Joint Committee on Disability Matters debate -
Thursday, 28 Apr 2022

Humanitarian Risk Situations and Emergencies: Discussion

Chairman

The purpose of today's meeting is to discuss situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Ms Catherine Naughton, director, European Disability Forum, and Dr. Mary Keogh, advocacy director, CBM Global.

I remind members that they can participate in the meeting only if they are physically within the precincts of Leinster House. In this regard, if members are joining us remotely, they must confirm they are within the grounds of the Leinster House complex before they can contribute to the meeting. For anyone watching online, some witnesses are accessing the meeting remotely. Due to the unprecedented nature of this, I ask everyone to bear with us should technical difficulties arise as has happened over the past while.

I must advise everyone participating in these proceedings on matters of privilege. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I advise witnesses giving evidence from locations outside the parliamentary precinct that the constitutional protection afforded to witnesses attending and giving evidence before the committee may not extend to them. No clear guidance can be given. If witnesses are directed to cease giving evidence on a particular matter, they must respect the decision of the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to that effect as well.

I invite Ms Naughton to make her opening remarks.

Ms Catherine Naughton

I thank the Chairman and members for inviting me to join this meeting as a witness. I am in Brussels and, therefore, will attend remotely although I would have loved to have been able to go to Leinster House.

The European Disability Forum is a European network of organisations that represent persons with disabilities. Our members includes organisations like the Disability Federation of Ireland and European-wide organisations like the European Union of the Deaf and the European Blind Union. The forum is a very inclusive umbrella organisation and our main objective is to promote the rights of persons with disabilities in Europe.

In terms of situations of risk and emergencies, people with disabilities are routinely excluded from full participation in everyday life. When society breaks down as a result of conflict or a natural event, including those we see today in ever greater frequency caused by climate change, the barriers people with disabilities face are exacerbated. The result is they are more exposed to risk and abuse and have less access to aid and support.  This reality applies to all persons with disabilities. When we think of the war in Ukraine, we immediately realise that somebody who uses a wheelchair would have difficulty entering an inaccessible bomb shelter.  We also need to remember that the community of people with disabilities is very diverse. A whole range of people in our community may experience barriers in the scenario of trying to safely reach or stay safe in a bomb shelter. Imagine people who require daily support; people with essential dietary requirements or therapies; people with psychosocial disabilities, autism, dementia or an array of neurological conditions; or people who are deaf and so have difficulty hearing air raid sirens.

My intervention refers to all persons with disabilities and their families. In the scenario I describe where a person cannot get to a bomb shelter, members know his or her family members will stay with that person.  So the number of people affected by inaccessible non-inclusive disaster risk reduction is great. Recently, I met a woman, Tetyanna, who has arrived from Ukraine and is a wheelchair user, as is her husband. She wanted to stay in Kyiv, but when there were air raid alerts, she wanted her son to go in the bomb shelter but he would not go without her, so she had to flee. Therefore, we are talking about a huge number of people being affected.

Some of the specific examples of this exclusion include policies of residential institutionalisation, which increases the risk of exposure to a person-to-person spread pandemic, like we saw during Covid-19, and makes evacuation more difficult during extreme weather events such as flooding and wildfires or situations of conflict like in the Ukraine; inaccessible life-saving aid; inaccessible transit centres for displaced populations; and inaccessible information about emergency services and basic services but also about long-term integration and social protection for migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. People who live in poverty are often more likely to be impacted by climate change. As members will know, persons with disabilities in Ireland and across Europe are more likely to live in poverty, exposed, as they are, to discrimination, unemployment and underemployment, and the extra costs related to disability that they face every day, such as the cost of accessible transport, housing and other disability-related supports that they often must for pay out of their own pockets.

Sometimes policymaking is not inclusive. As well as not including the requirements of persons with disabilities, some new policies can have a negative impact on their lives, such as the potential for carbon pricing schemes to reinforce social inequality. There is not enough official and academic documentation of the extent of discrimination, but studies after the great east Japan earthquake in 2011 showed that the mortality rate for persons with disabilities was two to four times the rate for the rest of the population. Recent examples of crises in Europe, where many of these situations have happened, include the Covid pandemic, and we all know what happened in residential care institutions during the Covid-19 pandemic; flooding in Germany in 2021, where there were also examples of people in residential care facilities who could not be evacuated; and the war in Ukraine, where one can see examples every day. Ireland must deal regularly with flooding, which affects the whole population, including persons with disabilities and their families. The development of strategies to ensure inclusive and accessible preparedness and responses to flooding must be done in partnership with the disability community.

From the examples I am giving, it is clear there are many overlapping fields of work that must better focus on disability inclusion and better connect with each other in order to address the problem. These fields include: immediate humanitarian action and long-term response and recovery to build back better; climate action; disaster risk reduction and management; civil protection; and social protection. Depending on the context, policy makers and technical professionals working in these fields may have to address different specific priorities.

