Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Sep 2013

Vol. 226 No. 4

Services for People with Disabilities: Motion

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, to the House.

Before we begin our debate, I would like to announce a correction to the Government amendment to the motion on the Supplementary Order Paper. The run-in to the amendment should read: "To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:".

I move:

That Seanad Éireann:

recognises -

- the fact that there are over 600,000 people with disabilities in Ireland;

- the deep concern among those with disabilities that services affecting them are being cut or reduced further; and

- that it is unfair and unjust to cut services for people with disabilities;

notes pledges in the Programme for Government to -

- ensure that the quality of life of people with disabilities is enhanced and that resources allocated reach the people who need them; and

- facilitate people with disabilities in achieving a greater level of participation in employment, training and education;

deplores the -

- cut in the respite care grant in the last budget;

- cuts in resource teachers and special needs assistants;

- lack of further education opportunities for young adults with intellectual disabilities;

- cuts to St Michael’s House; and

- delays in processing of applications for disability allowance and benefit and for the carers allowance;

and calls on the Government to provide the appropriate funding and services necessary to honour all its commitments to people with disabilities.

As the motion before the House points out, the programme for Government made a number of specific commitments not only to protect but also to enhance services for people with disabilities. The reality, however, has been very different. Over the past two years, there have been major cuts in services for people with disabilities. Some, such as the €300 annual reduction in the respite care grant, which was implemented last year, have been up-front budget cuts, but others have been stealth cuts. For example, capping special needs assistants at a time of rising enrolments has amounted to an effective cut, whatever the Government's counter-motion wishes to claim.

No matter how many times the Government tries to pretend otherwise, putting a cap on the number of special needs assistants at a time when the number of kids with special needs in schools is increasing means that schools are not in a position to give children the services they need and to which they are entitled. All Senators have met families affected by this cut in SNAs. Last night I attended a public meeting organised by the INTO in Ayrfield and it is organising similar meetings across the country in the run-up to the budget. At that meeting, a number of parents spoke very emotionally about how special needs cuts have affected their children, both in terms of SNAs and the reduction in resource teaching hours.

Despite the row-back by the Government a couple of months ago, resource teaching hours have been reduced by 15% over two years. The proposal made a few months ago to reduce this by a further 10% was overturned, but the previous cuts still stand. The result is that a child with autism who was entitled to five hours of resource teaching is now getting only 85% of that. This makes a huge difference in terms of that child's ability to engage in education and the opportunity to get the extra support he or she needs for real inclusion. From the point of view of the teachers, they are left in a heartbreaking situation in which a child has been brought into the mainstream classroom so as to have the opportunities that come with that, but that child is not getting the support he or she needs to avail of those opportunities. This is heartbreaking not just for parents but for teachers also.

We have also seen a wide range of other cuts. For example, funding for university access programmes for students with disabilities was cut by 20% in 2012. Provision for school leavers with intellectual disabilities has also been cut, as highlighted by Inclusion Ireland. I am aware that Members from all parties attended the Inclusion Ireland briefing, not just this summer but also the previous year, where they expressed their concerns about whether there would be sufficient places for school leavers this September.

We all took at face value the Government's announcement last year as bona fide that that situation would not occur again and it would ensure sufficient resources were put in place so that young people with intellectual disabilities who are finishing the second level system would have adequate education, training places or day placements to give them the same opportunities every other young person takes for granted. When the latter finish their leaving certificate they decide whether they wish to go on to the third level and study at a PLC college or use other further education services - a range of services is offered to them, whereas children with intellectual disabilities do not have that choice.

I have written to the Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality, Deputy Lynch, about the matter over the past couple of months. The Government's response is that placements are offered to all the young people affected. However, what is happening on the ground is that young people who would have previously got full-time placements are being given only part-time hours, which is woefully inadequate. They have no input into the type of services they are given, so they are being asked to fit into what is on offer rather than what suits their needs and abilities. The situation is deeply upsetting for the young people and their families.

Earlier this year, the Government also announced that the mobility allowance is to be discontinued without putting in place an alternative. That is another decision that does not seem to have been thought through. It took people with severe disabilities protesting outside Leinster House before the Government would even listen to what impact the policy would have.

We have tabled this debate in advance of the budget to flag these issues because we do not want to be in a position in a couple of weeks time when Ministers make similar cuts only for them then to say they had not really thought about how they would affect people but that they would now consider that. We want the issues to be on the agenda. We hope that Members of all parties will lobby Ministers over the coming weeks to ensure that that is the case. I know that some Fine Gael and Labour Senators were deeply uncomfortable with having to support last year's cut in the respite care grant. We had an emotional debate in this House about that cut - the vote was very close. Labour lost one of its Senators over the issue, which was regrettable. Senator Gilroy might disagree - perhaps that is why he is smiling at me or perhaps he wants to lose more Senators.

It is your touching sympathy for us that makes me smile.

I thought he would be inclined to join Fianna Fáil.

Members on all sides of the House in the course of that debate expressed sympathy for the people involved and said that they wished the cuts had not happened and that they would lobby Ministers after the event to have them overturned, but the cut stands. All we are asking is that, ahead of the budget, Members put pressure on Ministers to avoid a similar situation happening again.

Other cuts in the past year include the housing adaption grants, which saw funding to local authorities cut by 38% on average. That led to a farcical situation two months ago when Dublin City Council had to close down the grant scheme altogether. It is in the position that when someone has a serious accident or disability and cannot return home because of something simple such as a lack of a ramp, downstairs toilet or guard rails for their showers, he or she is left in hospital instead. That is deeply damaging not only to that person's dignity and independence, but it costs the State far more because the person is stuck in the health system when they would rather be at home. The cuts are in so many ways socially incredibly unfair and economically silly. They simply do not stand up and the Government will end up having to spend more in other areas.

As Senator O'Brien will outline in more detail there have also been huge cuts to St. Michael's House and similar services. I am more familiar with St. Michael's House than other areas because they serve many people in north Dublin and I know that Members will be familiar with other services with which I am not. St. Michael's House has had to reduce its staffing levels across the organisation, including in day services, clinical services and administration. It has been forced to implement a contraction of its residential and respite service and it has had to close its residential day service for one day each month. Elderly parents have spoken to me about that and they have been upset about how they are going to look after an adult child with a disability on that day because they feel that they are not able to look after them for the day yet the person is being forced out of the day service. In addition, St. Michael's House has had its trainee allowance ended and the transport services have been reduced. Due to the huge cuts in its HSE grant, they have had to cut services right across the board.

