Joint Committee on Disability Matters debate -
Thursday, 6 Jul 2023

Employment Participation and Career Progression for People with Disabilities: Discussion

An Cathaoirleach

Apologies have been received from Senators Clonan and O’Loughlin. The purpose of today’s meeting is to increase employment participation and career progression for people with disabilities. On behalf of the committee I warmly welcome Ms Fiona Ward, assistant secretary, employment services, Mr. Tadhg O’Leary, principal officer, contracted services, Ms Annette Conroy, principal officer, employment services policy, Department of Social Protection and Mr. Haydn Hammersley, social policy co-ordinator, European Disability Forum.

Before we begin, I will read a note on privilege and address some housekeeping matters. All witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment, criticise or make charges against any persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of a person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings.

I ask Mr. Hammersley to make his opening statement, online.

Mr. Haydn Hammersley

I thank you for inviting me to be here today. My name is Haydn Hammersley. I represent the European Disability Forum based in Brussels, Belgium, an umbrella organisation of persons with disabilities that defends the interests of over 100 million persons with disabilities in Europe.

In this brief opening statement I will highlight some findings from a recent report we conducted into the employment situation of persons with disabilities in the 27 EU member states. The report allowed us to compare the situation in different countries using data from official sources such as EUROSTAT, which are collected in collaboration with national statistics offices. In our findings, it was quite interesting that Ireland stood out as a country that still has a lot of difficulty integrating persons with disabilities into the open labour market. I can quickly show statistically what this looks like and how Ireland compares with other member states.

I will begin with employment rates of persons with disabilities, as that is the best place to start. In the EU, on average, the employment rate of the general population is around 76%. On average, for persons with disabilities it is just under 51%. However, the reality varies significantly from one member state to another. Two member states scored the worst in this respect. These countries are Greece and Ireland, both of which have an employment rate of only 32.6% on average for the disabled population, according to EUROSTAT. Whereas Greece has issues with employment more generally, it is not so much the case with Ireland. Ireland’s general employment rate is actually above the EU average according to EU statistics. This explains why, as well as having the joint lowest employment rate of persons with disabilities, according to EUROSTAT figures, Ireland also has the EU’s largest disability employment gap, this is to say, the biggest difference in percentage points between the employment rates of persons with and without disabilities. In Ireland, the employment rate of persons with disabilities is 38.6 percentage points lower than that of people without disabilities.

Data from EUROSTAT also show us that the proportion of persons with disabilities in full-time employment is lower still. This means that many of the people who show up in the data I just mentioned, as working, are actually not earning enough to make ends meet. On this issue, women are much more heavily impacted than men. While only 23% of men with disabilities in Ireland are in full-time employment, which is the fifth lowest rate in the EU, when it comes to women with disabilities only 15% are in full-time employment. That is the fourth lowest rate for full-time employment in the EU.

The European Institute for Gender Equality also shows us some interesting information when it comes to the disability wage gap in Europe. Typically, in almost every EU member state, the mean equivalised income of women with disabilities is lower than that of men with disabilities. Then, the income of both men and women with disabilities is lower than that of women without disabilities which, in turn, is on average lower than that of men without disabilities. Ireland is a slight exception in this area, as the data suggest that men with disabilities in Ireland have, on average, a lower mean equivalised net income per year than women with disabilities.

At this point it is worth pointing out that we conducted another study in 2020, again using data from EUROSTAT, which found that the risk of poverty and social exclusion for persons with disabilities in Ireland was higher than anywhere else in western Europe. It was topped within the EU only by the Baltic states and Bulgaria. Ireland's poverty rates for persons with disabilities were therefore higher than in such countries as Romania and Greece. The data suggested that 38.1% of persons with disabilities in Ireland were at risk of poverty and social exclusion at the time of the report’s publication in 2020.

While our study highlights some of the main reasons for unemployment of persons with disabilities in general, we do not yet have a clear insight into why persons with disabilities in Ireland struggle more to enter the labour market than their counterparts in other EU member states. This, I recommend, is a question probably best addressed by national or local organisations that know the Irish context better than we do in Brussels. What I can say is that often the main issues we see preventing people from entering the labour market in Europe as a whole are the following: the loss or progressive reduction of disability allowance when a person starts working or earns over a certain amount.

If I am not mistaken, in Ireland we see some flexibility in this area, which is to be commended. However, we still see people starting to lose their allowance or having it cut after a certain income threshold. We also see many employers being resistant to offer adjustments in the workplace or to the job description that would enable a person to better do their job. We usually refer to this process as reasonable accommodation. It is guaranteed as a right under EU law but it is very poorly understood and implemented in the member states.

I will finish shortly with this opening statement. Another issue is the mismatch we often see between the skills required by the current labour market and those that many persons with disabilities have learned during their education. This refers not only to things such as digital skills but other forms of vocational skills as well. Across Europe, we see a need for far more investment to link education to the needs of the labour market.

On top of this, although I could mention many things, we see, quite simply, many cases of discrimination against persons with disabilities in the recruitment process due to misconceptions about the abilities, skills and commitment of persons with disabilities.

With this, I conclude. I will stay with the committee and I am happy to answer any questions members might have to the best of my ability.

Ms Fiona Ward

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend. I am the assistant secretary general in the Department of Social Protection with responsibility for employment services. I am joined by my colleague, Tadgh O’Leary, principal with responsibility for contracted employment services, including EmployAbility, and Annette Conroy, principal with responsibility for employment services policy.

Colleagues from the Department who have attended this committee previously have already outlined in detail the suite of income supports available for those with a disability. As previously outlined, these supports are not contingent on the nature of the disability but on the extent to which a particular disability impairs or restricts a person’s capacity to work. Disability-related income schemes have been designed to support people with disabilities to enter or return to employment or self-employment.

In addition to income supports, the Department provides a wide range of services and supports to assist jobseekers, including those with a disability, to find work. We also provide recruitment and retention incentives for employers.