Some of the main issues relevant for the greater European region are clear and crosscutting, as identified in a very recent review of disability inclusion in national disaster risk reduction policies in Europe and central Asia. The review and policy paper, which are included in our submission, identified priority gaps and make detailed recommendations for change. Broadly speaking, these fall under the categories of: systematic collection and use of disability disaggregated data; meaningful participation of organisations of persons with disabilities in decision-making; accessibility including communication; risk information; critical infrastructure and services; improved expertise on disability inclusion; and a dedicated budget to ensure disability inclusion. National governments, including not only Ireland but all EU member states, are ultimately responsible for ensuring this under their obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Specific articles are particularly relevant and Dr. Keogh may refer to some of them. I will draw attention particularly to Article 4.3 on meaningful participation of persons with disabilities through their representative organisations and Article 11 on situations of risk and emergencies. They require a whole-of-government approach. We see this in the way the committee discusses all of its topics. The committee, with its commitment to dialogue with the disability community and its coverage of horizontal disability rights issues, is a very positive example of the type of meaningful participation foreseen in Article 4.3 of the convention.

I want to note the range of expertise found in community and voluntary sector in Ireland. It is a very important resource for planning. Within the sector we have specialist knowledge, expertise and assets that can be deployed quickly, including on accessible transport, equipment, knowledge and relationships that can support effective inclusive preparedness and responses. I saw this at a recent meeting with the Disability Federation of Ireland and its members when discussing the response to Ukraine.

It is essential to stress that all of these scenarios, from disability proofing to emergency management and dealing with displaced populations as a result of any crisis, require the collaborative, adequately resourced and long-term commitment of many Departments. Targets such as disability inclusive emergency preparedness and response must be complemented by similar work on disability inclusive health, education, social protection and employment policies.

International frameworks and guidelines exist and are being implemented. The European Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction Roadmap 2021-2030 is an example of how policy improvement is continuing at this level. It should be the priority of national governments to support this work and replicate it in their own settings, according to their own contexts and challenges. As well as working towards more equitable societies, studies have shown that disability inclusion is an investment and not a cost. This requires building capacity in government, the disability community and all agencies involved in disaster management and preparedness and climate action. Since it is critical to ensure meaningful participation of persons with disabilities through their representative organisations, the European Disability Forum and our members in Ireland remain at the disposal of the committee for any further work it explores in this field.

By its nature, disaster preparedness is preparing for things we do not know will happen. We never expected the Covid-19 pandemic. We did not expect this war on European soil. We need to learn from all that we could have done to prevent the dreadful impact on persons with disabilities so we are really prepared. All we know is that we do not know what will be the next thing we need to face. I thank committee members for their attention and I look forward to listening to the contribution of Dr. Keogh and hearing the questions afterwards.

Dr. Mary Keogh

I am privileged to be following my good colleague, Ms Naughton. I extend thanks to the committee for the invitation to speak today on the important topics of persons with disabilities and situations of risk and humanitarian situations. I work as advocacy director with CBM Global Disability Inclusion, an international organisation with a dual mandate for international development and humanitarian action. It is a federation that works alongside people with disabilities in the world’s poorest places to transform lives and build inclusive communities where everyone can enjoy their human rights and achieve their full potential. Our federation members include CBM Ireland, and colleagues are here today. It is an active member of the Dóchas working groups on disability, international development and humanitarian action. At the heart of how we work in CBM Global and CBM Ireland is partnership with the disability movement. We work with and support organisations of people with disabilities in our programmes to ensure we meet the needs of, and are accountable to, the individuals and communities we serve. We are pleased to be here today as an associate member of the European Disability Forum and a member of the International Disability and Development Consortium.

Before covering the topic we are here to discuss today, which is primarily Article 11 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it is important to acknowledge that while humanitarian disasters occur year on year, the past three years in particular have witnessed a period in time where we have seen the lives of persons with disabilities in the most precarious of situations stemming from global pandemic, climate events happening more regularly and conflict and war. Ms Naughton touched on this.

The areas outlined for protection under Article 11 are illustrated by the Covid pandemic, which caused the unnecessary deaths of many persons with disabilities worldwide. They can also be seen in the extreme weather events Ms Naughton spoke about, such as the floods in Germany in 2021, the heat dome in Canada and ongoing food security crisis in countries such as Madagascar, where the impact of climate change has impacted negatively on millions of people, including persons with disabilities. They are also illustrated in the dire situation of persons with disabilities currently living in Ukraine and the urgency of an inclusive humanitarian response, including safe evacuations and an inclusive response to the refugees arriving in our countries. These are just a few current examples. We also know that persons with disabilities are impacted daily by conflict, crisis and climate in other parts of the world, such as Syria and Yemen. These are ongoing crises. The urgency for the full implementation of Article 11 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD, will always be with us, as emergency and disaster situations continue to unfold at a rapid pace. As Ms Naughton said, this is mainly without warning.

For today’s intervention, I would like to look a bit more closely at the role of the various actors that can be involved in implementing Article 11, which is focused on risk and humanitarian situations for persons with disabilities. The original drafters of the CRPD asserted that the main responsibility for Article 11's implementation lies with the governments that ratify it. This is correct, as it is with all international laws. They also foresaw an important role for organisations of persons with disabilities and wider civil society to support a inclusive humanitarian response. With this in mind, while focusing on the role of the Irish Government, I will also highlight the importance of organisations of persons with disabilities and their critical role in supporting humanitarian responses and the role mainstream organisations can play.

The Irish Government has a dual role in the implementation of Article 11. It must consider the safety of persons with disabilities in Ireland during times of risk, disaster and conflict. Ms Naughton spoke about constant flooding and situations that arise in Ireland and really thinking about how they impact on ensuring the inclusion of persons with disabilities. It is natural for us when thinking of conflict and disaster to think of it happening somewhere else but we know these situations happen in Ireland. The pandemic has highlighted this. It is interesting to see how this was detailed in Ireland’s first report to the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was published in November 2021. Under its reporting of Article 11, it details the domestic actors involved in emergency response planning and the role of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland in ensuring accessible communications.