There have been a whole range of areas in which major cuts have occurred affecting people with disabilities over the past three years. Fianna Fáil accepts fully that cuts must be made. There is still speculation about the size of this year's budget and the tax increases and expenditure cuts needed to reach our target, whether that is €3.1 billion or a smaller amount. Unlike other parties, we are not arguing about the need for cuts. Indeed, I was at a meeting last night in which another former Member of the Labour Party stood up and said that there was no need for any austerity or cuts in the budget, that everything could be rosy in the garden and nobody would be affected. That is not credible. I have never argued that-----

(Interruptions).

It not a fair message to the parents. We must all accept economic realities. However, there are alternatives, and last year we proposed an alternative budget that reached the same overall target as the one implemented by the Government but that protected services, including mental health services and those for people with disabilities. We will do the same again this year. All we ask is that the Government consider fairer alternatives, such as increasing the universal social charge by 3% for people who earn more than €100,000. I do not understand why that was not done last year; it is precisely the type of policy that should be looked at before making the unthinkable disability cuts that I have mentioned.

As I have said, the purpose of the debate is to highlight the cuts that have already been made. That is not to score a political point, but to ensure that Members are aware of how wide the cuts are. I know that Members will be aware of the cuts relating to their individual briefs. For example, while some may be aware of the education cuts, they may not be conscious of all the other cuts that people with disabilities have experienced. As the Disability Federation of Ireland constantly points out, as well as seeing reductions in specific services for people with disabilities, people have also had their basic payments cut, so they are experiencing a double whammy, and the cuts are having a doubly unfair effect.

As I said, the primary reason for tabling the motion is to get in ahead of the budget and to signal that disabilities should be prioritised and to seek all-party support for that approach. We were hopeful that the Government would not table an amendment and that we would all agree that this area deserves support from us all. Unfortunately, I saw this morning that such an amendment was tabled, which is regrettable. However, I ask Members that, should there be a vote later and we walk to opposite sides of the lobby, if in their hearts they agree that disability services should be protected, they should at least use the next few weeks to reach out to their Government and ask them to ensure that in making choices in the next budget they pick ones that are fairer than those picked last year.

I second the motion. Was the amendment circulated earlier?

There was a typing error in the original amendment.

I circulated it earlier.

It was circulated at lunch time, but the typing error has now been corrected.

Senator Power has outlined the purpose of the motion, which is to permit a pre-budget debate on disability services and funding for both children and adults with mental and physical disabilities. I only learned this morning that the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch is in hospital and that she would not be here to take the debate. I wish her well in her recovery.

Since mid-August I have called for the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, as the senior health Minister, to comment on the most recent cuts to St. Michael's House to which Senator Power alluded. I will cover some of those matters, but that is just an example of other services in Dublin and across the country that have been cut. Why did the Government feel it appropriate to announce the cuts in August during the recess and why did it backdate those cuts to 1 July?

In the case of St. Michael's House, €1 million was taken out of its budget. It was announced at the end of August but backdated to 1 July. It makes it nearly impossible for the service to manage the reduction in its budget.

The Government tends to forget that the period to 2011 featured some of the toughest budgets every announced, a point it tends to forget when it talks about the level of adjustments it has made. There have been six incredibly difficult budgets, four of which were delivered by the previous Government. In the 2011 budget there was an effective total cut of 1.9% in disability services. It was made in consultation with the Disability Federation of Ireland. The Government has no regard for the sector. There has been an 80% cut in respite services for children in the north east. In the cases of St. Michael's House and the Del Val house, on which the Minister for Health will not comment, four respite beds have been taken out of circulation completely. I will not talk about the medical cards being withdrawn from children with disabilities. We all know about it and it is happening every single day of the week. People are being asked to reapply and for reviews. As the Government directs the HSE, I do not like the idea of blaming the HSE for everything. The Minister appointed the board and Mr. O'Brien without interview. The HSE board is the Minister's board and the HSE is an arm of government. Medical cards are being withdrawn; day care services have been reduced and, in the case of St. Michael's House, I learned last night that in residential locations for adults with Down's syndrome medical services were being stopped between 10.30 a.m. and 2.30 p.m. I have the specific details from an email and a conversation I had yesterday evening. Between the hours of 10.30 a.m. and 2.30 p.m. there is no emergency medical cover in a number of the houses. This is the effect of the cut of €1 million for that service on 1,500 people in the north east. I use this as an example, but it could be replicated throughout the Twenty-six Counties.

I ask colleagues to think about why these cuts are happening. The Minister mismanaged his budget last year. He brought forward a budget last year that required a €300 million supplementary budget the day before the Christmas recess. He produced a budget before the start of this year that we said did not stack up. This has been already proved. In the first five months of the year he was already €100 million over budget. He will require another supplementary budget at the end of the year and will probably come in, under cover of darkness when there is no one in the Dáil Chamber, to have it rubberstamped by the Government. We must get control of spending. Difficult decisions have been made, but I remind both parties what was said in advance of the last general election. The Minister's party leader, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, said the Labour Party would be "looking after people with disabilities". The Taoiseach said he agreed with this and felt an absolute priority should be the 300,000 people who suffered from mental illness every year. How can these comments be married with the reality of what the Government is doing? My colleague has mentioned the cuts to the mobility allowance and the respite care grant. They delayed the passage of the Social Welfare Act in this House and it was almost defeated. It is a pity that some people did not support it, as difficult a decision as it might have been.

This is in advance of the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, and the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, bringing forward budgets on 15 October. We have had no formal discussion in either House on ring-fencing budgets. In an alternative budget last year we showed that it could be done. Difficult choices must be made elsewhere and if the Government states it must raise taxes or cut transport services, most people will agree with it in the interests of protecting those with mental and physical disabilities and the elderly. All I ask, in the absence of the Minister of State and the continued absence of the Minister for Health is for the Leader to do his level best and ask colleagues on the Government side to lobby Ministers to ensure funding for the disability sector is, at the very least, ring-fenced and protected from further cuts. I remind colleagues of what happened last year when some €8 million worth of home help hours were taken out of the system. There was an apparent U-turn which we welcomed at the time. The Minister for Health said it would not happen, but that was untrue. He kept the budget the same as it was the previous year, even though more people had applied for home help services. It was a cut. Senators John Whelan and John Kelly regret that they took the Minister at his word.

