The Disability Bill should be substantially redrawn to bring people with disabilities in from the cold, campaign groups said yesterday. Christine Newman reports.
The Bill was criticised by 14 disability groups. They told the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights that it failed to provide for people with disabilities to be socially included or treated equally.
Among the groups were those representing children, the elderly, the deaf, the blind, carers, wheelchair-users, students, service providers and those with spina bifida, inherited disorders, Down's syndrome and depression. The definition of disability in the Bill was agreed by the groups to be too narrow.
Mr Séamus Greene, chairman of the National Parents' and Siblings' Alliance, said the effect of the Bill was to give legislative support to the inequities that existed.
"For this reason we say that it must be drastically redrawn, and that without this being done we could not take it seriously in any way."
He told the committee the Bill was a flawed document. It should be redrawn to make it satisfy the needs of people with disabilities and their families rather than the needs of the Government.
Mr Olan McGowan, of the Irish Wheelchair Association, said in one of the world's richest states a Bill was produced which presented a way of indemnifying the State against any obligation to bring people with disabilities in from the cold.
"It creates layers of expensive bureaucracy aimed at telling people what they need while insulating the State against any obligation to cater for those needs."
He added: "Without fundamental amendment, the structures provided for will institutionalise even further the exclusion of people with disabilities."
Also calling for the Bill to be redrawn was Ms Shivaun Quinlivan, of the Association for Higher Education Access and Disability (AHEAD), who said it would be difficult to amend as there would be too many changes needed.
If the Bill was passed in its present form students and young graduates with disabilities would continue to have to overcome discriminatory barriers, making participation in education more difficult for some and preventing participation in others.
She said initial optimism about the Bill had given way to dismay, alarm and now anger.
"The depth and extent of this sense of betrayal are difficult to convey but should not be underestimated."
Mr Cearbhall Ó Meadhra, of the Institute for Design and Disability, who is blind, said he did not fit into the definition of disabled in the Bill which referred to people with "substantial restriction requiring services".
"I need no services so I don't fit in with the definition yet I'm restricted wherever I go, even in this building," he said, referring to the Leinster House extension.
Ms Mary O'Connor, of Children in Hospital Ireland, said there was no real acknowledgement of children in the Bill, which was a very basic omission.