One of the key barriers that many organisations of persons with disabilities faced worldwide during the pandemic was getting access to basic information that was being provided within media channels and various networks. The report also outlines in broad terms the Government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Obviously, it was written during the pandemic so does not offer a reflection on it. We are still going through it. However, it considers the effectiveness of the response and how the Government did that in partnership with organisations of persons with disabilities.

In addition to Ireland’s domestic responsibilities under the convention, it is also responsible for international co-operation and development aid and making sure that, under Article 32, the funding that goes from the Government into overseas and humanitarian aid takes disability inclusion into account. Broadly speaking, this sets up an important role for the Government to ensure the funding channelled through international or development co-operation modalities for the purposes of humanitarian response is inclusive of persons with disabilities. The Dóchas working group on disability and international development has for many years been focused on influencing in this respect.

A recommendation from an Irish perspective is that the committee may wish to consider the organisation of learning and exchange between domestic and international stakeholders on responding to situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies. This could be an exchange between governmental and non-governmental organisations based in Ireland, and with colleagues such as Ms Naughton of the European Disability Forum as well as the International Disability Alliance, to consider how to exchange with the Irish disability movement examples of good practice in disaster risk reduction planning and humanitarian response.

I refer to the role of organisations of persons with disabilities in terms of what was foreseen in the context of the CRPD. Momentum for organisations of persons with disabilities having a role in humanitarian response has been growing in recent years. Typically, in times of risk, disaster or conflict, persons with disabilities can be viewed as passive recipients of assistance - when they can actually get access to it, that is. The view of persons with disabilities as powerless in these situations is widely held and perpetuated by the media and imagery we see daily. It is not a true picture, however. In many situations, persons with disabilities and their representative organisations such as the EDF are active contributors to response in times of emergencies and risk. Examples of this can be found within the field of disaster risk reduction. I have provided in my written submission a hyperlink to a video showing how persons with disabilities have become involved in disaster risk reduction in Bangladesh. A similar situation pertains in respect of climate action, which is obviously an ongoing emergency and will continue to be such. Persons with disabilities and their representative organisations are engaging with the impact of climate change in their communities. For example, a CBM Global partner organisation in Madagascar that represents persons with disabilities is currently mapping out where persons with disabilities are and the challenges they face in accessing humanitarian and food security assistance in Madagascar.

As we are sharing the panel with our colleagues from the European Disability Forum, we wish to highlight the work of EDF and its members, including its Irish members, in times of risk and crisis. In particular, it is worthwhile examining the toolkit it has developed on the inclusion of refugees with disabilities. This is pertinent at the moment as refugees, many of whom may be persons with disabilities, are arriving into Ireland. All of these examples are what the CRPD drafters had in mind when they were thinking of organisations of persons with disabilities leading and being active contributors in times and situations of risk.

The final example I will highlight, which is more at a global level, relates to the disability reference group. It includes a work stream on building capacity of organisations of persons with disabilities to be part of the humanitarian sector, including leading the influence for change that is needed. There is very much a partnership at the moment between the humanitarian sector and the disability movement in respect of how to become better at this from an inclusive perspective. Another recommendation is to consider an exchange between Irish organisations of persons with disabilities and Irish emergency responders to share and chart a path forward for inclusive response.

It is critical for mainstream organisations and organisations of persons with disabilities to work together. International non-governmental organisations, national governmental organisations and organisations of persons with disabilities working together have an important role to play. We are slowly beginning to see a realisation that, in times of risk and emergencies, there needs to be a collective approach so that more people who are impacted by conflict, climate and crisis can be reached. There are recent practical examples of this. The inter-agency guidelines on inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian assistance were launched last year. These are the first humanitarian guidelines to be developed with and by persons with disabilities and their representative organisations, along with traditional aid agencies. The launch in Ireland last year marked the beginning of a new phase of Irish action to promote uptake and implementation of the guidelines. A commitment coming from this was a stronger focus on disability across all programming, along with funding for partners working in humanitarian assistance.

The VIVID-T consortium, a funded project by EU volunteers, focused on improving inclusion in volunteer management and humanitarian action. CBM Ireland led the project consortium and worked closely with CBM Global, the Abilis Foundation, the European Disability Forum and ASPEm, as well as colleagues here in Ireland such as Tearfund Ireland and Viatores Christi. Through close collaboration, the project is examining building a community of practice in respect of inclusion in the context of situations of risk and humanitarian situations. These examples of working together highlight how, in future, working in consortiums and collectively bringing different levels of expertise is critical to how we can make progress on ensuring the rights of persons with disabilities under Article 11 are implemented.

Chairman

I thank Dr. Keogh for her insightful and thoughtful opening remarks. I invite Deputy Tully, our Vice Chair, to make her contribution. I ask members to bear in mind that we are under considerable time constraint this morning.

Deputy Pauline Tully

I welcome our guests and thank them for their informative and thought-provoking presentations. We are discussing how to deal with a humanitarian crisis and the fact such a crisis or emergency disproportionately affects disabled people compared with the rest of the population. We came through the crisis that was the Covid pandemic. We are witnessing another crisis in Europe with the Ukrainian war. Of course, unfortunately, there are many wars happening all over the world, some of which have been going on for several years, with millions of people killed, displaced or injured, ending up with a disability themselves. Of course, there is the ongoing climate emergency that will increase in terms of severity and the number of events.