The Department provides a case-managed employment service to jobseekers, including those with disabilities, who seek employment through their local Intreo centre. The jobseeker works with an employment personal adviser with a view to agreeing a suitable personal progression plan in order to access the full range of employment opportunities and supports available.

The community employment scheme and the work placement experience programme, through community-based work placement and training, provide valuable stepping stones into sustainable employment. Our Department also contracts AHEAD, that is, the Association for Higher Education Access and Disability, to deliver the Willing Able Mentoring and Get Ahead programmes on its behalf. These programmes provide paid work experience and other supports for graduates with disabilities seeking to enter or re-enter employment.

The Department, recognising the additional challenges that some jobseekers with disabilities may experience in securing and maintaining employment, contracts for the provision of specialist employment services through EmployAbility to help to address this. The EmployAbility Service - a network of 23 supported employment companies nationwide - is contracted to deliver supports to persons with any long-term medical condition, illness, injury or disability. A jobseeker with a disability who is working with an Intreo employment personal adviser may be referred to these specialist services if it is agreed that it would be of benefit to them. The goal of the EmployAbility service is to provide support to people with disabilities to secure and maintain paid employment in the open labour market, leading to independence and career progression. Jobseekers work with a job coach who provides both pre-employment and in-employment support and assistance to ensure the sustainability of their employment. There are currently approximately 3,000 participants engaging with the service and the engagement period is for 18 months.

The Department has commenced a procurement process to update current EmployAbility services in order to comply with legal advice from the Attorney General and meet with the Department’s objective of shifting emphasis from the financial monitoring of these service providers to focusing on service quality for clients. It is not intended to significantly change the services currently provided to clients, rather the new model will enhance the autonomy of the providers, giving them more flexibility to enable them to continue to provide and grow a high-quality service for people with disabilities.

As part of our commitments under the Pathways to Work strategy and the comprehensive employment strategy, the Department has commenced an early engagement approach for young people with disability whereby designated employment personal advisers proactively engage with them at the earliest opportunity to offer support and assistance on a voluntary basis to help them to enter or return to employment. This has already been introduced for those aged between 18 and 22 years and is now being rolled out to those aged between 22 and 25 years, with some 10,500 people contacted to date. In addition, the Department provides a range of services and supports for employers to recruit and retain jobseekers with a disability, including financial incentives under the wage subsidy scheme and the reasonable accommodation fund grants. A comprehensive review of the latter is being finalised at the moment and a public consultation has just opened in relation to the former, with a closing date of Friday, 21 July.

Employment rates of people with disability in Ireland are lower than in other countries, although differences in definitions need to be taken into account when making such comparisons. The development of services and policies to improve the employment opportunities for people with disabilities is a whole-of-government responsibility requiring a broad-based approach encompassing education, treatment, rehabilitation, social care and employment supports. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is the lead Department in co-ordinating these efforts but we all have our part to play. We in the Department of Social Protection recognise the significant challenges faced by people with disabilities and I have sought to outline the measures that have been taken to address these and our plans to do more going forward.

We are happy to assist with any questions the committee may have.

Deputy Pauline Tully

We heard it many times in this committee – the stark fact that we rank one of the lowest in Europe for employment of people with disabilities, with the largest disability employment gap. The Department carried out a cost of disability review that found the cost of disability was between approximately €7,500 to €12,500 on average. We are aware of all of these things yet nothing seems to be changing or moving. Many people will come in here and say that the biggest disincentive to going to work is the fear of loss of disability allowance and secondary benefits, such as a medical card and the free travel pass. Has the Department looked at these issues again? A person needs to retain disability allowance at least until they are well established in their employment and are earning a decent wage that can be proven to support them and take into account the cost of disability.

Mr. Hammersley mentioned co-operation between social protection and education. Ms Ward also mentioned that every Department has a responsibility. Is there much cross-departmental co-operation on the issue of disability and looking at this whole issue of the poor employment rate in the country and incorporating the cost of disability into it?

Does the Department do disability awareness training for those in the Department who work with disabled people? A situation was just brought to my attention this week of a young woman, whose EmployAbility service feels she meets the criteria for their services, but the person in the Department of Social Protection has refused to refer her because he is insisting that one must have a 20% deficit in ability to work. However, long-term medical illness, which this woman has, is also a criterion. The manner in which this man in the Department has dealt with the young woman and the people in the EmployAbility service is not good enough at all. Does the Department provide awareness training and is everybody au fait with the reasons for referring someone to EmployAbility? They feel he is mixing it up with the wage subsidy scheme, which is a different scheme.

Ms Fiona Ward

I will go through the Vice Chair’s questions. Regarding fear of loss of the disability payments and the secondary benefits, the Department is very cognisant of that. In various budgets, we have made some changes to the means test to ensure that people can keep their payments with a higher level of income. For example, currently, a person on the disability allowance can earn up to approximately €495 per week and still retain some of their disability allowance payment.

On the secondary benefits, people on disability allowance can keep the free travel benefit for five years after they secure employment. Through engagement with colleagues in the Department of Health and the Minister for Health, medical cards can also be retained for three years as I understand it. Having said that, we keep everything under review all the time and when budgets come up we look at what we can do.

As I said in my opening statement, this is a cross-departmental issue that needs to be addressed on a cross-departmental basis. The two main strategies which focus on assisting and dealing with people with disabilities and ensuring they can access the labour market are the national disability inclusion strategy and the comprehensive employment strategy for people with disabilities. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is a lead Department for both those strategies and there is a steering group, chaired by the Minister of State with responsibility for disability, on which our Department is represented. The Deputy mentioned the recent report on the cost of living for people with disabilities. That report was steered through the steering group, chaired by the Minister of State, Deputy Butler.

Our Department has the Pathways to Work strategy, which is the Government's national employment services strategy. It includes commitments under strand 4 around leaving no one behind and focuses on the groups of customers who are furthest away from the labour market or who have some disadvantage in accessing the labour market. The commitments contained in that strategy apply across the Government.

Before I hand over to my colleague, Ms Conroy, who will go through the issue of training, 74 staff based in all our Intreo centres are fully trained in engaging with customers who have a disability. We have 13 disability liaison officers and other staff are trained to engage with them.

