The Centre for Disability Law and Policy,
National University of Ireland, Galway,
Voice and Choice
Summer School
Held at the NUI, Galway
18 June 2013
Text streamed live to the web on www.seewritenow.ie
Telephone ……………………………. (0404) 64355
Fax ……………….…………………... (0404) 64354
Email …………………………………. info@pcr.ie
Website ……………………………….. www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
1
NUIG Summer School - 18th June 2013:
2
3
DR QUINLIVAN: Good morning everybody, I hope you had a good night sleep, I see you
4
brought the weather with you for which we're very grateful, you don't get much hot weather in
5
Ireland it's nice to see blue skies today, trust me, I know some people are saying well it's still
6
cold, for us this is nice, good weather we're very pleased.
7
8
My name is Shivaun Quinlivan I'm with the school of law and Centre for Disability Law and
9
Policy, I'm chair of this session today. We’ve had a few slight changes, what we have up first is
10
Janet Lord to speak first, and then after the coffee break it's going to be Rosemarie, but they have
11
informed me that they are going to work together for both sessions, so I'm going to introduce
12
both of them at the same time rather than introduce Janet and have Rosemarie speak as well and
13
you wonder who she is.
14
15
So firstly Janet this is Janet an international disability rights lawyer and she is currently a senior
16
research associate with Harvard Law School project on disability. She participated in all the
17
negotiations section for UN Convention and she serves as a legal advisor to the disability,
18
disabled persons international several governments and technical expert to UN, she has designed,
19
managed and implemented progress and disability law and policy in more than 30 countries
20
worldwide. She consults for a variety of international organisations including the UN Office of
21
the High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN disability programme, UNDP, US Aid, the EU,
22
DTS, World Bank, care -- I could keep going, this could go on. What I'm trying to say is we are
23
so, so lucky to have Janet here and she has become, Janet and Rosemarie are two veterans of the
24
summer school at this point, this is I think the third year and we're so grateful they come every
25
year and we're pleased to have them speak with us and speak to you here.
26
27
Rosemarie has extensive disability policy experience, she has held Ministry advisory roles with
28
both State and federal government on disability and carer issues, she was the external expert on
29
Australian government's delegation to the UN negotiations on the Convention. And Rosemarie
30
has extensive research experience working and advising on a variety of social research projects
31
including access to justice, human rights and disability, guardianship, young people in nursing
32
homes and her research areas include access to justice, human rights, disability, guardianship.
33
34
So we are incredibly pleased to be able to invite you to listen to both Janet and Rosemarie here
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
2
today. They are going to speak on the obligations in relation to the Convention.
2
3
There are two separate topics so we'll start the first session which is what obligations to reform
4
do states have under the convention and the general obligations of estates parties, we'll take a
5
break, have some coffee and come back for the second session. So a big round of applause for
6
both Rosemarie and Janet.
7
MS LORD: Good morning everyone. Thank you so much for the introduction, great to be back
8
this morning. I think what we're looking at this first session, we're looking at it in terms of
9
continuing to provide the foundation for our very specific thematic focus of the week, which is
10
really looking at legal capacity, independent living.
11
12
So we're going to continue to lay the foundation and this is a great opportunity for any of you
13
who do have questions that pertain to the CRPD in general, we're going to focus on the general
14
obligations of the CRPD which we hope will allow us to dig deeply into the obligations around
15
legal capacity and independent living throughout the course of the week, but this is a great
16
opportunity for anyone to ask questions, raise questions, many of you have raised some excellent
17
questions during the coffee breaks and lunch breaks, but we encourage to you do that in the
18
context of these two sessions this morning as well.
19
20
It's doing this tricky thing that Jerome has done, I didn't plan it this way! But anyway, so outline
21
for this morning's discussion, what are the general obligations of the CRPD? That's what Gerard
22
has tasked us with focusing on T where do we find these general obligations? What do they
23
mean? And are there tools that we can use to discover what they mean and how might we use
24
them in the context of our work, whether thinking about legal capacity, living in the community
25
or indeed thinking about applying those principles and interpretive tools to other obligations in
26
the treaty.