What our guests are basically saying is that if disabled people are included in the preparation for the response to a crisis, we will have a better response that will ensure more people will survive. What they are saying applies across the board. If disabled people are involved in all aspects of policy development across all Departments, such as in respect of housing, transport and so on, we will have better outcomes. That seems to be an ongoing problem here. How can we improve inclusion and have more disabled people involved in preparation across all policy areas, but particularly in the context of crises?

To take the Covid response as an example, a vulnerable persons subgroup was set up as part of the National Public Health Emergency Team, NPHET, initially. If memory serves me right, it was disbanded in mid-2020. Even though there were calls for it to be re-engaged, that was not done. That was important because the response to special education, for example, was then not seen as an essential service and it was delayed. Disabled people were not necessarily prioritised in the roll-out of the vaccine. Carers definitely were not prioritised. The way carers were treated throughout the Covid pandemic and the fact they were not even considered for the Covid payment afterwards was disgraceful. How can we improve the involvement of disabled people? Are there good examples, especially in Europe, in the context of how countries are responding to the Ukrainian crisis, for example?

Do we have any data on the number of disabled people who are coming to Ireland and what kind of supports they are getting here? We may not have any, because it is ongoing and new and our data on disability in this country is quite poor.

I have a question specifically for Dr. Keogh. We have a high rate of poverty in Ireland among disabled people and a lot of social exclusion. Some 28% of the population is at risk of energy poverty. Do we need to look at our climate action plan again and adjust it, even though it is only from last year? Do we need to look at that more in respect of including disabled people?

Ms Naughton said there was consultation with the Disability Federation of Ireland, DFI, which does a lot of good work. However, it is not a disabled persons’ organisation, DPO. Is there involvement with DPOs directly as well in the work that Ms Naughton does?

Ms Catherine Naughton

I thank the Deputy for her questions. I think she had the answer to her question on the vulnerability subgroup, which was dropped. We know that at each phase of the Covid-19 pandemic – the Deputy mentioned vaccination and education, but there were also the issues of returning to work and around the lifting of measures such as face mask wearing and everything such as that - that people with chronic illness, medical conditions, older people and people with disabilities also have pre-existing health conditions and were at high risk. There are more risks also as the pandemic reaches what we hope is its final stages. Maintenance of the subgroup would have been wise to continue at each stage.

On the response to Ukraine, this week there was a meeting called by the European Commission of the disability platform, which is the network that it set up for the implementation of the European disability strategy. This network includes the focal point for disability in the different European member states. It did an open call – this is a bit in response to the Deputy’s question on co-operation with DPOs – for members to be part of the committee. There are 14 different civil society organisations on the disability platform. There are DPOs as well as LGBTI representative organisations, AGE Platform Europe and service providing organisations. There are a range of stakeholders there who can have their say and be part of the discussions.

It was mainly the countries neighbouring Ukraine and the Baltic states that spoke about their response. In terms of good examples, Lithuania was able to say exactly how many people had come from Ukraine - how many women, how many children and how many people with disabilities. They did a very effective registration. They set up a working group with humanitarian organisations and included the national disability organisation as well. They had regular engagement with the humanitarian community in Ukraine and with the disability community. My impression from what they said is they were asking very specific questions about how they would recognise disability so people would have access to support. They had already organised how they would recognise the Ukrainian disability certificate and allow people access. Under the temporary protection directive, in principle, people arriving from Ukraine can access employment support services, education and so forth. However, it is not so straightforward with disability-related services and how each country will recognise disability. The example from Lithuania impressed me because they seemed to have collected the data very well and they had foreseen how they were going to provide disability-related support to people with disabilities who had arrived from Ukraine.

From the beginning, on 24 February, when the war escalated with the invasion, I have been very impressed by the response from DPOs in all of the countries. We have members in all of Ukraine’s neighbouring countries and many of them are very under-resourced, yet immediately stepped forward. They were locating people with disabilities who had crossed the border, they were trying to provide direct assistance and accommodation and they were reaching out with transport and assisted living. Without many resources, because of pure human solidarity, as we have seen in Ireland as well, the disability community in the neighbouring countries as well as across Europe has been helping out. Our members have been reaching out saying they have a place where they can receive people with disabilities, for example, in Spain, Italy and Portugal. They have been trying to facilitate people arriving to them so they can provide the Ukrainians with safe and secure places to stay while the war is going on in their country.

A good example of response is also the fact the European Union got its act together very quickly with the temporary protection directive and allowed people immediately to find safety in Europe under this legal measure. This is something that could have been activated in previous crises, such as the Syrian war, but it was not. At least here it was done. It shows that when the European Union acts together, it can provide this legal protection when it needs to and provide people with that safety they need during war.

The Deputy brought up the important issue of the fuel crisis. We know many people with disabilities who are using, for example, different kinds of assistive equipment, such as wheelchairs and so forth, use more energy at home. They are having to choose between buying food and paying their electricity and gas bills. While we have not done it yet and we are not ahead of this in the European Disability Forum, we need to discuss together how to make sure we do not lose track on climate goals while also ensuring we do not disproportionately punish people with disabilities with rising costs of fuel. This is something on which we need to have research, discussion and make sure, in those measures that need to be taken to protect our climate, we do not reinforce inequality. Unfortunately, I do not have the answer to this. However, it is something we need to make plans for without undermining climate action.