If the Deputy would like to give me the details after the meeting of the case she raised where there seems to have been an issue with someone being referred to EmployAbility Services, we will follow up on it.

Ms Annette Conroy

I will clarify about the training that is provided. All staff in the Department have access to "be disability aware" training. They can benefit from that by taking that training.

With specific reference to our public employment service, we have 74 trained officers at the moment who have participated in disability awareness training. The content is provided in an online environment to our officers and the purpose is to educate and train the participants in that training on the core aspects of disability and disability-related issues and to give them confidence to engage with colleagues. Some of the items covered in the training include communication, use of appropriate language when dealing with people who have a disability, types of disabilities, the relevant legislation, disability etiquette and how to engage with people, barriers for people with disabilities, discrimination and how to create an inclusive society. There is also a lesson on reasonable accommodation. That training has been provided to 74 of our officers so we have an officer in our Intreo services in every area who has availed of this training and is working in that remit. Those officers should be fully aware of EmployAbility Services requirements and what makes a person suitable for those. As the Deputy correctly pointed out, the person must have the necessary training, education, motivation and ability to go to work and need the support. It sounds like there is some confusion and we would be happy to work with the Deputy on it.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

I have two questions. The first is for Mr. Hammersley. I recently had the honour, at a Fine Gael businesswomen's event, of meeting a woman called Hannah Daly who is a paediatric occupational therapist. She is profoundly dyslexic, dyspraxic and has a sensory processing disorder. She has multiple university degrees but still cannot read and write. I am reading that information from the back of a book she has written about her life and experiences as someone with fairly debilitating disabilities who is extremely successful. Her argument is that people do not get support to come in at that high level of employment. She says there are lots of supports for low-level, minimum wage type opportunities, but asks where the conduit is at the high level. She challenged the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment who took her points on board and has met her since. What is the international best practice? How do we ensure that people are supported at all levels? Stereotypes have been blown out of the water. People have ability across the board, regardless of what people might think. If they say she could not possibly do that if she cannot read or write, why am I holding her successful book?

My second question is for the Department. It has given an exceptional list of supports and of everything that is available and yet we have this damning situation where we are in the lowest bracket. It is shocking to think there are poverty ratings where we are lower than Romania and Greece, when we appear to pride ourselves on being a little more advanced. Does the Department think our measures are sufficient? How long have they have been in place? If the Department thinks they are sufficient, what is that based on and how does it account for Ireland's appalling rating? If the Department does not think the measures are sufficient, where are the gaps and who is responsible for fixing those gaps?

Ms Fiona Ward

I thank the Senator for her question. On whether our measures are sufficient, as I said, a cross-governmental approach is required. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth leads on this issue, including leading the steering group. There is a cross-governmental approach to addressing these issues. My Department's role in addressing this issue is to ensure the income supports we provide facilitate people taking up employment, to take up what Deputy Tully said about how we manage those supports.

We have employment services, for which I have responsibility. We have our employment personal advisers in our Intreo centres. We have Intreo centre partners and we have EmployAbility Services that work with people with disabilities to assist them to secure and sustain employment. We engage with employers. We have a number of supports, including financial incentives, to incentivise employers to take on people with disabilities, such as the wage subsidy scheme-----

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

I will cut across Ms Ward. How is the assessment of that done? Despite having those services, people are still fearful of the consequences for their benefits of taking up employment. The study on the cost of disability to individuals is pretty damning. Nothing appears to fill that gap or meet that weekly cost which almost amounts to another wage. Where is that assessment? Ms Ward says it is a cross-Government approach but the emphasis lies with the Department of Social Protection meeting some of those needs to facilitate people taking up employment. Where is the review and what is it based on?

Ms Fiona Ward

One of our commitments under Pathways to Work and under the various strategies to assist people with disabilities to secure employment is to look at the income supports we provide. The Department made a commitment, including in the Roadmap for Social Inclusion 2020-2025, to look across the whole disability and illness supports we provide and provide for a consultation on how we can improve them, on whether they are fit for purpose and on whether they are working for our customers.

That strawman proposal is at an advanced stage at the moment and we would hope, as a Department, to go for publication in the not-too-distant future with regard to our income supports and how we should engage with people with disabilities going forward. That is ongoing at the moment.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

What sort of timeline are we talking about? It is said that “We are developing”, “We are in consultation, “We are going to publish” and there is going to be feedback on that, but before action is taken, during all of that time, people with disabilities are in subsistence situations.

Ms Fiona Ward

As I have outlined, we have taken a number of actions in a number of budgets, certainly in regard to the income support side, to make sure that people with disabilities do not lose their payments immediately. We have addressed some of the secondary benefits issues and in the most recent budget, we increased the income that a person can earn before it has a significant impact on their allowance.

The Senator is right that there is an awareness issue, certainly with employers in terms of the significant financial supports that are available to them to employ somebody with a disability and, indeed, in making sure our own customers are fully aware of what they can do in terms of retaining benefits should they seek and secure employment. That is part of the early engagement process that we have implemented since July 2022, whereby trained employment personal advisers are engaging with younger people with disabilities who are in receipt of payments from our Department. It is on a voluntary basis and is to outline to them what supports are available to them and what we can do to help them should they wish to seek employment. That is a process that we commenced in June 2022 and 10,500 people have been engaged with as part of that. Ms Conroy can go through the outcomes if the Senator is interested to know more.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

I am. I would also love to get follow-up on that in writing.

Ms Annette Conroy

I understand members are under time pressure so I will synopsise. Basically, the early engagement started in July 2022 and, as Ms Ward pointed out, it is a proactive but voluntary service. What we are doing is advising people who are in receipt of a disability allowance. We initially started with people who are aged 18 to 22 and we have moved on to 22- to 25-year-olds and will continue in that vein. Using a letter that was agreed with disability stakeholders, we advise them that we exist and that there is support for employment services if they are interested in finding a job. However, it is entirely voluntary and they do not have to engage with us if they do not want to because we do not want to create a fear of loss of payment or that kind of thing. We then follow up with a phone call from our trained employment personal advisers. We discuss the services and supports available and whether they might have an interest in participating in some sort of training or education. With some of the younger groups, what we have found is that they are already in education and working towards something, so we are explaining to them that we exist, that we are there to support them in the future and that they can contact us at any time, again, without fear of losing a payment; it is a support mechanism.

