A group of academics at NUI Galway's faculty of law have disputed the Government's explanation of why it cannot offer a rights-based Disability Bill.
The Minister of State with responsibility for the legislation, Frank Fahey, has said limited resources and other competing funding priorities mean the Government cannot afford to offer disabled people a right to services. The Bill enters the final stage of its passage through the Oireachtas this week and is due to be enacted shortly.
However, in a statement, Prof Gerard Quinn, who recently finished a major research project for the Office of the UN High Commission on Human Rights on disability rights, and other academics at the university's disability law and policy research unit, said it was possible to provide a basic level of services over time.
"Resourcing is never going to be perfect. But it is entirely legitimate that disability groups would require some extra assurance, going beyond political rhetoric, that there will be a floor of basic provision beneath which no one will be allowed to fall," the statement said.
"Considerations of human dignity alone would strongly point to the need for such minimum provision.
"Expressing such a 'floor' and 'positive dynamic' in terms of legal rights does no violence to the allocational prerogatives of the State which, of necessity, is charged with balancing many competing calls on resources.
"Rather, it gives the assurance that disabled people so desperately need that such allocational decisions will, in the future, be made rationally and equitably."
The group said that while people understood there could not be an "overnight" change in disability services, it was possible to provide in law to progressively build on a level of service so the promise of equal citizenship and participation could become a reality.
The academics also questioned whether the proposed enforcement mechanism for services was adequate, especially when compared to international treaties which the State has signed up to.
"While the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights presumed the availability of a judicial enforcement mechanism, it also considers an appropriate administrative mechanism to be acceptable provided the remedies afforded are 'accessible, affordable, timely and effective'.
"The remedies suggested in the current Bill would not appear to meet these criteria," the statement said.
Government amendments to the Bill, such as using the Ombudsman as an appeals office in the area of service provision, were worth exploring but not on the basis of the Irish model, it added.
The Government has signalled it is not willing to consider any major amendments to the Bill. A number of disability groups have pulled out of consultations with the Government in protest at the contents of the legislation.