27
28
So we thought we'd start out this morning with again reviewing what are the structural
29
components of the Convention, we did go through that yesterday, but we've got the preamble
30
which as Rosemarie said yesterday provides us with the sort of historical antecedence to the
31
Convention, and she pointed out yesterday, quite rightly, that there are things in that and there
32
are certain instruments that are, that were purposefully left out of the preamble and that gives us
33
an idea of the extent to which the drafters privileged certain documents, like the standard rules,
34
like the universal declaration, like the two covenants, and were not so enthusiastic about other
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
3
1
instrument that is were in some instances disability specific instruments, like the two documents
2
developed in the 1970s the two declarations, which are really regarded as quite outmoded and
3
not appropriate.
4
5
Also left out was a reference to the MI principles, that's pretty important for our thinking about
6
legal capacity issues this week. These are the -- I don't know what the full name of the
7
document is, principles on mental illness, they were adapted right around the same time as the
8
UN standard rules.
9
MS KAYESS: About 1991.
10
MS LORD: Very controversial document during the drafting of the treaty and several groups
11
lobbied very hard for the exclusion of mention of the MI principles because again of the
12
outmoded antiquated perspective of disability reflected in that particular document.
13
14
So the preamble has lots of good stuff in it. Articles of general application, we referred to
15
yesterday, articles 1 through 9, we're going to be focusing in particular this morning, especially
16
on Article 4 that lays out the general obligations, what do State parties need to do in general in
17
order to meet the treaty obligations, the specific standards, rights and obligations in articles 10
18
through 30.
19
20
One important thing to note about the structure is that there is no categorisation of rights in the
21
articles 10 through 30, so in other words there is a mix of civil, political, economic, social and
22
cultural rights in 10 through 30, they are not categorised in terms of civil and political rights,
23
economic, social and cultural rights. Rosemarie will talk quite a bit more about that distinction
24
in human rights law and why it's important.
25
26
But for our purposes it's just a mix from 10 through 30, we have the full range of human rights
27
reflected. At the beginning of the drafting some of the countries, like my own country, was
28
arguing for very narrow, non-discrimination type treaty that is it not, that would not cover the
29
full range of human rights. Fortunately that argument did not win the day and we have quite a
30
comprehensive treaty, more like the Convention on the Rights of the Child than some of the
31
earlier conventions like the women's Convention or race Convention.
32
33
Implementation and facilitation and monitoring measures are in articles 31 through 40 and we'll
34
hear a lot more about monitoring the CRPD later in the week. And then the final provisions in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
4
articles 41 through 50.
2
3
So nature and scope of CRPD obligations. They are an integral part of international human
4
rights law and what the drafters were attempting to do with the CRPD is elaborate human rights
5
in the context of disability, the mantra throughout the drafting process was these are not new
6
rights, they are existing rights. So in other words we are articulating disability rights, not as new
7
rights but as part and parcel of the general human rights framework. That which was already
8
there, but not specified in the earlier documents.
9
10
Now if you go through and read the C RP D you'll see that actually there is a lot that looks kind
11
of new, looks kind of different. So perhaps it's something of a fiction that we didn't actually
12
create anything new. But clearly it was a very important part of the drafting process and the
13
process to bring states on board to stick with the mantra that no we're not doing anything new,
14
we're just saying what's already there implicitly but making it explicit.
15
16
Human rights and fundamental freedoms are as we said yesterday, indivisible, interdependent
17
and therefore we need to focus in our discussion on general obligations this morning, on
18
implementation, promotion and protection of civil and political as well as economic, social and
19
cultural rights in the CRPD. Rosemarie will elaborate more on the distinction and differentiation
20
of obligations in respect of those civil and political rights and economic social and cultural
21
rights.