Outside of that, to date, 1,300 people, which is perhaps 13% of the people we have contacted, were immediately interested in supports and they are on our officers’ caseload, which is how we refer to it, and are engaging directly with officers. We are making referrals for those people, depending on the barriers they are experiencing or depending on the interests they might have for career progression. In some instances, we refer them to the EmployAbility service because we believe they are job-ready and ready to move on to have that supported employment environment. For others, it is further education and training and support grants, and there may be referrals under the wage subsidy scheme. There is also a work placement experience programme, CE schemes and things like that. The officers engage with people, establish where they would like to get to and what they would like to do, support them and do their best to advise them of all of the options that are there to assist them into employment.

As Ms Ward said, we have contacted more than 10,500 and we are continuing to review that process. We meet with our officers regularly and we are moving the process out across the country to see what sort of feedback we are getting. It has been very positive so far. Some people have told us that they are not in a position right now to engage but that they would love to do so in the future, and others have taken the information away and said they will come back. All in all, we have had very positive feedback but we continue to review it to see if we can improve it.

Mr. Haydn Hammersley

I thank the Senator for her question. The question was about good practice in support for people who are looking for work at a higher, more qualified level. In terms of good practice, a relatively widespread practice throughout Europe is that of the countries where reasonable accommodation is reimbursed or subsidised by the state, which happens in almost all EU member states and is also the case in Ireland, if our research is correct. What is important is not just the fact it happens but also that any reimbursements or adjustments in the workplace are reimbursed well and that a big proportion of the costs are reimbursed, and also that this is done quite quickly, given employers have a fear that they will be out of pocket if they pay for anything upfront.

To deal with the question more specifically, I do not have the example of a particular country in which this is happening because it tends to happen more sporadically or more on the basis of the employer. It is important for people in high-performing sectors to have job coaching and mentoring on the job. With people who are on the autism spectrum and people with mental health issues in particular, we see that the issues they face in the workplace are often due to interaction with bosses or colleagues, and this is something that can be helped. It is sometimes the company itself that will invest in this or there are organisations or NGOs that offer this service. It is extremely useful. For example, we have seen research from Spain that shows that one of the groups among persons with disabilities that is the most affected by unemployment is that of persons with mental health issues. Quite often, it is this issue of interaction with the hierarchy and the resulting misunderstandings, and difficulty in managing workload is also sometimes an issue. Mentoring on the job can help with this, so that is a very good practice and is something we would like to see more systematically put in place. Where we see it in operation, it works quite well and is a valued practice.

Deputy Dessie Ellis

I thank the witnesses for their contributions. What I found noticeable is that the European Disability Forum, EDF, has outlined many areas where there are problems in this country and, in fact, most of the people we have had before the committee have said exactly the same things with regard to problems with income, employment and education. In particular, the point was made that most EU member states have a quota system for people with disabilities for both the private and public sectors. Ireland seems to only have a quota system for the public sector, with literally no penalties or anything else for the private sector, or that is what comes across. I do not know what penalties for non-compliance there are in Europe. Have we any examples of what penalties or fines can be imposed for breaches in this area?

The 2020 study using data from EUROSTAT found that the risk of poverty and social exclusion for people with disabilities is higher in Ireland than in western Europe. It beggars belief that our country, which is supposed to be relatively rich, is at the lower end of the scale compared to others, and we are being compared with Bulgaria, Romania and countries such as these. There is a huge gap in this regard. The employment rate in Ireland for people with disabilities is approximately 32%, which is shocking when compared to the rate of 57% in other European countries. I do not know how we are going to plug that gap. Women, in particular, are badly affected.

I would love to know how we are eventually going to bridge that gap. Women really are at the lower end. Often they are in households and they are penalised if they are on disability and there are incomes coming in. That has been highlighted by the European Disability Forum. It outlined exactly what we have all said here time out of number. A lot of the jobs that become available are often very low paid or below minimum wage. We have to stop anyone being paid below minimum wage. It has also been highlighted that that is a problem in this country. I am just wondering how that is going to be properly addressed and what penalties can be imposed.

Ms Fiona Ward

There is a quota, as the Deputy knows, in the public sector for employing people with disabilities. I think it is around 6%. In our Department we have 6.8% employed. There is no quota in Ireland for hiring people in the private sector though in some countries they do have one when employers are of a certain size. I cannot really comment on that. That would be a policy matter and would involve discussion across a number of relevant Departments. That is really all I can say on that. Mr. Hammersley can talk to what happens internationally.

Regarding Ireland having a higher employment gap than other countries, I meant to say to earlier that there is a technical issue, and it is accepted by the Commission, with how this information is collated by EUROSTAT and the index it uses to collate it. For countries like Ireland that have a lower prevalence of disability compared to others, it comes out that the gap is higher. There are some issues with the way it is collated and the Commission itself acknowledges that in the language it uses when it produces publications around it. Having said that, we do have a significant employment gap and it is something we need to address. As I said, it is across government and is an issue that needs to be addressed on a cross-government basis. We are part of the solution but we are not the only solution. Education, as the Deputy mentioned, is part of the solution, particularly further and higher education and the Department responsible for that. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is leading on this issue and it will also require input from colleagues in the Department of Health. A steering group, chaired by the Minister of State, is looking at this issue.

Within our own Department, we are doing a mid-term review of the Pathways to Work strategy, which is our own national employment services strategy. Now that the labour market is tight overall, we will review our commitment on that and there will be a focus on strand four of that strategy, entitled "Leaving No One Behind". The review will focus more on that going forward and on putting measures and services in place to address the employment gap, working across government.