Dr. Mary Keogh

I will just mainly follow on without repeating much of what Ms Naughton said. I will just kind of give some specific examples.

On climate and energy, that is a very valid point because it links in with the cost of living at the moment. Even taking a step back to look at when we talk about the development of climate action plans that happen at national level, it is very rare that organisations of persons with disabilities are actually part of that consultation that helps shape those plans. That brings out that bigger policy piece that needs to be thought through. There will be research launched in the coming weeks which will show, out of all of the national climate action plans worldwide, there is a very small percentage, perhaps ten to 12 countries, that have actually included some examples of thinking around disability inclusion and climate action. Do not quote me on that exactly, but it is literally that small. Colleagues in McGill University are doing this research and will be publishing it soon. As Ms Naughton said as well in terms of the humanitarian response, it is about putting organisations of persons with disabilities into these decision-making rooms and being able to shape these policies. These are critical, whether it fits within a vulnerable subgroup that is set up under a Covid response or at a national level.

I can give some examples in the countries we work in. When we think of the Covid response in Ireland, obviously it was an emergency that landed on everyone’s doorstep without any planning, so we were playing catch-up the whole time. As I said, the reflection piece that will come later will show where the gaps are and we are know where gaps are. Within the countries we work in, even getting access to vaccines for persons with disabilities, such as in Madagascar, where vaccines are not actually available, is a critical issue. There are all of these kind of universal pieces of access and consultation that are needed to help drive responses, whether they are to climate or the pandemic.

The Deputy also raised a question around data. Ms Naughton spoke about the data coming from the work the EDF is doing on its members. We know also that there are major gaps in data around persons with disabilities worldwide. Some of the research that was done by the International Disability Rights Monitor in terms of Covid was looking at gathering that data and showing where the gaps were. The UK showed the numbers of death of persons with disabilities, but in many other countries it is not recorded. Similarly, for any other type of emergency, it is not there. That is something to think about from the committee’s perspective. Ireland has been progressive around kind of the Washington Group questions and even doing national surveys on the experiences of persons with disabilities. That is something we can showcase to others in terms of how to use that type of data gathering.

On climate action, Ireland is on the Security Council at the moment and seen as kind of one of those small governments that is able to really influence policy.

Being able to push for inclusion in regard to climate action and try to drive it forward, in partnership with organisations here in Ireland, really is critical.

Chairman

The next speaker is Senator McGreehan. Will she allow Deputy Cairns, who has a parliamentary question being taken in the Dáil, to go before her? Is the Senator under a time constraint to get back to the Seanad?

Senator Erin McGreehan

I am under a time constraint because I have to attend a meeting of the Oireachtas Committee on International Surrogacy.

Chairman

The Senator may go ahead.

Senator Erin McGreehan

I will be very quick. It is a huge privilege to have Ms Naughton and Dr. Keogh here with the wealth of knowledge and experience they have. I wish we could download some of that knowledge. It is great to listen to them.

At a time of crisis, all the weaknesses in our systems are shown up and a shining light is thrown on the lack of default provision. The Covid pandemic, the war in Ukraine and the climate change crisis show all of that up very well. The problems are blatant. The job of this committee is to try to make the consideration of disability matters the default, with the needs of our friends and family members who have a disability placed front and centre. I appreciate Dr. Keogh's point about how the media portray people with disabilities during times of crisis as vulnerable, with the suggestion that their situation is almost a hopeless case. That absolutely is not true. This almost ableist attitude makes people with disabilities feel they are not able to get through crises when, in reality, we know it is the complete opposite. They are people like the rest of us and they are not hopeless cases.

We have many great humanitarian organisations in this country, including GOAL, the Irish Red Cross and Concern. Reference was made to our position on the UN Security Council. How far away are we from a situation where disability matters are not confined to a little box in one corner and are instead to the forefront in crisis situations? When will members of the Defence Forces, for example, be trained in rescuing and looking after people with a disability and ensuring all the responses suitable for our friends with disabilities are in place? Are we on a concrete pathway to achieving that or is the progress too piecemeal, without any uniformity to it?

I have much more to ask but I will move on. This has been a very good conversation and I thank the witnesses.

Dr. Mary Keogh

Senator McGreehan raised the point very eloquently around the lack of co-ordination that sometimes can happen. From a Government perspective, we know it is not the easiest thing to co-ordinate services across a whole range of Departments. Ms Naughton spoke about the need for a whole-of-government approach to disability inclusion. The Government makes an effort around that, as all governments do. It is the vision of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD, that states would really look at how that type of cross-departmental working can happen. In the case of international development aid and humanitarian assistance, which operates mainly through the Department of Foreign Affairs, it is really important to have that conversation. A lot of the issues are mirrored at the domestic level as well. Sometimes we think of these issues as operating in silos, which is easy to do because it is the way things do operate a lot of the time. The whole cross-functionality aspect is really important in terms of taking a disability-inclusive approach.

We are making progress but it is slow. Inclusion does not happen overnight but there should not be excuses made for a lack of progress. It is about trying to figure out the strategic ways to move forward in these areas. Learning and sharing knowledge are important. I work in the international development sector and there is so much experience there, including in terms of crisis response and influencing and working in partnership with governments. We in this country can learn from our colleagues in the international development sector and vice versa. That collaboration is already happening through platforms such as the Dóchas platform and the international development platform, which work with the peak bodies on these issues. Progress is slow but it is happening and we learn from each event. The Covid crisis was huge, it is continuing and it will have ongoing effects for many years.