I am glad that the Senator has an insight into the minds of his opponents.

They said it on the floor of the House.

I ask the Senator to conclude.

Members should not come in during the debate on the social welfare Bill and argue the toss about how this had to happen. The Government has a choice to make on how to allocate funding for next year.

The Senator is over time.

I am trying to get the point through to Senator John Gilroy and it takes a little longer sometimes.

I call Senator Martin Conroy.

I genuinely ask the Minister of State to take up the points with which she agrees. No one in the Oireachtas agrees that disability services should be cut. If that is the case, they should not be cut and we will find the money elsewhere. We should protect children and adults with mental and physical disabilities. That should be the bottom line.

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Seanad Éireann” and substitute the following:

“recognises the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the quality of life of people with disabilities is enhanced and that resources are prioritised for the people who need them;

notes that the Government spends approximately €4.8 billion on disability services and that the Department of Health alone will spend €1.5 billion in 2013 on health and social services for people with disabilities, including:

- residential services for over 9,000 people with a disability,

- day services for over 22,000 people with intellectual and physical disabilities,

- respite residential support for over 7,500 people with intellectual and physical disabilities,

- 1.68 million hours of personal assistant-home support hours;

acknowledges the key programme for Government commitments and recognises the progress to date in implementing them, particularly in:

- the publication of the value for money and policy review of disability services which will lay the foundations for a new system of individualised budgeting, which will allow people to exercise greater choice and control, enabling them to live fully inclusive, active and independent lives within the community,

- the publication of an implementation plan for the national disability strategy, which commits to developing a comprehensive employment strategy,

- the introduction of independent inspections for residential services for people with disabilities;

welcomes the provision of €4 million in the Health Service Executive’s national service plan for life skills training places and day services for school-leavers with disabilities in 2013, where each school leaver is assessed on an individual basis to plan for their services and to identify the most suitable training place depending on their particular needs;

acknowledges the range of income and work-related supports for people with disabilities provided by the Department of Social Protection and recognises that the Department has in place an equitable standardised application and assessment process whereby all cases are examined and dealt with on an individualised basis; and that the processing time for individual claims can vary depending on the complexity of the claimant’s circumstances;

welcomes the publication of Recognised, Supported, Empowered, the national carer’s strategy as committed to in the programme for Government, which demonstrates the Government’s support of the vital role played by carers;

and

recognises that the Department of Education and Skills is focused on ensuring that all children can have access to an education appropriate to their needs and that through its budget of €1.3 billion for special education in 2013:

- has protected the numbers of resource teachers and special needs assistants in schools,

- has opened 118 new special classes this month, catering for up to 700 pupils at both primary and post primary level, increasing access to over 700 classes with 5,000 pupils, a 50% increase in special classes since 2011,

- over 1,100 teachers are also being provided for in special schools providing teaching for pupils with various disabilities at much reduced pupil/teacher ratios”.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, and begin by wishing the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, the very best. Members from all sides send her our very best wishes. She is very passionate about disability services.

This is a very reasonable amendment. I thank my colleagues on the other side of the House for putting disability services on the agenda. It is, however, regrettable to see so few Members in the Chamber for such an important Private Members' debate.

There is agreement on all sides of the House on the need to protect services for people with disabilities. Some of the cuts that took place last year were painful and we all found them difficult. It has not been easy and the Government parties lost one colleague. I will give credit to the previous Minister of State, John Moloney, who was excellent. He saw the waste in certain areas of expenditure and initiated a value for money audit which the Government continues to support. It was carried out by Mr. Laurence Crowley. The recommendations were groundbreaking and proposed a system of funding individuals, known as individualised budgeting. It is a commitment in the programme for Government. At least, John Moloney did not keep throwing good money after bad and decided that it was time to carry out a proper evaluation of the money spent on disability services.

People often talk about the astronomical salaries paid to chief executives and senior management in the NGO sector in providing supports for people with disabilities. It is even more regrettable that a number of the charities and NGOs refused to publish the bonuses paid to senior management, citing the fact that the bonuses were paid from charitable donations, not by the taxpayer.

As far as I am concerned, the people of the State were the ones who were making the charitable donations, just as it was they who were paying the taxes that were supporting the senior management salaries in the first place. When we talk about disability services, we must talk about the whole system. We must talk about waste in administration and administration costs, including rent.

The body that nominated me to run for the Seanad is known as People with Disabilities in Ireland, PWDI. The Government removed its funding in my first year as a Senator, rightly so, because 92% of it was being spent on renting offices and paying travel expenses and wages. Only 8% of the funding actually went to provide meaningful support and training for people with disabilities. That is the type of thing that went on under the previous Government. Nobody here is to blame for this. What I describe is the type of cleaning up that had to be done. There was a barrage of criticism when the funding was removed from PWDI, but I supported the decision because it was the right thing to do. When one gives €1.6 million to an organisation, one must ensure one is getting value for money. If one gives €1.60 to somebody, one expects to get value for money.

There will, I hope, be no further deterioration in services for people with disabilities. I will be the first to acknowledge that the communication of decisions in recent years on alterations of supports for people with disabilities was badly handled. That has been agreed by everybody. I firmly believe the Government is totally committed to ensuring the money being spent on front-line services for people with disabilities and their supporters will be maintained. However, no Government would be doing its job right if it did not try to ensure savings could be achieved in administration, at senior management level and in office rental costs. When an organisation, particularly a very big one, loses 5% of its budget, there is plenty of scope for ensuring money can be saved in administration and other areas without having to hit the people on the front line. It is far too easy for organisations to send people with disabilities out to protest when they know well that making cuts to senior management wages, etc., would be the appropriate approach.

Today I was at the launch of a training programme for organisations providing support for sports groups. The idea of the training manual is to ensure all people with disabilities have access to sports facilities. The Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ring, launched the programme, with individuals such as Mr. John Delaney, chief executive of the FAI, and representatives from the GAA and other organisations. The programme is run on a shoestring budget and supported by the Government. Great value for money is achieved from it.

The money being spent on support structures for people with disabilities is more than adequate. The problem is that we are not getting value for money. The amendment to the motion which I am proposing outlines the commitment of the Government to ensuring the people who should benefit most benefit. A clean, lean, properly funded operation with no waste is the ultimate goal. That goal is shared by my colleagues on the other side of the House. In fairness to Fianna Fáil, it has used its Private Members' time to highlight issues surrounding disability. That can only be good.

Like my colleagues, I sympathise greatly with the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch. I am very upset to hear she is still unwell.

