed from them. It stated that the Bill maintains discrimination, especially against people with intellectual disabilities, in its determination of eligibility for jury service.

The centre also noted that the Bill continues to enshrine a medical model of disability in determining the eligibility of members of the disability committee of IHREC, thereby hampering the work of the committee. It is also of the opinion that the Bill prolongs the archaic and unconstitutional ward of court system. It is also of the opinion that the Bill codifies the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court, which provides wide-ranging powers for judges to impose treatment without consent, to authorise restraint and to place people in institutional settings without any specific legal basis or mandatory review. In the centre's view, this will embed a dangerous parallel system alongside the new assisted decision-making regime.

There is still time to address some of the human rights violations that have been outlined in this amending Bill and its parent Act. Almost all the proposed amendments to solve those violations have been rejected. The sector concerned felt the Bill was published without significant consultation. It does not address the most important issues that affected communities have raised since the 2015 Act was introduced.

We have only just returned from the recess so I do not want to focus too much on the end of the previous term. However, as with many things, there was a feeling that the legislation was rushed through with the inappropriate use of the guillotine. There were not adequate opportunities for engagement. I may as well express the hope now, in September, that we will not be flying through legislation again next July.

Mental Health Reform has also expressed serious concerns regarding the Bill. Leaving aside the Minister's announcement that some Government amendments are to be forthcoming, Mental Health Reform remains seriously concerned about the omission of those detained involuntarily people from the provisions of the historical Bill. Mental Health Reform and I had hoped this discriminatory lacuna would be addressed through Government amendments but we now believe the necessary amendments will not be forthcoming in the relevant Stages as the Bill passes through the Seanad. The necessary amendments are the responsibility of the Minister for Health. It is not only Mental Health Reform that has these concerns. The omission has been widely criticised across the mental health sector, including by the Mental Health Commission.

Mental Health Reform received some communication from the Office of the Taoiseach in June this year assuring it that this was a matter of priority. The communication informed Mental Health Reform that the matter would be raised with the Minister's Department. It has not, however, seen the publication of any further amendments. It must be said that was a hard blow, and not for the first time, to the people who are currently living with the consequences of involuntary detainment orders. The Minister is now telling us that such matters will be dealt with through Government amendments. I ask him to make a conscious effort to work closely on those amendments with the affected persons. I ask him to keep them and the organisations that represent them up to date on his work on this matter. For too long, the position of too many Governments has been to exclude from the process the people with the most intimate understanding of these matters and not to include them in communications about legislation that directly affects them. I trust this Minister, of all Ministers, will do that and bring the people with him on this issue. I am sure he will have the good will and good wishes of the members of the Joint Sub-Committee on Mental Health.