22
23
As we said yesterday the CRPD needs to be interpreted in good faith, in accordance with the
24
Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, again taking into account the object and purpose,
25
ordinary meaning, preparatory work, of which there is volumes and volumes nicely archived on
26
the UN website as well as relevant practice, and we have lots of relevant practice that's
27
emerging, both from the regional systems, European Court of room heights, inter American
28
court as well as other treaty bodies, and of course domestic jurisprudence as well in many of the
29
countries. And we'll hear about some of the really interesting Law Reform initiatives that are
30
taking place in different parts of the world with respect to implementing the Convention.
31
32
Did you want to say anything about foundations; we haven't talked much about social model,
33
medical model?
34
MS KAYESS: Yeah I'll do a little bit of that in my session next up, I don't know how much we
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
5
1
want to get into it here.
2
MS LORD: Okay. So moving on and looking at the nature and scope of CRPD obligations we'll
3
get to a more interactive session in a minute. But we're going to look to the CRPD text but we're
4
also going to take into account the work of UN bodies and other organisations, special
5
rapporteurs in the field of human rights, we're getting a number of more disability specific
6
reports of special rapporteurs that attempt to shed light on the interpretation of the CRPD, so all
7
of that is really important to take into account when we're trying to interpret provisions of the
8
CRPD.
9
10
Some rights recognised are to be attained progressively Rosemarie will talk more about that.
11
Others need to be implemented immediately, it's not always so easy to disentangle what aspects
12
of rights are to be immediately realised and what are to be progressively achieved, it's not all that
13
straightforward.
14
15
NGOs play an important role in promoting and implementing CRPD and Steve spoke about the
16
role of DPOs in particular about drafting the treaty and because of the very strong role of DPOs
17
and disability advocates in the drafting process we see in this treaty more than any other human
18
rights treaty very specific roles accorded to non-governmental organisations in the monitoring
19
and implementation of the treaty, and also as you'll see in a minute, in the actual general
20
obligations of states. So really interesting role for NGOs and DPOs in particular accorded in the
21
treaty.
22
23
States parties are accountable both to the international community and their own people for
24
compliance, as we talked about yesterday, the organs monitoring the CRPD need to pay attention
25
to principles laid out in Article 3 and crosscutting obligations in assessing compliance.
26
27
And particular attention should be given to measures to improve the standards of living of the
28
poor and other disadvantaged groups within the disability community, so if you look at the
29
preamble you'll see various references to particularly marginalised group s within the disability
30
community and other marginalised groups that really contribute to multi dimensional forms of
31
discrimination, persons living in poverty, persons living in areas where there is armed conflict,
32
refugees and IDPs for example implicitly referenced in the preamble. And so on, and references
33
to indigenous persons as well in the preamble.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
6
1
So turning to Article 4, again part of the general crosscutting obligations at the beginning of the
2
treaty, it's got a dynamic relationship clearly with all other provisions in the treaty, meaning that
3
the obligations in Article 4 need to be implied, applied across the treaty. And it describes the
4
general nature of the legal obligations, general legal obligations undertaken by states parties to
5
the CRPD. So very important to think about Article 4 in relation to understanding Article 12 on
6
legal capacity, Article 19 on living independently in the community as we delve into those more
7
deeply during the week.
8
9
So what are the general obligations set out in Article 4? Article 4 lays out specific requirements
10
for addressing the legal framework, we are going to spend a lot of time this work talking about
11
the legal framework because of the very specific domestic Law Reform effort that is we're going
12
to talk about, particularly in the context of legal capacity. So what are these specific
13
requirements? Adopting legislative, administrative and other measures, modifying or abolishing
14
existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination. So again a
15
strong emphasis on disability discrimination and clearly the CRPD committee, the treaty etcetera
16
is, there is a strong focus on the development of national disability discrimination laws.
17
18
When we started drafting the treaty there were fewer than 50 countries around the world that had
19
any kind of comprehensive disability discrimination legislation in place, since 2006 we have a
20
tremendous amount of Law Reform going on that's attempting to fill that gap, so we see a lot of
21
countries going in the direction of adopting a disability specific anti-discrimination law.
22
23
Now the troubling thing about that is many countries are moving forward very quickly to adopt a
24
disability discrimination law because they've ratified the treaty, so that's a really good thing. The
25
really not so good thing is that quickly drafted legislation that does not include for example the
26
voice of DPOs and is not done in a considered process is likely to fall short of the CRPD.