I thank Senators Averil Power and Darragh O'Brien for tabling the motion. It covers an area in which we all have a great interest. I am sorry there are not more Members present; I do not know where they are. We know we are in hard times and face considerable challenges and problems, but, as other speakers have said, there is nothing more important than protecting the most vulnerable in society, which is why we are here.

Rather than being highbrow, I will just focus on some reality stories of people I have encountered in recent months and the problems encountered. Not all of what I will say will be critical of the Government and its performance in this area. The motion is very broad and deals with a considerable variety of issues relating to disabilities. Consequently, I contend the Government is doing very well in certain areas when it comes to protecting people with disabilities. However, there have been times when it has let itself down very badly. At other times, its good work is not being communicated properly. There is a lack of joined-up thinking across various Departments and even within Departments which is a symptom right across government, not alone in the area of disability.

The time of the respite care grant cut last December was one of the most depressing any of us has ever spent in the Seanad. It was my view at the time and remains my view that the Government showed a lack of compassion and comprehension of what the payment meant to families and the unnecessary stress and pain caused to families in the intervening months. I could spend time discussing a week in the life of a Jack & Jill Children's Foundation family; suffice it to say we all know people affected by the cut. As I always say, we are all so lucky because one does not really know the reality unless one is a member of the affected families. We could all use the term "elitist" in respect of ourselves unless we went to somebody's house and just said we cut the grant.

I hope that when the budget is announced in mid-October, it will be completely proofed. That is why we are here. I hope it will be completely proofed against savage, unjust measures such as the respite care grant cut we witnessed last year. If we have to cut something in the area of disability, please let it not be anything on the front line. I hate even saying that, but I am just trying to think of something. Senator Martin Conway spoke about administrative costs and salaries in the many disability services. Advocacy is the only area I can think of that might be subject to a cut if we have to cut something.

Delays in processing disability allowances and the carer's allowance which comprise a well seasoned problem have been discussed over and over. I am certain that the Minister of State will tell us that there has been an improvement in application processing rates and that any delay is caused by an increased volume of applications. I believe the Minister of State in respect of an improvement, but it is not being felt on the ground. I have a letter on my desk upstairs from a Jack & Jill Children's Foundation family. Such families comprise the majority of my constituents. Has anybody looked after a baby with a disability who takes 20 hours per day to mind? Applicants must take 11 items into account, including documentation on one's mortgage, proof of marriage and documents that even those of us without a child with a disability could not readily find. Applicants have 20 working days in which to find the documentation. They receive a letter to this effect before they can renew their medical cards. There has to be a way, but we are fighting all the time. I have tabled an amendment on the subject.

There is a lack of joined-up thinking. I am aware of the case of the young lady with a disability who is going to study in the United Kingdom this year to better herself. This is great news. As she is a good citizen, she has already communicated to the disability service that she does not need her allowance and needs to be transferred to an education allowance. She has gone to Edinburgh, but her disability allowance has been cut, although her education allowance has not come through. She should not have been a good citizen; she should have allowed the disability allowance to continue until she received the other one. We now have a citizen who has gone to better herself by way of further education in Edinburgh and who will have to endure at least two months without any contribution from the State. She is asking for her education allowance. What is she to do for two months?

On the topic of the disability allowance, I am aware of two cases of blind people who have secured employment. I wish to be upbeat about people with disabilities. Senators will all know Kevin who works for me. He is a magnificent person who has taught me so much. One or two of the people to whom I refer are friends of his who have gained employment.

The disability section asked to be informed by letter but these people are blind so they cannot write letters. They asked those in the service if the submissions could be made by e-mail but they do not accept confirmation in that way. I need not go on and what I am saying is almost laughable. It is a true story but it demonstrates a waste of administration time. I know sometimes we do not like e-mail because of the possibility of fraudulent activity. Perhaps we should not even mention that.

There is a disturbing case of a child in Donegal who is leaving the children's system to go to the adult system. The parents were told there are no services left. The child's parents are strong people and once this process started, they contacted the people involved in the services. To make a long story short, there were services available and, although I hate to say it, the HSE and the Government were telling lies. I could tell the proper long story in this regard, as the people were told there were budget restrictions or no spaces available. At one stage they were told three days were available but in the end, a five-day service is available for the child. Why are there such discrepancies in the system?

Thank God we are putting a regulator in place as we need to examine the administration costs. The charity sector is getting €4 billion and Senator Conway addressed some of the issues. The Minister is representing us at the Cabinet table and should think carefully before we act in such a way as to affect any of these people.

I welcome the Minister of State to the Chamber and I add my voice to those wishing another Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, my good friend and constituency colleague, a speedy recovery. She is doing an immense job and covers four different sectors in Departments, any one of which could easily carry a junior Ministry on its own. The work she is doing in the area is commendable.

I welcome the motion and Senator Power's interpretation of it, although I am not so sure I welcome Senator Darragh O'Brien's interpretation. He has fallen into an uncharacteristically narrow view that may be more suited to Sinn Féin than Fianna Fáil. It is a case of recognising that cuts are necessary in an Augustinian or Sinn Féin-type manner, as he argues we should not have these cuts now. That was the tone of his contribution. It is uncharacteristic.

If the Senator wishes to indulge in fiction, he could read the amendment to the motion.

Senator Gilroy, without interruption.

I need protection right enough. It is important we have this conversation in advance of the budget and that is a benefit of today's motion. Nobody has a monopoly on concern in the area and there is no question that there have been cuts. Of course it is unsatisfactory that we have seen cuts, although I am afraid I supported cuts last year. On balance, although it was difficult, the savings had to be found. We can call the process a reduction, reallocation or whatever we want, but no matter what they are called, they are cuts because they affect ordinary people's lives. That they do so in a negative way is regrettable.

Senator Power acknowledged the necessity for reductions in the general economy, and to find sufficient savings, one must go to the big-spending Departments, which include those dealing with social welfare, health and education. If we do not look for savings in such Departments, we could take every penny from other Departments and not make sufficient savings. No matter how we make reductions or cuts in the Departments, they will be perceived as being unfair by the people affected. That is a truth that must be acknowledged.

Does this mean we can stand back and not make any cuts? We cannot do so, although the motion before us asks us to. We will probably vote on whether it should be done now. Senator Power has argued that if we feel in our hearts that this is the wrong action, we should act accordingly, which is a very good point. We should do that in this Chamber a bit more often. It may be premature to support or reject a motion at this time and lose the Whip because of the way our democratic party system works in this and the other House.