On people being paid below the minimum wage, that is against the law as far as I am aware so that should not be happening. People should be paid at least the minimum wage. If anybody wants to bring any issues to our attention, we will certainly follow up on that. That falls within the remit of our colleagues in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

Mr. Haydn Hammersley

With regard to quotas, it is true that throughout Europe it is more common for these to be in place in the public sector because they are more easily implemented. There are quite a few countries where they are also put in place in the private sector. It is more common, when there is a quota system in place, to have a system of penalties. I would not be able to give an amount as an example of what is required because it is usually dependent on the size of the company so the fines would be relative to how big the enterprise is. The idea is that they need to be big enough to be dissuasive. The practice in most countries is that the money paid in fines goes towards a common fund, which is then used as a pot of money to subsidise wages in those companies and sectors that do employ at or above what is required by the quota. That is the case in Czechia and Poland but I believe it is the case in other countries as well. That is a typical practice, whereby money paid in fines goes towards a fund and the fund is used for the benefit of workers with disabilities elsewhere.

Senator Erin McGreehan

The witnesses are all very welcome. We speak quite often to representatives of many different Departments. I am struck by the continuous statements from all Departments saying that the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is the lead Department and then when representatives from that Department come in here, they say they are only one Department. What are the witnesses doing to be the lead Department in their own area? What are they feeding into the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in respect of positive changes to get people to work? We have the statistics. The witnesses can disagree with how the base levels of the employment gap are calculated but the fact is the employment gap is shocking. We have, quite starkly, a system that is almost State-sanctioned poverty for people with disabilities. They are damned if they do and damned if they do not. They go in to work and are constantly in fear of losing their disability allowances and benefits. If they do put up their lámh to have career progression, they are afraid the hand will be snapped off because they will lose benefits. They might have three years or five years of free travel or a medical card but they will have that disability infinitely. The disability does not approve. They will still have a visual impairment or autism. There are no supports for that career progression because people with disabilities cannot afford to lose their benefits. They cannot afford to go to the doctor. They cannot afford to be healthy if they lose those. What are the witnesses doing to be outstanding in their own field, to be that lead Department in their own area of social welfare and feed into the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth? What are they doing to say what they can do and what they are doing?

Will the Department be considering the cost of disability in its budget for 2024? We know the cost of disability is colossal and it is a massive penalty on people. Will that be fed into the review that was spoken about? There are schemes there. There is one workplace scheme where not one cent has been drawn down. I cannot remember off the top of my head what it was called. That is a red flag that something is going seriously wrong when over a long period of time no money has been drawn down.

In reality, the comprehensive employment strategy is not too comprehensive because there is very little reference to career progression. That is what I mean about putting a barrier on people with disabilities who have the audacity to have ambition. There is a lack of continuous supports for moving on. What is the current situation with the comprehensive employment strategy? The third and final implementation plan was due to begin in 2022. Where is the plan? There was a draft circulated. How many meetings have the witnesses had on that?

When was the last meeting? There has been a discussion recently, and I heard that the chair of the implementation group has resigned. Is that true? Have there been movements to take on another chair to drive that strategy? I will go back to my original question on the comprehensive strategy. What is the Department of Social Protection doing to push and contribute to that? Are there targets? What are the 2024 targets for how many with disabilities will be targeted to encourage them into work, and without penalty of ambition?

Ms Fiona Ward

I will start with the last question, which is about the comprehensive employment strategy for disabilities. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is the lead Department on that strategy. Delivery is monitored by an implementation group, which meets four times per year. Our Department is represented on that strategy. I am not aware of any issues relating to how that group operates. I am not the representative on that group. I can find out and come back to the committee on that. I am advised that work is being done to finalise the third and final action plan, to underpin the delivery of the strategy covering the period from 2022 to 2024. I understand that is where things are at the moment.

On the Department's contribution, there are three areas on which we are leading and are involved in. The first, as the Senator mentioned, is the income support side. There are two elements to that. On the day-to-day stuff and on budget changes, we have sought through successive budgets to make changes to the means test, and to make sure people with disabilities do not fall off a cliff when they get employment. As I mentioned earlier, a person in receipt of a disability allowance can earn approximately €495 per week and still retain part of their disability allowance payment. In terms of secondary benefits, they keep free travel for five years, and the medical card for three years. The anticipation is that if people are working, they will increase their earning potential while working and gaining skills. As also outlined, we have the employment services staff. We work directly with people with disabilities and all job seekers to try to give them the skills they need to secure sustainable employment. If people have particular issues when they are job ready, we have the employability service, which falls under our contracted service. We have contracted public employment service providers too. They also work with people with disabilities. They provide pre-employment and in-employment support for people with disabilities. They work with employers and employees to ensure they have the support they need to sustain their employment.

We then have the financial incentives, such as the wage subsidy scheme, the JobsPlus programme and the work placement experience programme. We also have, as the Senator has said, the reasonable accommodation fund, which is for employers to adapt their work practices and workplace to facilitate the employment of a person with a disability. That reasonable accommodation fund is being reviewed at the moment, as I mentioned in my opening statement. The review is almost finalised, and we have received feedback that it is cumbersome and clunky for people to apply for it. The review was undertaken and there was a public consultation. Many people submitted to that consultation. That review is almost finalised. We would hope the outcome-----

Senator Erin McGreehan

Is that the employee retention grant scheme?

Ms Fiona Ward

Yes. It falls under the reasonable accommodation fund.

Senator Erin McGreehan

There is zero drawdown.

Ms Fiona Ward

It falls under that reasonable accommodation fund grant system. It goes to what I am saying, which is people are telling us it is clunky and they find it difficult to get through the system. We hope when the review is published that it will be more user friendly and easier for people to access. The other job of work we have is to publish and publicise these reports, so employers are aware of what is there to assist them, should they seek to take on an employee with a disability. I think I have covered everything. Mr. O'Leary can talk about how the employability service supports people.