27
28
So we see all sorts of draft disability legislation that is supposed to provide non-discrimination
29
protection for persons with disabilities, but these drafts are missing key elements of disability
30
discrimination law, so we see all sorts of drafts without any reference to reasonable
31
accommodation, the core element of the non-discrimination obligation in the treaty.
32
33
So there is a lot of work to be done by all of us to raise awareness about what are the content of
34
the obligations of the CRPD and what are the key elements of for example non-discrimination in
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
7
the CRPD.
2
3
And then measures to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability by any person,
4
organisation or private enterprise. Clearly really important, we're not just talking about measures
5
undertaken by governments, but governments are responsible for insuring that discrimination is
6
eliminated where practiced by private enterprises, really important for our consideration of
7
Article 19 and independent living. A number of institutions in many parts of the world are not
8
run by the government, they are run by private companies, private organisations in many
9
instances.
10
11
So governments are responsible for monitoring what goes on in these institutions, hospitals
12
etcetera, whether they are owned and operated by the government or whether they are owned and
13
operated by an NGO, by a private company and so forth.
14
15
Okay so we thought we'd throw out a case study that looks at Article 4 and we're going to share
16
with you the Hungarian initiative that was put into place very, very quickly following the
17
adoption of the CRPD in 2006.
18
19
Clearly what Article 4 requires is a comprehensive legislative review in order to assess
20
compliance with CRPD. So one, I think pretty need advocacy example was initiative by the
21
Hungarian disability community led by a deaf organisation there that was working in particular
22
on the recognition of Hungarian sign language in the national law, and they worked together in
23
coalition with other disability organisations, brought together the Hungarian deaf community for
24
the first time ever, as well as other allies in the disability community, and they lobbied heavily
25
for recognition of sign language as an official national language.
26
27
And they were working in particular on the references in article 30 for example of linguistic
28
identity and the protection of cultural right. And they went through a very carefully considered
29
process working closely with the government of the time and it's a really interesting piece of
30
legislation because not only did they adopt this legislation that recognises sign language as an
31
official national language, with various obligations on the State party to make sign language
32
interpretation available and so forth, but it also went carefully through other bits of Hungarian
33
legislation and amended a number of statutes in order to ensure consistency with the principles
34
and objectives of the act.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
8
1
2
So for example they amended the code of civil proceedings various statutes on criminal offences,
3
public notaries, radio and broadcasting, among others to make sure that sign language
4
interpretation would be available in these other contexts.
5
6
So it was a great example of both participation of DPOs in a national legislative reform effort as
7
well as a very carefully done scoping exercise to make sure that the legislation they were
8
actually adopting was comprehensive enough, so again looking through all of the legal
9
framework to ascertain what particular amendments might be required in respect of other
10
statutes.
11
12
What are the other obligations referenced beyond Law Reform in Article 4? Protection and
13
promotion of the human rights of persons with disabilities in all policies and programmes.
14
15
Refraining from acts and practices inconsistent with the Convention and a number of other
16
measures. Undertaking and promoting research and development of universally designed goods,
17
services, equipment and facilities. Undertaking and promoting research and development of and
18
promoting availability and use of new technologies. Providing accessible information to persons
19
with disabilities about mobility aids, devices and assistive technologies. Promoting the training
20
of professionals and staff working with persons with disabilities in rights laid out under the
21
Convention.
22
23
So let's look at State responsibility for violations of the CRPD. A State party will be in violation
24
of the CRPD if it fails to take a step which it is required to take by the CRPD. Sounds pretty
25
obvious.
26
27
Let's make that a little more concrete so a State party will be in violation of the CRPD if it fails
28
to take a step which is required by the CRPD, anyone have an example of a specific step
29
required by the CRPD which a State must take? Any examples?
30
SPEAKER: Provision for reasonable accommodation.
31
MS LORD: Okay provision for reasonable accommodation, so how would State be in violation
32
of the CRPD if it -- can you make that more specific?