We can examine what is proposed in the budget rather than getting ahead of ourselves in seeing what cuts, reductions in service or reallocations will be made. At that time we could decide whether to support such action; that is what I intend to do. I will support the amendment to the motion but I welcome today's discussion, which is very important. We should have such discussions on every issue between now and budget day, teasing out the matters. That is a function of this House and we should leave aside party political allegiances until the budget is published. At that stage we can decide if our parties are correct and make decisions accordingly. That is what I intend to do.

Senator O'Brien referred to my colleagues and their unhappiness over what happened with the budget last year. He has an insight into their minds to which I do not have access.

It was said on the floor of the House.

Absolutely. I do not have any insight into the nature and extent of that unhappiness. I am unhappy and we must do some awful things when we are part of the Government. I could use my time lambasting Fianna Fáil for its mismanagement of the economy that has resulted in these cuts. I will not do so but we should agree it is an underlying reason.

What about the mismanagement of the past two health budgets by the Minister, Deputy Reilly?

So the Minister inherited a robust and booming economic process?

It was difficult but he made it worse.

There is some revisionism there.

He inherited a difficult position but made it worse.

Senator Gilroy, without interruption.

I am worse to rise to it. I will leave my contribution at that. I welcome the proposal, if not the tone of its introduction. It is a pity it is couched in such party political terms. Senator Power did her best to remove that tone, and that is a reflection of the nature in which the Seanad should be run. Senator O'Brien dragged the tone back to narrow party politics and blame but I should try to be bigger than that in my slow-witted way. It is premature to ask me to make a decision on whether to support cuts we do not even know will happen. Perhaps we should wait until the budget and decide what to do then. Some of my party colleagues might share that view.

I support my colleagues in this motion. There are 600,000 people with disabilities of one form or another in the country, and they should be protected in the best way possible. That amounts to 18.5% of the population having some form of disability, and the manner in which the Government gives support is critical. To clarify the matter for my learned friend opposite, mismanagement in the health services is an issue, with budgets going over every year since the current Government took office. Extra funding is being sought for the running of the health service because the Minister, Deputy Reilly, has not been able to grapple with it or get on top of the brief, despite being in the Department for two and a half years.

People with special needs, those needing resource teachers and people with intellectual disabilities have all had services cut, with allowances reduced as well despite promises they would be protected. There is the issue of the health services, its funding and the fact that it is unable to manage its budget, with continuous overruns. That means the Minister is required to seek extra funding to pay for what are mostly wages.

We have cases in Kerry in which funding, instead of being given to people with Down's syndrome and their families, is diverted to care providers and others for speech and physical therapy. That is not cost-effective and does not work. That funding is going to pay lighting, heating and administration costs, whereas all those people need is services, not all the ancillary items they are covering.

In light of the fact that this is Irish sign language awareness week and we have this motion before us, the Minister of State might make her Cabinet colleagues aware that we are in breach of international agreements to which we signed up, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Good Friday Agreement, regarding members of the deaf community and the fact that they are not given the same access to Government services as other citizens.

The Good Friday Agreement recognised Irish, Ulster Scots and Irish sign language as official languages. We agreed, with the British Government, that these languages would get official recognition in the North and South. While Irish sign language is recognised in the North of Ireland and policy has been put in place on the ground to implement it, here in the South there has been no implementation of it 15 years on from the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. I ask the Minister of State to make her Cabinet colleagues aware that it is a fundamental breach of international law and a disgraceful act for a government to sign up to an international agreement in good faith and then to blatantly ignore its provisions.

When the Good Friday Agreement was signed, interpreters had to be physically in the room. With modern technology one can have online interpreters. We can imagine how difficult it is for a member of the deaf community to explain his or her symptoms to a doctor. Something lost in translation could have a detrimental effect on the outcome. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, gave us an excellent presentation on how unemployed people no longer have two-hour interviews in person, but do it over the phone. For a member of the deaf community that is not a possibility. Social welfare officers in offices around the country have computers. An online interpreter engaged by appointment would allow members of the deaf community, many of whom are unlikely to get full-time employment and are therefore more likely to be in need of social welfare assistance, to engage with social welfare services. Yet we have not put in place the infrastructure for them to do so and we continue to breach international agreements by failing to recognise Irish sign language. I will introduce a Bill on this. All parties have promised at various times to recognise Irish sign language, but-----

Senator Daly will have an opportunity on 9 October during our Private Members' time to support our motion on Irish sign language.

I will be delighted to support the motion, but-----

There will be lots of backtracking now.

I would hope that rather than supporting motions we support legislation.

This has been going on since 1997. Senator Daly's party was in Government for 14 years and did nothing about it.

I addressed that in my speech. Activity should never be mistaken for action. While we would be delighted to support any motion that is positive on Irish sign language, the legislation-----

Senator Daly will support it. The country is safe.

Senator Daly is way over time.

The Cathaoirleach should give him some latitude.

Putting the Good Friday Agreement on a legislative basis would be far more productive for the members of the deaf community.

I am delighted to contribute to this important debate and I thank the proposers of the motion for tabling it. The more often disabilities are spoken about in this House the better. I contributed two items, one of which was on employment rights for people with disabilities. Only last year did public bodies reach the target for employing people with disabilities. It is a small target at 3%, which amounts to 6,171 people. I would like to see a more proactive approach. That EU target was set in 1977. The economy is not great now but hopefully we could re-examine that target. We should not just try to meet a target. We could put measures and supports in place that would make it easier for people.

I would like to see a scheme for public representatives here in the House. Senator Mary Ann O'Brien mentioned this and we can do it. A strategy should be laid down to ensure we are afforded the opportunity. It is not easy to match needs with the facilities available. In the area of internships, we have deals with various colleges. There should be a deal with the disabilities associations. Often people with a disability have difficulty getting experience. It is like the chicken and the egg - which comes first, experience or a job? I ask the Minister of State to consider something like that to ensure the Members of this House do our bit in ensuring we reach the target.

When I was on South Dublin County Council, no local authority had reached the 3% target. Now 88% of local authorities have reached it. Targets work. Our manager at the time, Mr. Joe Horgan, made us take a week to ensure there were strategies for employing people with disabilities, Travellers and people with different types of expertise. They all bring their own expertise and we can learn from everybody in our own employment. Everybody has their own ability to bring to us.