That was a roundabout way of answering the Senator's point. She mentioned some of the great humanitarian organisations we have in this country. Independent Living Movement Ireland is really pushing for a strong disability rights perspective, which must be at the heart of any type of co-ordination we do. Part of that is responding to the ableist attitude that often arises from a rights perspective.

Ms Catherine Naughton

I will give two examples that relate to Dr. Keogh's points. A few years ago, I delivered training to a group of CEOs of humanitarian organisations. It really amazed me that all ten of them stayed for the whole day. When we were doing the reflection at the end, I said I was surprised that they had all showed up for this one-day training on disability awareness and stayed for the whole day, with none of them going off to meetings. I asked them why they were there and they explained that their main donor, which was the Australian Government, had asked them to report on their work on disability and disaggregate data. All the organisations it funds had to report back at the level of beneficiaries and they could not get away with not doing so. That is one of the abilities the Government has as a funder of such organisations.

The other example is related more to domestic issues around how we get our emergency services and public services to include people with disabilities. I was involved in looking at the disability mainstreaming approach of the Government in Kenya. I went to different Ministries there and had to interview people for the United Nations Development Programme. All the Ministries, including those with responsibility for children and training, had all been requesting training on disability awareness from the disabled persons organisations. The latter were very busy providing that training and I was really impressed that all these Ministries were availing of it. When I inquired as to why they asked for the training, because it was a bit weird that they would be so proactive, they said that in their performance evaluation, they had to show what they did. They got three out of three points if they had all their civil servants trained, two out of three points if they had only engaged random training and so on. They were being judged on how well they had done it. Their accountability mechanisms related to what measures they had taken for disability mainstreaming. Those two anecdotes struck me as showing instances of actions that were impactful in terms of disability mainstreaming in a way that is not usually achieved.

Deputy Holly Cairns

I thank the witnesses for taking the time to share their insights on this timely matter. The CRPD requires states to ensure the safety of people with disabilities during conflicts and emergencies. However, we know people with disabilities are disproportionately affected by humanitarian emergencies and conflict situations. As the witnesses highlighted, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a stark reminder of that reality.

There was reference to Ireland's domestic and international obligations in this area. I have several questions in that regard, most of which the witnesses have already touched on in response to questions from colleagues. The Australian example was really helpful. Will they explain further how other countries are working effectively with people with disabilities to develop policies and mechanisms that can best ensure safety in disaster and conflict situations? Real examples in this regard are very helpful.

The current and growing impacts and risks of climate change were mentioned. Will the witnesses outline what practical approaches can be taken to prepare for climate-related events and emergencies? Often in these discussions, we are dealing with abstract concepts and we talk about a human rights-based approach to disaster, risk reduction, humanitarian relief and that kind of thing. If the witnesses could give more examples of what that looks like in practice, it would be really useful to the committee.

The anecdotes the witnesses provided are very helpful. They outlined how people with disabilities can be viewed as passive recipients of assistance rather than active agents. Will they elaborate on some examples of how people with disabilities and their representative organisations are active contributors in responses during times of emergency and times of risk?

Dr. Mary Keogh

With regard to good examples, Ms Naughton might speak about Kenya and how organisations for persons with disabilities worked to influence the Kenyan Government to make sure disability data was gathered in the census. As already stated, it is difficult to provide evidence when there is no data. There was a strong advocacy campaign to drive forward the Kenyan Government including disability data in the census. It was driven through a partnership and advocacy approach.

We also have other examples from humanitarian responses to Covid-19. We have a publication coming out soon showing where organisations for persons with disabilities influenced humanitarian clusters in Nepal and Bangladesh. We are also looking at how to influence other areas. Research we carried out found that in many of the countries we work in, a key issue during the pandemic was getting access to social protection for persons with disabilities.

The successes come from being able to have the data and the evidence. The rights-based approach can be fairly lofty in many of the countries we work in. Even in our country, there is the famous saying from years ago that we cannot eat human rights. This is the reality in many senses. We know human rights are very important but people's experience on the ground is quite different. Influencing is critical in partnership. We have examples we can share with the committee on how this has happened in various countries we work in.

Ms Naughton might be able to speak more on climate change and disaster risk reduction. It is about looking at consultation and bringing people into the responses as they are developed. Covid came and we knew we could not plan for it. We can plan for it happening again with regard to what the response needs to be. We can bring Irish organisations for persons with disabilities into helping shape it. This will be critical. Ms Naughton will speak about good examples of disaster risk reduction and other areas.

Ms Catherine Naughton

It is easier to illustrate disaster risk reduction with a story. One of my colleagues working on inclusive disaster risk reduction in Thailand spoke about doing evacuation practices with the army and emergency services and including organisations for persons with disabilities. What she said, which will not surprise anyone, is that people with disabilities from among the population were the ones who helped to find the answers. Wheelchair users know how they can get out of a building with a bit of help or support. The police or army does not have to invent it. They work with people and ask how they usually manage, what should be put in place to make sure it is safe and how to reach the person. Organisations for persons with disabilities know where their members are. They know where they are living. They have their phone numbers. Doing this together meant that the solutions were found much faster and targeted towards the people living there. They knew the risks they faced and the biggest problems for them when there was a flood or typhoon. People with disabilities should be involved in practices and simulations to help find solutions and be part of it. This will also contribute to what was mentioned earlier by Senator McGreehan about the ablest attitude. It will overcome this. People with disabilities are used to being creative in how they need to get around within their communities because of all the barriers that are there.