33
SPEAKER: Yes, if the State does not make provision.
34
MS LORD: If it does not have an element of non-discrimination in the legislation, okay. Any
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
9
1
other ideas or examples?
2
SPEAKER: If the State fails to modify laws, their national laws, and ensure that they address
3
the concerns of persons with disabilities.
4
MS LORD: Okay if State fails to modify the laws in compliance with the CRPD.
5
6
Another example of how a State might be in violation of the treaty, if it fails to remove promptly
7
obstacles, which it is under a duty to remove to permit the immediate fulfilment of a right. Can
8
someone give me a specific example; we're going to get the Mics out so we have full
9
accessibility here. So a State failing to remove promptly an obstacle which it is under a duty to
10
remove in order to permit immediate fulfilment of a right. This is a general obligation but let's
11
apply it to a very specific situation.
12
SPEAKER: Make public buildings accessible to people in wheelchairs?
13
MS LORD: Good. Okay. Absolutely. So for example in order to realise access to justice or the
14
ability to exercise legal capacity in the context of being able to access a court building, that
15
would be a great example if the State fails to do that. So the first case coming out of the equality
16
court in South Africa actually involved a case of a woman lawyer who was a wheelchair user
17
who was not able to access the courthouse because it was not physically accessible, and therefore
18
she was not able to actually perform her job as a lawyer. So that's a great example.
19
SPEAKER: I don't want this to be another South African example, so let's just say in a country
20
that shall remain nameless! Which recognises the presumption of innocence, the legislation,
21
which regulates the registration of voters says that you cannot be registered as a voter if you are
22
of unsound mind, or words to that effect. And I can say that applies to many jurisdictions in
23
Africa.
24
MS LORD: Great, so reform of the electoral code would be in order on ratification of the
25
CRPD.
26
SPEAKER: I work in Russia right now and one part of the legislation that I think should be
27
modified is allowing doctors to recommend home study for children based on their disability, so
28
if they use a wheelchair it can be recommended that they study at home, which parents often take
29
as a mandate.
30
MS LORD: Okay, instead of making provision for the child to be accommodated at the school.
31
SPEAKER: By failing to provide a convenient parking space or not for vehicles used by
32
persons, PWD.
33
MS LORD: Okay so the failure to basically make accessible, accessibility provisions.
34
MS KAYESS: Provide accommodation in the options for parking.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
10
1
MS LORD: Good all right, let's move on.
2
SPEAKER: I want to ask one point. Suppose a State perpetuates laws, which are
3
discriminatory, which perpetuate disability discrimination did you it not amount to obstacles or
4
barriers?
5
MS LORD: Absolutely. If legislation is in place, which is discriminatory, that needs to be
6
removed.
7
SPEAKER: So inaction on part of the State for a long time; should we treat it as an obstacle?
8
MS LORD: Yes, I would.
9
MS KAYESS: Inaction? Oh, yes, inaction.
10
SPEAKER: By perpetuating the existing discriminatory regime for a long time, this would
11
certainly amount to inaction, so should it be treated as an obstacle?
12
MS LORD: Yeah, we're going to talk in a minute about the violations by acts of commission or
13
omission.
14
15
So the State will be in violation of the CRPD if it fails to implement without delay a right, which
16
is required by the CRPD to be provided immediately.
17
MR ESTEY: Let me ask you a question Janet, going back a couple of examples around public
18
buildings and making them accessible and things, I was in a meeting with some politicians in a
19
province in Canada last year and they were asking me about that very thing, there was a lot of
20
nervousness when you get into implementation of the Convention about these type of things. So
21
I think your thinking an clarification about it.
22
23
Because what I said to them, the politicians, the Minister of Justice, he was asking about courts
24
in new found land, a province where I was at the time, he said if we go forward and ratify this
25
Convention then do we have to make every count house in new found land accessible like that?
26
And I said that's not my understanding of things. My understanding is that you can't build
27
inaccessible courthouses from that time forward, and further more, that you should put in place a
28
programme to retrofit already existing things over a period of time.