The first Adjournment debate matter I tabled in this House was on Irish sign language, because I have been campaigning for it for years. I established the Model School for the Deaf in Irish sign language in north Dublin with Mr. Brian Crean and Dr. John Bosco Conama. It was a pilot project that went on for three years, after which funding was pulled. I would like this Government to do what it can on Irish sign language. Senator Conway has a motion coming up but I would like to see more than motions. It was sad yesterday that people supporting the Irish Deaf Society had to parade outside the Dáil gates to bring it to our attention once more. When Fianna Fáil was in power I came here on many delegations to try to get something done. I met Minister after Minister and nothing was done. I would like to see this Government doing even one small thing. There are not huge numbers of people out there, but it is their culture. It has nothing to do with the Irish language.

It is their culture. They want it and they should be afforded the means. I am involved in the North-South body and I raised the issue in that context because, as Senator Daly noted, it is part of the North-South agreement. I proposed a motion which was passed by all of the Parliaments, including Wales, Northern Ireland and England, and forwarded to the relevant Ministers. We are waiting for a report on the matter before considering whether we can proactively engage on the basis of the North-South agreement on Irish sign language. The issue is more advanced in the North, although it is not yet a statutory right. I believe we could work together to do something in this regard.

I want to ensure there are no cuts to this area in the forthcoming budget but when I asked about it, I received a note from the Government stating that it has passionately defended the provision of special education spending since it came to office. Some €1.3 billion will be spent on supports for children with special educational needs this year. I hope some of that goes to Irish sign language. We are only seeking a small percentage of the overall budget. The Government has said it will continue to provide 1,100 teaching posts in special schools. The National Council for Special Education has also opened 118 new special classes for the 2013-14 school year, which means that 740 special classes are currently in place. This represents an increase of more than 40% in the number of special classes being provided since the 2010-11 school year. It is not all bad news, therefore. The Government is doing what it can in the context of our current situation.

It is important that we contribute to this debate. I have attended three debates already and some of the Senators who contributed in this debate were not in the House for the earlier debates. It is difficult to be in the House all the time. I was late coming to this debate but I followed it on the monitor. The fact that Senators are not in the Chamber does not necessarily mean they are not interested. They are following the debate on their monitors.

On behalf of my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Health with responsibility for disability, equality, mental health and older people, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, I welcome this opportunity to put on the record of the House the Government's commitment to the provision of effective and responsive public services for people with disabilities and to strongly re-affirm the Government's commitment to the national disability strategy.

The Minister of State has expressed to this House her strongly felt view that people with disabilities are not ill and do not require to be fixed. What people need is for us to break down the barriers which society puts in the way of them living a full life that is worth living. They also need the supports necessary for them to live a fully inclusive life. This is the aim of the national disability strategy, which was launched in September 2004 and which continues to be the focus of Government policy for the sector. The programme for Government contained a commitment to publication of the first ever implementation plan for the strategy and to the achievement of even greater levels of progress in progressing the strategy over the next three years. With this in mind, the Minister established and is personally chairing the national disability strategy implementation group, which was tasked with developing and monitoring the implementation plan. I am happy to report that the plan was approved by the Government and published in July of this year.

The aim of the implementation plan is to engage with the disability sector and build on the traditional problem solving and constructive approach of the community and voluntary sector. Acknowledging the current economic climate and diminished resources available across government - in the spirit of Seanad harmony I will not refer to the fact that the previous Government signed up to the troika agreement - this implementation plan seeks to ensure available resources are used to best effect in ensuring people with disabilities have more choice and control in their lives and in achieving their aspirations for the future. This aim is also fundamental to the value for money and policy review of the health funded disability services which the Minister of State published last year. The value for money review will be pivotal in progressing and supporting the implementation of significant elements of the national disability strategy. The review also echoes the health care reforms signalled in Future Health, the Government's blueprint for the restructuring of the health services over the coming years.

Collaboration is key to progressing the national disability strategy and the value for money review. The Minister of State is a passionate exponent of the motto "Nothing about us, without us" and is committed to working with people with disabilities and to opening channels of communication wherever she can. To this end, she set up a disability forum under the stewardship of the National Disability Authority. The first meeting of the forum was held in June last year and the views expressed at it provided an input into the development of the national disability strategy implementation plan.

This is a time of major change in the delivery of social care in this country and we have embarked on a transformation programme that will put the citizen at the heart of everything we do. This change can best be illustrated by the disability services provided by the health sector, in which regard we are at the start of a journey to migrate from a segregated, group delivered service to a person-centred and individually chosen supports model. The implementation of this new model requires a more effective, transparent and accountable use of the €1.5 billion in funding which the Government is providing to the HSE this year for its national service plan. Within the funding provided, the Minister for Health has emphasised to the HSE that it must maximise the provision of services within available resources and maintain a consistent level of service compared to that provided in 2012. Both the HSE and the voluntary disability service providers have introduced significant efficiencies over recent years to remain within budget and the HSE has advised that these changes have not resulted in service contraction.

Despite the difficult economic conditions in which we find ourselves, there can be no compromise on the quality and safety of the services we deliver. Earlier this year, the Minister of State launched a set of standards for residential services and she hopes to be in a position to announce shortly that the regulations to allow the scheme of registration and inspection to commence on 1 October have been signed. The regulations, which will be enforced by the Health Information and Quality Authority, seek to ensure that the unique and complex needs of each child and adult with a disability in a residential service are met in an appropriate and effective manner by service providers and their staff. This is a positive development for both service users and service providers. We believe that it will set the bar for quality care in the years ahead.

The way in which we support people with disabilities to live normal lives is undergoing a seismic change. The process of moving away from congregated settings towards a community-based model of residential services has been happening gradually for a number of years and is now gathering momentum. At this point I would like to highlight the co-operation between myself and the Minister of State, and between our respective Departments, in regard to housing issues. My Department, together with the Department of Health, has developed a housing strategy for people with disabilities and an implementation framework for that strategy which aims to support people with disabilities to live in their communities and to have maximum independence and choice. Collaboration on the housing strategy is an excellent example of the cross-sectoral working and whole-of-government approach which is a central theme of the national disability strategy. I have had a number of meetings with the Minister of State on this topic and from my perspective as Minister of State with responsibility for housing, I have highlighted the importance of addressing the needs of people with disabilities. The funding I administered recently was allocated to local authorities solely for the purpose of housing people with disabilities.