Active contributors were mentioned. In the first week after the invasion of Ukraine, we put on our website links to our members who are working on it so people could support their work directly. Organisations for people with disabilities are providing cash assistance to people with disabilities in Ukraine. They are helping people to find accessible shelter as they travel across Ukraine and to find accessible transport. It is the humanitarian responders and UN that should be going into dangerous places and making sure people have food, water and medical assistance. In fact, the disability community has been doing this proactively. I was discussing this with our Hungarian member, who explained they do not have much accessible transport themselves but they had lent their buses to evacuate people from Ukraine to get through Hungary to get to another safe place. They did this with an open heart but in the meantime they have no transport. They knew the transport was needed to get people with disabilities out of Ukraine. We see many examples. I am not sure whether I have included for the committee links on our website to the work of our organisations but if not I will send them. We have weekly meetings co-ordinating our work and helping people find solutions and link up together. We also link up with humanitarian organisations so they are in a better position to do their job. They are the ones who usually have the means and resources to be there in conflict and difficult settings.

Senator Eileen Flynn

I thank the witnesses for being here. I do not want to repeat what other members have touched on. People with disabilities should be at the heart of all discussions in society and should have a space in both Houses of the Oireachtas. Will the witnesses give practical suggestions in respect of how we can build expertise and capacity in disabled persons' organisations? Many of them are still working with very limited resources and volunteers. Is there anywhere the voluntary organisations can access the training and resources they need to strengthen their work on Article 11.

Ireland's representative organisation at the European Disability Forum is not a disabled persons' organisation. What impact does this have on the ability of Irish disabled persons' organisations to benefit from learning opportunities at an international level and to have meaningful engagement on the implementation of Article 11? Do the witnesses have examples or advice on how we can do better? Ms Naughton gave great examples from other countries. Without putting words into the mouths of the witnesses, can we in Ireland perform better? If so, how can we do it? We need the people themselves at the heart of it. Nothing about us without us. I come to every committee meeting with this in mind. Much of the time it seems people who have a disability are not included. We are here and we are doing the talking. Politicians are the best in the world at speaking on behalf of people instead of including them.

I have spoken openly about how proud I am of Ireland taking in Ukrainian refugees. Not all Ukrainian refugees are able-bodied people. There have to be people who have disabilities among them. What is the involvement of the witnesses in this?

Are people with disabilities around the table for discussions to integrate people from Ukraine with disabilities and other difficulties? That is my final point. Again, I thank the witnesses.

Ms Catherine Naughton

I thank the Senator for those good points. The first she mentioned was about capacity. Of course, a problem in every country is the ability of DPOs to be able to have the resources to do their work. We find in many countries now, when governments take a good initiative to try to include people with disabilities in developing transport policy, that if the DPOs do not have the human and financial resources to do the policy work, it is hard. I will use the example of the European Disability Forum. We have staff to participate in policy advocacy, analysis, giving input and me being here today because we have public funding. The European Commission has the rights, equality and citizenship programme and there is an open call for applications. It is not a closed, targeted call as some countries would have. DPOs are able to apply, explain what they can do, explain what they want to do and receive funding. I am not saying that with this funding there are not co-financing requirements and other obligations, but it is public funding.

The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities did a general comment on the participation of persons with disabilities, and funding of a diverse disability movement was one of the things to which it drew the highest amount of attention. Reliable, sustainable funding is required, even in crises. I remember the first meeting I had with our board when Covid-19 started; we called it corona then. The only DPO in our membership that had immediately been given some funding from its government to help was Disabled Peoples' Organizations Denmark. The government had come to it and asked how it could help the government reach people with disabilities. It gave funding to help DPOs get their work online, to help people with disabilities tackle isolation and loneliness and to help target them with information that was accessible. This was funding that was provided in the emergency to help offset the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on people with disabilities when there was the lockdown. Honestly, the real start is public financing.

The second issue is how to reach all the active national grassroots DPOs and not only the platform organisations at national level and European level. Indeed, the work we do in Brussels, even in policy advocacy, is very far away from people's day-to-day reality. We will continue something that happened during the Covid-19 pandemic. A lot of training and capacity building was previously only for members who were able to provide a budget for travelling to meetings, but we do an awful lot of things online now. Obviously, people must have an Internet connection and so forth, but we have way more participation in training and networking events online. We miss the networking, relationship building and collaboration of face-to-face meetings, but we will keep a lot of training online. It is keeping an open door. There is a lot of information provided for anyone who wishes to show up. That is accessible with sign language and captioning, so it is still necessary to put some resources in.

Even national organisations that do not have all the grassroots organisations in their memberships can provide things through their websites and through online meetings. They can make sure everybody has the information and can get involved. When a consultation is being done, for example, on new climate actions in Ireland, while it is very dry to do just a written contribution or consultation online through the website, it still allows people to contribute. Having public debates online in accessible formats means ordinary people who do not have the days to travel to Dublin for meetings can participate. Making it low-threshold entry for people to participate in discussions is something that could enhance involvement of grassroots organisations and enable them to participate.