29
30
That's the way that I saw it. But from -- but what I was hearing you say, is that there is an
31
immediate obligation on the part of the State to make public buildings accessible from
32
ratification and that seems a horse of a very different colour to me.
33
MS LORD: Thanks Steve yeah, what I say in relation to that is the immediate right to be
34
realised is for example making it possible for a person to cast their ballot or making it possible
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
11
1
for a disabled lawyer to do their job in court, so that doesn't necessarily mean that every single
2
court building overnight needs to be made accessible, but measures need to be taken to ensure
3
that a person with a disability, whether the person using a wheelchair or requiring different
4
means or modes of communication or what have you, or other types of accommodation measures
5
they need to be made immediately in order to facilitate access to justice, in order to facilitate
6
access to medical care and procedures and so forth.
7
MS KAYESS: Immediate realisation is, in these days the modern understanding of the
8
obligation, we'll go through this a lot this morning, we can say it ten different ways but
9
essentially all rights are immediately realisable to within the maximum extent of resources
10
available.
11
12
There would be a higher threshold on courthouses in terms of the civil and political immediately
13
realisable right for access to justice. So what you would do is look at the extent of resources that
14
are required to make the courthouses in Nova Scotia acceptable. So your position of saying that
15
what you need to do is make sure any new courthouses were completely accessible and that there
16
is targeted measured goals towards retrofitting the other courthouses, and that would be
17
intelligent approach to it and would most probably meet the threshold of meeting the obligation.
18
SPEAKER: Can I please ask a question? I want to know what would happen if I broke into a
19
shop and I need to go up in court and be charged for something, I don't know if that would be a
20
question or not.
21
MS KAYESS: So if you committed a crime and had to appear in court?
22
SPEAKER: Yeah, what would happen? How would they facilitate me?
23
MS LORD: How would they accommodate you and what are the obligations of accommodation
24
SPEAKER: I'm just wondering how would they accommodate me to charge me, would I just get
25
off!
26
MS KAYESS: No, bad luck girl, that ain't going to happen!
27
SPEAKER: I have always wondered that so...
28
MS KAYESS: Well if you look at the obligations of the CRPD what would happen is they
29
would have to find an accessible way to accommodate you within the pre-court criminal justice
30
system and post court criminal justice system as well as the court system.
31
32
We have a couple of people in wheelchairs who are incarcerated in prisons in new south Wales
33
in Australia and they are accommodated by outside carers that have to go through all the security
34
rigmarole and those carers come in and support them within the prison facilities. So no, don't go
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
12
1
breaking in any shops!
2
MS LORD: And the treaty recognises legal capacity of all and then related to that is Article 13
3
access to justice. Which requires states to ensure effective access to justice for persons with
4
disabilities whether they are witnesses, whether they are defendants in a criminal case, whether
5
they are a plaintiff in a civil case and so on.
6
SPEAKER: Allow me share the experience from Uganda on access to justice and also
7
accommodation, with enhanced awareness around this issue for PWDs, what Ugandan courts are
8
doing now the new structures are being built with ramps but old one that is cannot be renovated
9
to have ramps and easy access, the court officials are being required to move to the lower, to the
10
ground floor and then start off with hearing cases of PWDs who come in before the judge or
11
magistrate moves to the upper courtrooms to hear the cases, so really that is to - I think it speaks
12
to adopting any other measures to ensure access to justice and reasonable accommodation to
13
buildings.
14
MS LORD: Great example, thank you very much.
15
SPEAKER: Thank you very much did I hear the presenter say that these are not new rights? For
16
mental health sector, did I hear that these rights that we are talking about...
17
MS KAYESS: Just move the mic away.
18
SPEAKER: Is that okay? I was trying to say, I have read that these rights we are talking about
19
are not new rights per se, they have been with us for some time. I'm interested in article 25,
20
making healthcare services as close to the people as possible. But what we are seeing on the
21
ground is one, institutional, and for that matter an odd institution that perpetuates human rights
22
violation. You get in there, you see how people are treated, tied to doors, sleeping on the floor
23
without bedding, look at the food -- how do I take my government under this responsibility that
24
they have, in fact for Zambia they have even ratified and we have a Disability Act
25
implementation problematic.