I will now turn to the subject of education. This Government has passionately defended the provision for special educational spending since coming into office. Some €1.3 billion, or 15% of the entire education budget, will be spent in support of children with special educational needs this year. This provision is in line with expenditure in recent years and shows that despite the current economic difficulties, funding for special education has not been cut. This year we will again provide funding for 10,575 special needs assistant posts. There has been no reduction to the overall number of SNA posts available for allocation to schools. In June 2013 the Minister for Education and Skills authorised the National Council for Special Education to maintain the level of resource teachers at the 2012 levels. There will not be a reduction in resource teaching time compared with last year.

Education does not end with childhood, however, and people with disabilities are one of the target groups for the back to education initiative, which provides part-time further education programmes for adults.

They may also avail of adult literacy and community education courses provided by the education and training boards throughout the country.

The fund for students with disabilities allocates funding to PLC colleges for the provision of services and supports to full-time students with disabilities. The fund aims to ensure students can participate fully in their programmes. The disability access route to education scheme also provides a third level admissions scheme for school leavers who have a disability or specific learning difficulty.

FÁS mainstream programmes are open to all unemployed individuals, including those with a disability. In addition, this year FÁS will provide up to 3,000 places, through specialised training providers, for people with disabilities. The Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Social Protection also support learners attending courses through the provision of payments, allowances and maintenance grants.

Every year young people finish their formal education and progress to the next stage of their lives. For most children, including those with disabilities, the aim is that they progress directly to further education, vocational training or employment and I have described the resources provided by the Department of Education and Skills to facilitate this. However, for more than 800 young people who have higher support needs, the requirement is for lifeskills training or day supports provided by the HSE. After following an appropriate lifeskills training programme many of this cohort will also progress in time to mainstream training and employment, with personal social supports provided by the HSE where needed.

The HSE national service plan includes an additional €4 million to provide training places and day services for young people who will finish their formal education this year. However, the provision of services to an additional 800 young people is challenging even with the additional funding, and some may have to wait longer than others until a fully suitable placement or support service is available. I know this is of concern to Senators.

Training is only part of the journey people with special needs must face to obtain longer-term sustainable employment. In the area of disability activation, the Government is committed to supporting people to participate more fully in training and employment through activation measures, income supports and work-related supports. The integration of the employment services and community services divisions of FÁS into the Department of Social Protection is enhancing the delivery of employment services for all people, including people with disabilities, and will assist in overcoming barriers in this area. The Department has also launched a disability activation project, with funding of more than €7 million, which aims to identify the optimum approaches to mainstreaming labour market activation measures for people with disabilities. This may be of interest to Senator Keane who has raised specific issues with regard to the 3% target, activation for people with disabilities and job opportunities.

This brings me to the issue raised by Senators with regard to the processing of claims. I assure Members of the Seanad the prompt processing of claims remains a priority for the Minister for Social Protection. I am pleased to report the backlog in processing carer's allowance applications has been eliminated. All backlogged disability allowance applications have been decided where possible, with the remainder awaiting additional information necessary to decide the claim, and the Minister for Social Protection has allocated additional staff to assist with this work.

The contribution people provide in caring for members of their own family is critical for society. It was for this reason the Government last year adopted the national carers' strategy with a view to giving greater public recognition to carers and their work. Carers receive significant income supports from the Department of Social Protection so people can continue living at home as long as possible. The supports available to carers in Ireland are among the highest rates of income support in Europe, and are expected to total €776 million this year compared with an estimated outturn of €771 million in 2012.

The issue of Irish sign language was raised by a number of Senators. I am aware of the issue and when I first entered the Dáil in 1998 I was spokesperson on equality and I met Dr. John Bosco Conama and others from the Irish sign language support group. As Senator Daly acknowledged, nothing has been done so far but we are all aware it is an important issue. I note Senator Conway stated he would table a motion on the issue.

I welcome the opportunity provided by the debate to put on the record the Government's position on services for people with disabilities. There is an onus on us all to use the substantial resources committed to disability services throughout the public sector more effectively, but also to achieve better outcomes for this funding and to bring about a real and substantial improvement in the lives of people with disabilities. This is a central tenet of the national disability strategy and a high priority for the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, and the Government.

I am delighted to have an opportunity to speak on this Private Members' motion. It is very important and recognises the need to protect services for those who are most vulnerable in society, namely, those with disabilities who are more dependent on the State to provide services than any other group in society. With regard to people with disabilities attaining educational advancement and the employment rates of people with disabilities, the most recent census showed the level of advancement for persons with disabilities was lower than for persons without disabilities. This highlights the fact a disability can provide an immense difficulty for any individual, and as a result it is important compensation is provided, whether financial or through other resource supports, by the State.

I listened, in my office and in the Chamber, to what the Minister of State has said. I do not doubt her enthusiasm for supporting the disability sector and individuals with disabilities, but unfortunately what is happening at present calls into question the support being provided to persons with disabilities, whether this is at primary, secondary or university educational level, through employment initiatives or through disability or social welfare payments.

I heard the Minister of State refer to social welfare payments, and I cannot agree with her that the processing of social welfare payments has been speeded up. I am not sure what timeframe she means. I presume she may be speaking about decisions on new applications. Decisions may be made more quickly, but the vast majority of applications for carer's allowance, disability allowance, disability benefit, invalidity pension or any other payment are being refused. The decisions may be made sooner, but the majority of all decisions are being refused.

I know of people diagnosed with very severe forms of cancer whose applications for disability payments were refused by the Department of Social Protection. Individual members of their families or persons providing supports have applied for carer's allowance to support them but they have also been refused. For God's sake let us introduce a system whereby any individual diagnosed with cancer is given all of the support available from the State during the illness. There should be no qualification to this. The best medical supports are available to those diagnosed with cancer but they do not always survive. When they and their families are dealing with this illness they should be provided with the required support. It is not acceptable for a civilised country to refuse payments to individuals diagnosed with cancer. This is not a political point. I see it every week dealing with people in clinics.

Recently I pleaded with the Minister for Social Protection during an Adjournment debate with regard to a case. It was also dealt with through parliamentary questions and representations to the Minister with regard to getting the application processed. The application was processed and a carer's payment was approved, but unfortunately it was approved a week after the individual died. This is not acceptable. We must have a new system in the Department of Social Protection to deal with genuine applications. There has been abuse of the system, and I know some of the checks and balances in place are to deter abuse of the system and we all subscribe to this, but we must have a system which will support the genuine cases.