Mr. Tadhg O'Leary

As Ms Ward said, the employability service is about providing support for people who are ready to go to work, and who need some support. Mentoring has been mentioned already, which means having someone to assist a person when engaging with the employer at particular times. It is open to people on any scheme, or on no scheme. They can already be in employment. The companies are locally based, and there are 23 of them around the country. It is a long-standing scheme. It was last evaluated in 2016 by Indecon, which found it was well regarded by everyone who engaged with it - the employers and employees and so on. We would certainly like to see an increase in the numbers of people we are engaging with on employability. The numbers have not really changed much in a 20-year timeframe. In the same timeframe, there has been a 30% increase in population and you would expect to see an increase in people with disabilities, and engagement with them. It is a good and well-regarded service. I know a lot of people here will have dealt with the service. It provides critical support at the point where a person with a disability has decided he or she is ready to go to work. The Senator spoke about the various barriers people would see and so on. However, when that time comes, and employability is available, there is a referral process through our own employment support guys. We acknowledge that the employability companies are always out there, marketing it, selling it to people and explaining the benefits of the service. It might be the case, particularly if a client is not in receipt of a benefit, that we only see him or her after they have gone to employability. I am happy to answer any questions about it.

Senator Erin McGreehan

I want to speak about the report on the cost of disability. Will that be taken into consideration in the reviews, and for budget 2024? The penalty and barrier of that cost is something that comes up here all of the time. It is huge, and it was the Department's report.

On the supports for employment, has there been an examination of supports for self-employed people with disabilities? Quite often, to be self employed benefits and works best for persons with disabilities because it is flexible and in their own time. They are not constrained by many other things. In reality, a self-employed person running a business can apply for assistance under the workplace to hire and retain somebody in employment. However, a self-employed person cannot often get the support to keep him or herself hired, and benefit his or her community. Self-employed people are locally-based small businesses and can be highly successful, yet they can hire someone and get supports but cannot get supports for themselves. Has that been examined by the Department?

Ms Fiona Ward

I will first speak to the cost of disability report. The cost of disability is significantly broader than income supports, and will not be addressed through income supports alone. It involved a huge number of policy areas, as was mentioned earlier, including housing, equipment, aids, appliances, mobility, transport, communication, medicines and care.

One of the key conclusions referenced the significant challenges faced in accessing employment and the high priority given to facilitate an increase in employment opportunities for people with disabilities. As I said, we have reviewed the reasonable accommodation fund. Hopefully, the review will be published in the near future to make it easier for people to use it. A review by the wage subsidy team has just commenced. We had a public consultation and the closing date for submissions is 21 July. We have also committed to develop a strawman proposal for restructuring the long-term disability schemes. It intends to simplify the system and take account of the concerns expressed on the difficulties and challenges faced by people with disabilities in accessing employment in various reports, including the Make Work Pay report, our Pathways to Work report and the findings of the Cost of Disability report. That consultation is at an advanced stage. We hope to get it out for a wider consultation in the near future. That is where we are on that.

In relation to people who are self-employed, obviously people with disabilities can access all the supports we have for people who want to engage in self-employment. The back to work enterprise allowance is available to anybody who wishes to take up self-employment. That is part of the information we provide in early engagement with people with disabilities. We already work with people with disabilities who wish to take up self-employment. I do not have any figures or numbers on that at the moment. I can see if we can get them and come back to the committee afterwards.

Senator Erin McGreehan

That would be great.

Deputy Emer Higgins

I thank the witnesses for joining us today. I have a particular interest in the area of employment for people with disabilities. In my previous career I did some work with the Trinity Centre for People with Intellectual Disabilities and I worked for a multinational. Many multinationals are currently undertaking inclusion initiatives to provide opportunities for people with disabilities to develop a career and share their skills, experience and expertise with the corporate world. I have four questions, one of which is a follow-on from Senator McGreehan's question. My first question relates to the public sector target of employing 3% of people with disabilities. It is due to rise to 6%. What is the current employment rate in the Department, and are we on track to hit that 6% target when it increases? Of the 74 people employed in the Department to engage with persons with disabilities, how many are trained in Irish Sign Language, ISL? We had representatives of the Irish Deaf Society in with us last week. I think they would be particularly interested in that.

Recommendation 41 in our committee's pre-budget submission requests "An upwards adjustment in the income disregard for those people with disabilities engaged in employment", an uncoupling of the medical card and disability-related supports from income restrictions and "a relaxation on the time limit placed on people with disabilities as regards engagement with employment support services and sufficient budgeting for PAS." For me, providing employment opportunities for people with disabilities is about empowering them, lifting them out of unemployment, providing them with an opportunity to add more to their lives and dismantling the social welfare trap. The fact that income is so coupled to the thresholds for allowances is actually a real hindrance. We have spoken about a cut-off rate of approximately €495. If a person is currently earning €490, which is below the threshold, how much of a disability allowance is he or she retaining? I assume that figure is going to be very small, given that it is the higher end of the threshold. I wonder, when we stand back and look at that figure, whether it is going to be satisfactory given that people's disability and medical needs do not disappear because they are working. In fact, they might even get more complex because they are putting themselves under more pressure.

My fourth question is a follow-up to Senator McGreehan's question on self-employment. In her statement earlier, she used the phrase "audacity of ambition". I think that is particularly true when we talk about entrepreneurs with disabilities. I know of one such entrepreneur, who gave up on his ambition of starting his own company after he was told that we would have to forecast his earnings accurately a year in advance so that his allowances could be reduced accordingly. As we all know, entrepreneurism does not produce immediate results. It is high-risk. In situations like that, people who are starting their own businesses are told that realistically, nobody can forecast earnings over the next year. However, what we can accurately forecast is the fact that people are going to be down X amount of their disability allowance. That puts them in a very tricky situation. I know there are back to education grants and a lot of different opportunities that people apply for, but realistically, people with disabilities are a different cohort and they need additional support. We have to be mindful of that. Currently, the experience of people I am dealing with is that we do not seem to be providing that support. As a result of that, entrepreneurism for people with disabilities becomes extremely high-risk because they are effectively being pushed off the cliff edge when it comes to financial support as they begin this unknown journey and they do not know how much money they will be ending up having in their pocket. That makes that situation untenable for people. I used the word "untenable", but the words given to me by one particular individual were "intimidating and threatening", because they feel they do not have any option. My concern is that the audacity of ambition that we have talked about is being quenched by State supports that should be there to help people. Those are my four questions. What percentage of people with disabilities are currently in the Department's workforce? Are we on track to hit the 6% target? If a person with a disability is earning €490, what are they coming away with in disability allowance? Of the 74 people employed in the Department to engage with persons with disabilities, how many are trained in ISL? Do the witnesses feel that we could do anything to better support the self-employed or people who want to become self-employed and potential entrepreneurs with disabilities?

