“Advancing The National Disability Strategy: Building On Comparative And
International Innovation”
Presentation by John Dolan, Chief Executive of Disability Federation of Ireland, to
NUI Galway, CDLP Conference Dec ‘10
1 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Presentation by John Dolan CEO Disability Federation of Ireland to “Advancing
The National Disability Strategy: Building On Comparative And International
Innovation”
NUI Galway, CDLP Conference Dec ‘10
Today’s conference is about realising the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities in Ireland. In this context it will reflect on the experience to date
here and consider what the future might be for our National Disability Strategy. On
behalf of DFI I welcome this very much given the reputation and commitment of the
Centre for Disability Law and Policy, NUI Galway, to advancing the human rights of
people with disabilities in Ireland.
This conference gives an opportunity to stand back and reflect in what I will describe as
“a contrarian way” but from a sympathetic point of view. To put that in simple terms, I
consider the NDS to be a major achievement for this State. For the first time ever we
have stated that disabled people and those with mental health needs are full citizens
and furthermore set out the commitment of the State to ensure that people can access
all areas and all opportunities characteristic of a civilised State. At the same time we
must accept and welcome the voices that challenge and test NDS implementation
because for them it cannot come soon enough.
I have been asked to consider “Nothing About Us Without Us-Meaningful Consultation
and Engagement”, Article 4 (3), at the national level from my perspective within the
Disability Stakeholders Group. First I shall argue that the language we use sometimes
blurs a better understanding of the potential resources and opportunities around us.
To talk of “service providers” or “service provision” fails to appreciate the positive
evolution in disability organisations. Second I explain why the capacity of the voluntary
sector to back the NDS is far from perfect, and discuss the challenges facing the DSG.
By this route I will come to discuss the DSG.
Looking at the “disability interest”
Let us look at how the “disability interest” expresses itself develops over time in
response to changes and developments in the State. We can understand the
institutional provision from the 19th century onwards as an attempt to give asylum to
people that were in effect outside of that society. The State was not able to, or not
willing to, include them and their humanity was not appreciated. Come on a century and
there is the independent living movement / approach along with the growth of many
organisations that include and support people with particular disabilities. The latter often
are referred to as condition specific organisations.
Over this time we have moved from people with a humanitarian motivation providing
support, protection and comfort, in the context of a society that was not welcoming and
2 where the disabled person was very much in a dependent and disempowered role. By
contrast in the contemporary situation the disabled person is more and more at the
centre of participation, influence and control in a growing number of organisations.
People with disabilities are taking over although many will say the pace is too slow.
Nevertheless that is what is happening and it is taking place through the growing
number and variety of organisations that disabled people, more and more, are setting
up.
This process is not complete but there is a relentless move in that direction.
DFI as an umbrella organisation, an organisation of organisations, spanning all areas of
disability, mental health needs and disabling conditions, can give witness to this
evolutionary process.
The “disability interest” has always expressed itself in the formation of groups and
organisations and I suggest that these are moving towards greater involvement and
control by disabled people. It is important to see this movement as a great resource to
the monitoring and evaluation of the NDS, one that we need to value and use in
progressing the implementation of the NDS.
At the same time we need to acknowledge that being an organisation of people with
disabilities confers no particular competence in relation to ability and effectiveness to
well represent and advance the needs of people that are to be supported. Capacity and
competence issues need to be addressed. Having said that there is much evidence
within DFI that organisations, when given the opportunity, are improving their skills and
doing so within the very welcome framework that the NDS provides. As set out in
“Towards 16”, people will be supported by the mainstreaming and person centred
approach to the inclusive provision of public and social services.
Implementing the NDS
We also must understand the importance of ongoing review as involving “critical
evaluation”. This is something that we need to do much better in Ireland in order to
ensure better outcomes. Senator Fergal Quinn speaking during the motion in the
Seanad in November 2006 to approve the Disability Sectoral Plans pointed to the poor
record that we have of following up to examine whether or not the legislation passed by
the Oireachtas was implemented effectively. He was drawing attention to the imbalance
between time and effort given to law making and subsequently given to monitoring and
evaluation. I have often returned to his observation because we have not given
sufficient consideration to measurement of what is, or is not, happening and checking if
the right things are being progressed. This is a major flaw in the implementation of the
NDS.