I plead with the Minister of State to sit down with the Minister for Social Protection to look at this issue which needs to be dealt with as quickly as possible because we cannot allow the current situation to continue.

With regard to the disability cuts, there is the generic issue of the processing of claims. While the social welfare budget is vast at some €21 billion, cutting disability payments within the overall budget is wrong. These payments should be ring-fenced. There were cuts to the respite care grant and other disability payments in budget 2013 which I believe were wrong. Every effort should be made to ensure no cuts are introduced that would affect anyone with a disability, physical, intellectual or otherwise.

The Minister has said no cuts are taking place, in so far as it is possible to do so. However, I point to the case of specialist preschools for individuals who cannot feed themselves. There were three such preschools in County Donegal, but one has closed, the one in Donegal town is not accepting new applications from this year and the other in Letterkenny will be closed from September 2014. That is happening from within the Department of Health's budget. These schools are being closed in line with the HSE service plan which is signed off on by the Minister and agreed at a national level, the regional plans which are agreed by the regional directors and the county plans which are agreed on a county-wide basis. Because the funding is cut, services are being withdrawn.

I will support the Minister in every way, but we need to make sure funding for people with disabilities is ring-fenced and not cut in the forthcoming budget. Unfortunately, the cuts that have taken place to date have been far too painful.

I thank all those who contributed to the debate. As I said at the start, this is an issue that should cross party lines. I appreciate that members of all parties feel strongly about the need to protect services for people with disabilities. I had hoped, when we tabled this Private Members' motion last week, that there would not be a Government counter-motion and that we would all be able to agree to the motion. When writing it, I went to great lengths not to include anything in it that I thought would be difficult for Members of other parties to support. That is why all it does is "calls on the Government to provide the appropriate funding and services necessary to honour all its commitments to people with disabilities". I did not include anything political and kept it as basic as I could because I did not want to put other Members in a difficult position where they would feel they could not support it. Therefore, I was disappointed to see that there was a counter-motion, as well as being disappointed with some of the language used in it.

Given that the counter-motion has been tabled and will be put to a vote, I want to explain why from our perspective we cannot support it. It denies the fact that cuts have been made to education. Although the total number of special needs assistants remains the same, as the Minister of State said, I point out that, owing to rising enrolments, this is an effective cut, regardless of how the Government wants to sell it.

The Government amendment also points out that the Government has "protected the numbers of resource teachers" when there has been a 15% cut in the number of resource teaching hours. It is difficult, therefore, for me to support this.

I had hoped we would all be able to take the position of acknowledging the reality that cuts had been made in recent years and agree that this area should be protected from further cuts in the budget. I regret that this does not seem to be the case. That is why we will have to push our motion to a vote and also why we cannot accept the Government's counter-motion. The reality is that people with disabilities have suffered greatly, as Senator Mary Ann O'Brien so eloquently pointed out in a quite upsetting way in actually putting before the House the reality of these cuts and the way they have affected people personally. That can sometimes be lost in overall numbers or when one is saying the overall budget has been protected. Because individual sectors have been hit - I outlined the impact on St. Michael's House services - the reality is that the personal experience of people with disabilities has deteriorated greatly in the past two years.

As I said, I regret that we will not agree to the counter-motion, but I appeal to Fine Gael and Labour Party Members, even if they are going to vote against the motion, to use the next couple of weeks to reach out to Ministers and argue that the disability sector should be protected from other cuts. There are fairer ways of making savings. I hope these Members will use their influence to ensure we will not end up in a similar situation this year to that on the Social Welfare Bill last year and that we will see off cuts in this area from the start.

Amendment put:
The Seanad divided: Tá, 22; Níl, 15.

  • Bacik, Ivana.
  • Brennan, Terry.
  • Burke, Colm.
  • Clune, Deirdre.
  • Coghlan, Eamonn.
  • Conway, Martin.
  • Cummins, Maurice.
  • D'Arcy, Jim.
  • D'Arcy, Michael.
  • Gilroy, John.
  • Harte, Jimmy.
  • Hayden, Aideen.
  • Henry, Imelda.
  • Higgins, Lorraine.
  • Keane, Cáit.
  • Kelly, John.
  • Landy, Denis.
  • Moran, Mary.
  • Mulcahy, Tony.
  • Mullins, Michael.
  • Naughton, Hildegarde.
  • Noone, Catherine.

Níl

  • Barrett, Sean D.
  • Byrne, Thomas.
  • Daly, Mark.
  • Leyden, Terry.
  • MacSharry, Marc.
  • Ó Clochartaigh, Trevor.
  • Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
  • O'Brien, Darragh.
  • O'Brien, Mary Ann.
  • O'Donovan, Denis.
  • O'Sullivan, Ned.
  • Power, Averil.
  • van Turnhout, Jillian.
  • White, Mary M.
  • Wilson, Diarmuid.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Aideen Hayden and Michael Mullins; Níl, Senators Ned O'Sullivan and Diarmuid Wilson.
Amendment declared carried.
Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."
The Seanad divided: Tá, 23; Níl, 15.

  • Bacik, Ivana.
  • Brennan, Terry.
  • Burke, Colm.
  • Clune, Deirdre.
  • Coghlan, Eamonn.
  • Conway, Martin.
  • Cummins, Maurice.
  • D'Arcy, Jim.
  • D'Arcy, Michael.
  • Gilroy, John.
  • Harte, Jimmy.
  • Hayden, Aideen.
  • Henry, Imelda.
  • Higgins, Lorraine.
  • Keane, Cáit.
  • Kelly, John.
  • Landy, Denis.
  • Moran, Mary.
  • Mulcahy, Tony.
  • Mullins, Michael.
  • Naughton, Hildegarde.
  • Noone, Catherine.
  • O'Neill, Pat.

Níl

  • Barrett, Sean D.
  • Byrne, Thomas.
  • Daly, Mark.
  • Leyden, Terry.
  • MacSharry, Marc.
  • Ó Clochartaigh, Trevor.
  • Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
  • O'Brien, Darragh.
  • O'Brien, Mary Ann.
  • O'Donovan, Denis.
  • O'Sullivan, Ned.
  • Power, Averil.
  • van Turnhout, Jillian.
  • White, Mary M.
  • Wilson, Diarmuid.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Aideen Hayden and Michael Mullins; Níl, Senators Ned O'Sullivan and Diarmuid Wilson.
Question declared carried.

When is it proposed to sit again?

Ar 10.30 maidin amárach.

Barr
Roinn