Ms Fiona Ward

In relation to the public service target, my understanding is that 6.8% are employed in our Department at the moment.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Great.

Ms Fiona Ward

Obviously, we would like the percentage to be even higher than that. On the question of the 74 people employed in the Department to engage with persons with disabilities who are trained in ISL, we contract sign language users in if we are engaging with people. We have some staff who are trained in ISL, but we also contract in sign language users for meetings and things like that.

Deputy Emer Higgins

So, if I was deaf and came looking for supports, you would tell me to come back next week when there would be somebody there.

Ms Fiona Ward

Yes, we would always do that. Obviously, there is a finite amount of resources and any submissions that are made in the context of a budget are all considered in the budgetary discussions. We have made a number of changes to the budget and the means test in relation to disability payments over the last number of years. The amount of disability allowance granted depends on people's circumstances and whether they have dependents and that. It would increase with dependents, children etc. A single person in receipt of a payment of around €490 would get around €10 of income, but they would keep all their secondary benefits, including the medical card and free travel, for three years.

Deputy Emer Higgins

After the three-year period, would they be paying their medical expenses themselves?

Ms Fiona Ward

People can apply for a medical card and get it if they satisfy a means test.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Would a person satisfy the means test if he or she was earning €490?

Ms Fiona Ward

The medical card does not fall within the remit of my Department, so I do not know. The Deputy asked a question on entrepreneurs. When people take up employment, we assume that over time their earnings will increase and they will progress as they settle into jobs. In relation to entrepreneurship, we have the back to work enterprise allowance for people who want to set up their own business. That is means-tested, once you qualify for that payment. We require people to go to a Start Your Own Business course. The local employment offices, LEOs, are there at a local level and they work very closely with people starting up businesses. I know that people have to draft business plans. There are a lot of supports available not only within our own Department but in other areas, including through the LEOs etc., to help people setting up businesses.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Is there anything specific? They are all fantastic supports and I am very familiar with them because many people in my constituency use them. Obviously, a person with a disability is taking a higher risk in starting a company. Is there any specific training course, payment allowance or support in place to show that there is a difference between me starting my own business and somebody with a disability, who has further challenges and hurdles to get over, doing the same?

Ms Fiona Ward

I am not aware of anything specific for people with disabilities setting up their own business, apart from all the supports available to everyone setting up their own business. There is a back-to-work enterprise allowance is a scheme that is not means tested. If the Deputy wants to give me information on that person, I could look at their circumstances to see whether there is anything we can do there.

Deputy Emer Higgins

That would be great. While I appreciate it is not means tested, which is why it is such a great resource for anybody, it is also not disability tested. We know that someone with a disability has more challenges and hurdles to get over, and I believe we should support them as a State to make sure they have every opportunity to do that. In the area of self-employment in particular, I worry we are not doing that.

Ms Fiona Ward

All I can say is we will have a look at what supports are available. I am not totally familiar with this area, so I will revert to the Deputy on it.

Deputy Seán Canney

I apologise for missing part of the meeting because I was taking part in priority questions in the Chamber, which have just finished. I welcome the witnesses.

When it comes to supports for people with disabilities, my biggest frustration, and perhaps that of a lot of the committee members, relates to people’s fear that if they try to improve their lot, they will end up losing out. I dealt with a case in my constituency where a man with a disability got married to a woman who was working. His disability allowance dropped to €60, so he had to rely on his wife for support. That is the kind of stuff that is going on. The policies are not correct when that is going on. There was a huge effort with artists where they got a bursary to do something in particular, and while it was a small bursary, it has had an effect on them. The system is punishing people who want to progress and become more independent in their lives.

What do we need to do, as policymakers and legislators, to make sure we incentivise people rather than put fear into them that if they try to do something, they will be punished through losing some of their supports? The cost of living with a disability is, on average, more than €9,000 per annum, according to an Indecon report carried out in 2019. There has been a cost-of-living crisis since then, so I am sure the figure would have increased to €12,000 if it were to be calculated now.

Ms Fiona Ward

As I explained, a person can earn a significant amount and still retain benefits, including secondary benefits, with the disability allowance. The Department and the Minister have over a number of budgets made some changes to facilitate people with disabilities taking up employment and not losing all their payments. The issue with the means test is that it is to cover two things, namely, the contingency a person might have arising from, say, a disability or having lost their job but also to ensure resources that are finite will be used for those who have the most needs. That is the rationale for the means test.

Any changes to the means test are a policy matter, so I cannot really comment on that because it is dealt with through the budgetary process. A lot of work has been done in recent years to make it smoother for people with disabilities if they are taking up employment. As I mentioned, the Department is shortly, we hope, going to start a consultation on the restructuring of our long-term disability payments to make sure they are fit for purpose and are having the intended effect in ensuring people with disabilities can pay their full part in society and the community. That will allow everyone to have their say on how we might restructure those schemes to ensure they will work for our customers. We have made some changes. Additional money has been provided for the reasonable accommodation fund and we are about to publish a review on that to make it much more user friendly. The wage subsidy scheme and other financial measures are under review at the moment. We are focusing our attention on what we can do to support people with disabilities as they seek employment.

The cost of disability report, which the Deputy mentioned, indicated there were significant costs for people who have a disability and that report is being steered through the steering group chaired by the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, under the auspices of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. That cross-governmental response is required there because the costs of disability relate not just to income supports but also to housing, equipment, communication and transport mobility. That is being progressed through those forums and we in the Department are playing our part in that regard.