Dr. Mary Keogh

I echo what Ms Naughton said. I will share an example. We did some research last year which looked at the challenges organisations of persons with disabilities have in terms of operating within the countries we work in and as our partners, because we work in partnership with organisations of persons with disabilities. One of the key things that came out of that research, and I can share it later with the committee, is the area of funding. Funding is critical for our organisations. In fact, core funding is critical. What we have a lot of the time is project-based funding which gives opportunities to respond. Quite an amount of funding came during Covid-19 and it was focused on being able to respond to that, and now it is also the case with Ukraine. However, all of that is very much project-focused. Core funding is a critical thing for organisations of persons with disabilities. It gives them the opportunity to develop their own strategy. It gives them the space to be able to respond to their membership. That was one of the things we found in our research.

We have a range of partnerships with organisations of persons with disabilities in the work we do. At a global level, we have strategic partnerships with the International Disability Alliance and the World Blind Union, where we fund in to give funding that allows both organisations to be able to take their work forward rather than us actually giving funding and directing that work directly. They have the space to do that. At community level, we are very much the same in terms of the organisations we work with, looking at what funding is needed. Always in one's work on funding there is the issue of the funder giving funding with criteria or conditions that need to be adhered to. While that is also important for due diligence on the legal side and the financial side, there needs to be some space with regard to giving organisations the space to be able to grow as well. This is the critical thing around funding. I echo Ms Naughton's comments on that. Funding and resourcing organisations of people with disabilities would be critical from the Irish Government's perspective.

Chairman

I thank Ms Naughton and Dr. Keogh for their evidence this morning, and I thank our team. They spoke about various countries and the humanitarian issues that are facing people with disabilities. What is very much before us at present is people with disabilities coming from Ukraine. There are also many other countries the witnesses work with. I was in Burkina Faso some time ago and saw people with disabilities on the street, abandoned and in very difficult situations.

I have been reflecting on the evidence the witnesses have given this morning. When Covid-19 struck in March 2020, people with disabilities and their families and carers were almost abandoned by the State for the first complete lockdown. The services that were in place, the service providers, the backup, the respite care and so forth formed one of the areas where everything was closed through lockdown, and those who are most vulnerable have always suffered the most. In Ireland, which is a relatively wealthy country in terms of providing services, and across the globe, when a humanitarian crisis hits, be it a pandemic, war, famine, flooding or whatever, the most vulnerable are always the most at risk. We need to be able to highlight that and to put it at the very forefront of the discussions that are happening. The issue is that when the crisis hits, the most vulnerable are the people who are the most affected. In July, August and September of 2020, when the real issues of the first lockdown were highlighted, people with disabilities were the people who were hit the hardest during that part of the pandemic in terms of isolation and human carnage, along with the mental health issues that followed it. The witnesses' evidence has been very worthwhile. Do they wish to comment on that?

Dr. Mary Keogh

The Chairman's points are absolutely valid.

As Ms Naughton said eloquently earlier, we cannot plan for what do not know. That is probably no longer an excuse now in many senses. A pandemic has happened so future thinking needs to ensure the gaps that were evident do not happen again and consider how the policy piece comes around that. The OPD involvement in that is really critical. However, it is a bigger picture, and it is linked to the climate emergency, than this way of thinking that we can suffer through and get to the end of this crisis. The critical thing is that crises are coming regularly and almost daily now. If we do not manage to get our systems, be they Government or NGOs, to be capable of rapid response - that is one of the key things about humanitarian systems - and if we are not able to have systems that are fluid enough for rapid response, we are always going to have these conversations about those who are left behind.

Ms Catherine Naughton

I think it is even worse than what was said about Covid-19 because not only were people left out in the lockdown, at the beginning in a number of European countries that tried to go for that herd immunity approach, the public health announcements actually said this is just like a flu for most people and the only people at risk of dying are older people or people with pre-existing conditions. People's lives were totally devalued. In some cases we saw institutions where staff were shipped off to hospital to be treated and the residents were left behind. It showed us that however far advanced we think we are, we are actually a lot further behind.

The joint committee can play a very important role in showing this example of dialogue, planning and discussing together. I realise I did not answer one of Senator Flynn's questions about Ukrainians with disabilities arriving to the country. It could be very useful to have a conversation at some point with Ukrainians with disabilities who have arrived to try to find ways to show a good example. Ireland has a very important diplomatic role in the world and could show a great example of how to receive refugees with disabilities in a time of war by identifying who they are, providing the support they need and helping them, during the time they are with us, to participate in all parts of Irish society, including the economy. Ireland has done a great job in welcoming people from Ukraine to the country, so to continue and enrich the ongoing discussion on the emergency, perhaps the committee can dig deeper when it comes to those people and families with disabilities to show some good practice for the future and how this can be improved. As the Vice Chair said at the beginning, there are wars going on all over the world and displacement of people is happening. Perhaps this is an area Ireland can strive to deal with really well.

Chairman

I thank Ms Naughton and Dr. Keogh for their evidence this morning and I ask that they keep in contact with the committee. If there are issues they think we should deal with or that we are not dealing with properly, they should feel free to contact us. It is only by their engagement that we become stronger and can deliver change for people with disabilities, their families and communities, and that is what we are about. I also thank our members who are dedicated, hard-working and committed to what we are doing here. I thank them sincerely for what they are doing, and the background team that keeps us all on the straight and narrow.

The joint committee adjourned at 10.44 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 12 May 2022.