26
MS LORD: I think that's a great example of why we needed to draft a disability specific treaty.
27
Because while we can say in theory the human rights of persons with disabilities were protected,
28
under the mainstream international human rights law framework, in reality disability issues and
29
persecution against persons with disabilities was not addressed at all.
30
31
So we had the mainstream organisations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch,
32
monitoring and documenting abuses against political prisoners who were held in psychiatric
33
hospitals under horrific conditions of the kind that you are referencing. So there is lots of
34
documenting of those types of violations against political prisoners.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
13
1
2
But the very same conditions were being experienced by persons with mental disabilities who
3
were not classified as political prisoners, they were ignored. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty
4
International not documenting violations against persons with disabilities unless you were a
5
person labelled as a political prisoner. So great example of how, in theory human rights of all
6
persons were covered, but certainly not in practice.
7
8
And in terms of talking about no new rights, again it's for to you decide whether you think the
9
obligations set forth in the CRPD reflect existing human rights or if you see some of those
10
obligations as representative of a progressive development of human rights law, because again
11
some of it looks pretty new. That is for you to decide, but certainly the mantra during the
12
drafting process was oh no we're not really doing anything super new and different, don't worry
13
states, it's okay, this is all stuff that's implicit, we're just making it explicit in the treaty
14
document.
15
MS KAYESS: I'm one of the people that actually think it's good that we say that this
16
Convention doesn't convey any new rights. I think there is value in saying there is a core
17
framework of human rights established by the international bill of human rights, that's the
18
universal declaration on human rights, the two covenants, the international covenant on civil and
19
political rights and international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. And the
20
thematic convention that is fallout from those three documents are an amplification in terms of
21
those thematic areas and what they do is they put them into the context of race, women, children,
22
people with disability.
23
24
The other instruments such as migrant workers, enforced disappearances are a different thematic
25
approach. But what we're saying is that disability is an inherent part of human diversity and so
26
what are the core human rights applied to people with disabilities? We are not different, we're
27
not other, we don't have new different special rights, we have the same rights, we just approach
28
them within a disability context.
29
30
So I think there is great value in emphasising the fact that there are no new rights in this
31
Convention, that it's a translation and an amplification of the existing core human rights that
32
every human being has. But we look at them through the disability prism. My God, I said
33
something right for Jerome!
34
MS LORD: First time ever.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
14
1
SPEAKER: My question is related to the debate of immediate and progressive realisation of
2
rights. I will take the example of Ireland with the Disability Act 2005 and this act says that all
3
public areas, buildings, services, should be fully accessible by 2022. And there comes the issue
4
of how we analyse this, the levels of analysis.
5
6
Are we analysing it, because okay Ireland has not ratified CRPD, but the issue is there is -- the
7
government show an intention to make accessibility, full accessibility available in this country
8
by 2022, but does it mean me as an individual, I cannot access a building or university or
9
whatever, or a pub, should I wait until 2022, or can I redress my rights in court because the
10
building today is not being accessible and that's a violation of my rights to choice or to access.
11
12
Because there is at least two levels of analysis there, individual rights are also human rights and
13
if I'm affected, I can't go to university just because I live in Galway and the accessible university
14
is in Dublin, that's a violation of human rights, isn't it?
15
MS KAYESS: There are two possible ways of answering this. The traditional application of
16
immediately realisable rights was negative rights. They were the ICCPR rights that were about
17
removing legal obstacles, so there was no resource implication for the country.
18
19
Basically what the community of nations was being asked of each other was to remove legal
20
impediments, so you were asking States to nullify, repeal or modify legislation that identified
21
personal characteristics of certain communities within their country and had barriers, legal
22
impediments to their exercise of rights.
23
24
So the denial of rights for women that were enshrined in legislation, the denial of rights for
25
minorities within countries, and so there was no economic resource impact on the country to
26
immediately realise that obligation. So all they had to do was remove that legislative
27
framework.