An Cathaoirleach

In the commentary made by members earlier and reflected in the evidence we get weekly, the loss of secondary benefits is one of the major stumbling blocks. There is a fear that people will be worse off in the round. There is benefit for them in participating in employment, even on a part-time basis. A lot of good work has been done on the community employment, CE, schemes over the years. Whenever we come to the end of a CE scheme, whether it is a three-year or six-year programme, people look for extensions. Is it time for a new scheme or new type of payment for disabilities to be brought into place? I appreciate Ms Ward will say this is a policy decision, but the officials are senior people within the Department. Twenty or 25 years ago, farm assist was brought in and following that, there was the rural social scheme for low-income farmers. Anyone on farm assist was allowed to move on to the rural social scheme. Either they or their spouse could go onto the scheme, and that had an enormously positive benefit for people who would not have worked outside the home before that. A lot of people went on to full-time employment and found their sense of worth, and the disregards that were put in place for that scheme, under the statutory instruments that set it up, allowed people to stay on the scheme for as long as they wanted but also to secure their secondary benefits.

Deputy Canney mentioned changes in a person's circumstances in the context of the disability allowance, which is not means tested. Whether it is means assessed or needs assessed, which is a fundamental issue we as legislators will have to address, there is scope within the Department for something to be done. As Deputy Ellis has mentioned to me for some time, people who were on the disability allowance might get a job on the CE scheme and get a sense of self-worth from that, but then they have to fight to see whether it can be extended or whether there is a way around it. Is there a need for all of us to look for a new, more imaginative way of ensuring people with disabilities can go back to work, contribute to society and benefit themselves and society from that participation, even if it is only part time, in the security they have, whereby they will not be less well off or challenged when they have to seek healthcare or any other issues for themselves? I acknowledge this is a policy issue, but the officials might have some comment. I know the work they do in the Department and they will have a good understanding of what goes on in the other Departments, so their thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Ms Fiona Ward

I will have to leave it to the committee in respect of whether there should be a new scheme. That would really be a budgetary matter. Having said that, some changes have been made to CE schemes. Around 1,460 people with a disability or who came from a disability-related payment are on a CE scheme. They can stay on the scheme for an extra year and be in it for four years up to a maximum of seven years.

The Tús scheme came in last year. There are 67 people who came from a disability payment on the Tús scheme. There are 33 people with a disability on the rural social scheme. The rural social scheme is subject to a review. It is outside the subject matter of this meeting but we are reviewing the rural social scheme at present. A steering group has been set up with an independent chair and people from the schemes are on it, as well as people from various Departments. Part of my area of responsibility is looking after that. That scheme is being reviewed.

Again, the means assessment and the cost constitute a policy matter. The rationale for the means test was explained. It is a mechanism for assisting people who have an income need as a result of particular contingencies. If there was no means assessment, the costs involved would be significant. Again, it is a policy matter and is outside where I could comment at the moment.

An Cathaoirleach

A person on disability allowance who goes on a CE scheme and gets three years on it-----

Ms Fiona Ward

Four years.

An Cathaoirleach

Somebody on a jobseeker's payment gets three years on a CE scheme while a person on a disability payment gets four years. I have no doubt that all those here know quite well the benefit to people on disability allowance of going on a CE scheme, including the sense of self-worth they get from participating in their community. It is immeasurable. It is immeasurable for the individual but also for the community. There are many CE schemes around the country that are struggling to find participants. A person aged 55 with disability allowance goes on a CE scheme and then spends four years on it. This person has not really engaged with the workforce for a long time. The scheme gives this person a sense of self-worth but when he or she reaches 58 or 59, he or she cannot be left on the scheme. Is there not a need to expand that and make sure the person can stay on the scheme until he or she is at least 65? Is that not the first thing we should be looking at for people with disabilities? I know CE is a labour activation measure that aims to get people back to work but there has to be a social element. The review of the rural social scheme is only the headline I am putting it under because that benefited, but the review of the CE scheme should take into account that a lot of people with disability payments probably will not be able to participate in full-time employment and their time on the scheme should be extended.

Ms Fiona Ward

As the Cathaoirleach said, CE is a labour activation programme. It combines people undertaking work on a part-time basis and there is also a training element. At the end of three to four years, we would hope that those on the scheme would have acquired skills that would assist them to get employment in the open labour market. That is the rationale for that scheme. I appreciate that CE schemes are finding it difficult to fill vacancies. This is happening across the labour market not just on our programmes. We have made some changes around the CE scheme to make it open to the qualified adults of jobseekers. They can now qualify for CE schemes. We made some changes to allow Ukrainian refugees who are here under the temporary protection directive to access CE earlier than others to help them with their integration. The number of people with a disability who are working on CE schemes is increasing substantially. We have a dedicated person in all our offices who works to engage with people who might benefit from working on a CE scheme, Tús and the rural social scheme, RSS, so we are looking at that.

Again, I will not comment on whether somebody should be on a scheme until he or she is 65. Because of the difficulties schemes face at the moment, when people on a CE scheme have been on it for three or four years, we have made extensions on a case-by-case basis because schemes rely on these people to deliver essential services in the community, so there are workarounds in place in respect of CE. Ultimately, however, CE is a labour activation programme. The OECD is carrying out a review of CE. We do not yet have the outcomes of that.

Deputy Dessie Ellis

If a disabled person qualifies and gets the back to work allowance, does his or her disability allowance drop by the same figure under the means test?

Ms Fiona Ward

I do not know the answer to that but I will find out and get back to the Deputy.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank our witnesses for appearing before us and for their engagement. I remind members that a photograph will be taken on the plinth at 11.30 a.m. to launch our pre-budget submission. As there are some issues for the Department in that pre-budget submission, I would appreciate it if the Department could look at it and give it due consideration as the budgetary process gets into full swing.

The joint committee adjourned at 10.57 a.m. sine die.