I welcome the Bill. It is appropriate that the Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, introduced it because she has had an interest in, and been committed to, people with disabilities for a long time. I also pay tribute to the previous Administration, which set up the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities. As a result of much discussion and the participation of groups with the necessary expertise, experience and skill, the commission brought forward recommendations, which, I hope, have been translated into the Bill.
Traditionally, people with disabilities were told what was good for them, but I hope the new authority and the equality authority, which will further resource, support and monitor the disability authority, will put in place mechanisms whereby people will be able to inform us about what they believe is good for them rather than being told by us. That is the greatest acknowledgment we can give people with disabilities who have been sidelined for many years.
All of us are guilty of not displaying enough awareness about these people and we have spoken over their heads and ignored them. Work has been done by the Department and the commission, which will be continued by the authority, to make the public aware that the lives and careers of those with disabilities must be acknowledged, resourced and supported. This, of course, should also take into consideration the huge role played by many carers in helping people to participate fully in everyday life.
I had the privilege of serving as a Senator and am aware that the passage of legislation through the Seanad allows for indepth discussion and amendment. The concept of mainstreaming is proposed in the Bill, which will bring people in from the cold. However, 40 per cent of people with disabilities are of working age and, with the aid of resources provided under the Bill, I hope they will be able to develop careers and be financially independent. Tribute must be paid to the voluntary and community organisations which are not co-ordinated or resourced to the extent the new authority will be. However, the co-ordination of these organisations and others, such as FÁS, will be mainstreamed in a way that has never happened before and that is positive.
There is huge potential, with the advances in technology through research and monitoring, to improve the quality of life of people with disabilities. It is not just a matter of improving support systems. Many Members spoke about accessibility and so on. The Minister is pursuing the issue with great energy, but incredible pro gress has been made with audiovisual aids. A professor in the UK is experimenting with a microchip to allow him communicate with people with disabilities. We are only on the doorstep of this technology.
Investment in the authority should centre on research and development because it is the fastest and most productive way to enable people with disabilities, who did not have the opportunity previously, to gain independence. I look forward to the results of the research. An independent agency is needed to concentrate fully on this area.
Regardless of what Government is in office, research is essential because it will enable the necessary legislation to be introduced and show the need for resources to support the objectives of bodies such as the National Disability Authority. The authority's aim is to enable people with disabilities to control their own lives and to make them aware that resources are available to realise their potential.
I welcome the fact that a report will be laid before the Houses each year. Many reports are laid before the Houses annually and, while they are valuable, they lie on dusty shelves and are not debated. The disability authority report should be debated annually so that members can monitor progress and lobby for what is needed.
When will the equality authority be set up? The disability authority is the first step in that direction, but the grievance procedure which people with disabilities need will come under equality authority. An expansion of resources, staff and professional experts is also required for that authority. We will lobby the Minister of State in that regard.
In many other areas attempts have been made to meet the needs of people and to deal with discrimination. Through the years various supports, resources and payments have emanated from a variety of Departments. The child care issue is one example of which we are all aware and the expert working group highlighted that it did not lie within the purview or resources of one Department. It is to be hoped an interdepartmental committee to deal inclusively with the area under the remit of the Bill will be established, with each Department taking responsibility and ceding power where needs be to allow for a more co-ordinated approach. Such a committee has been mooted in the Minister of State's speech and various Departments will have an input in the areas of health, education, social welfare and the environment. The last mentioned is important because planning is of enormous consequence in this area. The establishment of such an interdepartmental co-ordinating committee, especially in the early days, and perhaps headed up by the Minister of State's Department, would be tremendously effective. The co-ordination the Bill attempts to achieve would be made more effective if such an interdepartmental committee were established.
Given that the Minister of State, Deputy Mary Wallace, is steering the Bill through the House and has a significant input into it, I find it ironic that Ministers are still referred to in legislation in the masculine form. It could be that the senior Minister in her Department is being alluded to, but I imagine it is the case in the drafting of all legislation which comes to the House. I will continue to stress this point, especially given that women Ministers and staff have a considerable input into this legislation. Perhaps the Minister of State might examine that matter in future and ensure the language of legislation is gender proofed.
Other Members have drawn from their experiences in their constituencies, and national organisations have lobbied Members about their needs. In my intervention in Deputy Callely's speech earlier, I was not trying to make a party political point and I am sure the Minister of State understands that. I was trying to say that, given the improvement in the economy, the budget for the structures being put in place is a start, but we all agree that it is only that. One has only to speak to carers and people waiting for respite, day beds or even just communication, information and support, to discover that a considerable continuing investment is needed. Minorities in Ireland have suffered because of the country's historically poor economic and employment performance. I would like to believe they can now come in from the cold and, in that regard, affirmative action is needed. One recommendation the new authority could bring forward is some form of affirmative action. We need to give grant incentives and establish some form of recognition for businesses, especially private ones, which quickly improve access for and offer employment placement to disabled people to fulfil their potential.
We should all find it sobering that the Constitution can sometimes act against our best intentions in emphasising the rights of minorities over those of the more powerful and privileged. That is an area which must be examined. Attempts by the former Minister for Equality and Law Reform, Mervyn Taylor, to introduce specific legislation encountered difficulties. Constitutional provision in this area is contrary to every principle of the common good, the national interest and the rights of those who most need the protection of the Constitution. That area should be examined soon.
The input of people with disabilities is needed to allow for the better design of houses. A start could be made with public housing and an attempt made in the long-term to put across the message to architects and planners. For example, there is a need for wider doors for ease of access. Even able-bodied people find the planning of houses in terms of the height of sinks and baths, for example, is not just unfriendly but downright hostile at times. The input of more people who have experienced the frustration of dealing with that kind of bad planning and design should be taken into consideration. I hope that is something the new authority will not only examine but in which it will also influence change in line with planning reforms it is hoped will come from the Department of the Environment and Local Government. This is one area which impinges on people's lives more than the greater issues being addressed in the legislation.
While I am aware this matter is more suited to the Department of Education and Science, the mainstreaming of as many children with disabilities as possible into schools, so that they share the same schools, buildings and curriculum, is of paramount importance. It cannot be done without many resources being invested, many extra professional staff and smaller pupil-teacher ratios and groupings. That is an area for which the Minister will need much support and we on this side of the House will support any efforts made to achieve greater resources, especially for remedial support services.
The increase in the budget this year should urge us to begin lobbying now for next year's budget. Perhaps one of the greatest ways of welcoming in the new millennium is by recognising, acknowledging and affording the opportunity for the development of the potential of people who were treated in an horrendous manner in this millennium. Progress has been made, but there have been many victims of the type of terribly cruel behaviour people believed could be inflicted on them. Money would be well spent allowing them reclaim their lives, to gain an independence they have not known and to ensure the next millennium is more inclusive than this one.