“Towards 2016” in dealing with monitoring the NDS states “Arrangements will be put in
place to ensure a continued constructive relationship with stakeholders in relation to
progress on the Strategy as a whole. This will include bi-annual meetings between
senior officials and other stakeholders”. The subsequent letter, from the Chairperson of
the NDA, inviting DFI to participate, sets out the monitoring purpose as “to monitor
progress on the overall implementation of the Strategy, building on the monitoring and
3 review procedures already in place in each of the six sectoral plans” These directives
cannot be described as developed monitoring arrangements.
On the disability side, we also need to ask ourselves as to how ready and prepared we
were to take on a full blown monitoring role where we would challenge implementation
issues of such a major project where we had no previous experience. In the same way
that the disability interest / movement has evolved over the years I consider that there is
now a need for the DSG to deal effectively with three areas.
1. It must see itself as distinct from, and independent of, Government as the
executive side, in that Government and its Departments, has the ultimate
responsibility to deliver the Strategy.
2. It has to get a lot sharper and organised about how it plans and executes its work
and it is meeting in January to exclusively address these areas.
3. The DSG must be clear that it is there to support the full delivery of the five long
term goals set out in “Towards 2016” on behalf of people with disabilities and
mental health needs. This requires each of the participating organisations to
operate from the perspective of the long term goals of the NDS in doing their
DSG work.
It is the view of DFI that the DSG needs to review its methods of operation, its ambition
and strategies if it is to maximise its impact on behalf of disabled people to ensure the
delivery of the
NDS. Some examples illustrate why the DSG has to raise its game:
•
•
•
It took the DSG until June 2008, eighteen months after the NDSSMG (a senior
officials group) was established, to get it to accept that reporting of progress
should be done in terms of the achievement of the vision and long term goals of
the Strategy which were then two years in existence. Now another two and a half
years later, reporting has not commenced in that format.
In 2005, prior to the enactment of the Disability Act, the DLCG got a commitment
that disability proofing across Government would be introduced through
amendment of the Cabinet Handbook. That still has not been implemented.
DFI lead a campaign from early 2009, with the support of DSG members and
others, to get Government to put a plan in place to protect and advance the
Strategy throughout the recession. The commitment was given in the Renewed
Programme for Government, October 2009, and it too is not implemented.
These are ongoing irritants and frustrations that don’t need to be there and for which
there is no resource impediment to their implementation; yet they persist. They are
symptomatic of an issue that is beyond the Strategy but which will also handicap efforts
to implement it. There is a major dysfunction within the operation of our public services,
what could be described as poor or mal administration. In October 2007 at a monitoring
meeting of the “Towards 16” Agreement, I stated “As things currently stand my
assessment is that the vision and long term goals for people with disabilities will not be
substantially delivered by 2016. While there is a lot of commendable action going on
across a range of Government Departments and public bodies it is not being drawn
sufficiently together and focussed against the achievement of the vision and
4 long term goals”. It is important to note that this was before we were awake to the fiscal
crisis that we are now well into so it was not a point about the quantity of resources but
about how they are used.
To recap, Ireland has a solid infrastructure for consulting with and actively involving
persons with disabilities through their representative organisations, but there are actions
we must take as well as actions by the government to underpin implementation of the
NDS. In brief,
•
•
•
•
•
The organised disability movement is well and truly here to stay and it will grow
further
The movement has to be focused and up to the task of effectively engaging with
Government on behalf of people with disabilities,
The DSG needs to strike out to renew its approach and ambition as a credible
and independent voice on behalf of people with disabilities in its dealings with
Government,
Greater ambition and a significant cultural shift on the Government / Public
Service side in order to drive delivery of the Strategy and
Public service reform is essential to the delivery of the Strategy.
Thank you.
5