28
29
Where it gets more tricky is when you start moving into the standard of obligation, we'll go into
30
this a little further. So in respect of your right, it's generally in that term of removing illegal
31
impediments, when you have to protect that right you are then establishing a right to a remedy,
32
which is one of the core State obligations on international human rights law.
33
34
So to protect that you have to establish a mode of, where individuals can seek redress if there is a
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
15
1
violation of that right, that starts to bring in a little of resource impact for the country, because
2
they have to have courts, tribunals, mechanisms for that protection mechanism to happen. And
3
then the fulfilment of a right, which is the third step of State obligation, is about ensuring that all
4
people can exercise their rights and that's where we start moving into a lot more of the economic,
5
social and cultural rights.
6
7
But increasingly it's seen within civil and political rights. So to fulfil the right to legal
8
obligation, such as legal capacity, when you talk about establishing support mechanisms for
9
people to exercise their right, when you talk about the right to life, when you talk about ensuring
10
maternal health for mothers to ensure that babies have the opportunity to thrive and to develop,
11
so access to those sorts of services have resource implications.
12
13
So there is a standard and a threshold of, to the maximum extent of resources. So then it's an
14
evaluation of whether the country has repealed legal impediments, made sure that individuals
15
have an opportunity to seek redress if their rights are violated, so their rights are protected. And
16
then, whether they are taking concrete, measured steps to reach full compliance.
17
18
So if a country has a specific plan about making public buildings accessible by a certain date
19
they have budgetary allocations that demonstrate a commitment to the process, then yes you
20
would say that they are working towards their obligations.
21
22
But, what you could do, because you hold the individual right that your rights are being violated
23
without discrimination, there should be mechanisms where you can seek redress and there could
24
be a secondary evaluation on whether you are being provided with really accommodation. And
25
so then there is the threshold again of disproportionate or undue burden.
26
27
So are there the resources to make those facilities accessible? And that would be a judicial
28
decision that would happen in the context of all the circumstances of your particular case. Does
29
that help clarify?
30
CHAIR: I want to manufacture on a little for -- timewise but the Disability Act does have an
31
interim mechanism where you can ultimately appeal to the ombudsman, but I should also say the
32
Disability Act did not receive the support of the disability community. It wasn't -- it was seen
33
very much as, if anything a way to protect national resources against, everything is resource
34
dependent, everything is about protecting the resources of the State rather than really promoting
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
16
equality for people with disabilities, so it wouldn't be the guiding light in the Irish legal system.
2
3
The Equal Status Act might be more appropriate in that regard. But I'm going to move it on and
4
get questions in the end, I'm conscious we have a long day ahead and this is just the first session,
5
I will have a set time for questions at the very end, so maybe if we move it on a little bit.
6
MS LORD: That takes us naturally to the obligations set forth in Article 4.3 that in the
7
development and implementation of legislation and policies to implement the Convention and in
8
other decision-making processes concerning issues relating to persons with disabilities, which in
9
my view would be any legislation or policy, states parties shall closely consult with and actively
10
involve persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, through their representative
11
organisations.
12
13
One of the questions is what is the relationship to other articles in the CRPD? Well clearly
14
Article 4.3 imposes an obligation of consultation in respect of any of the other substantive
15
articles, Steve Estey yesterday mention the important role DPOs play in the negotiation of the
16
treaty and some of the other provisions where the participation of DPOs is referenced, he talked
17
about Article 33.3 which relates to national monitoring and the important role that DPOs play in
18
the monitoring of the implementation of the CRPD.
19
20
One of you asked in one of the breaks yesterday about the role of, that NGOs might play in
21
shadow reporting, or producing alternative reports that provide a little extra information on what
22
a State might be reporting to the CRPD committee, might critique a report or might fill in the
23
gaps and we'll certainly be talking more about monitoring and the role of DPOs and monitoring
24
later this week.
25
MS KAYESS: This is one of the greatest innovations I think of this Convention, it's really about
26
giving voice to people with disabilities and the way to formalise it, this formalisation of
27
engagement with civil society specifically people with disability and their representative
28
organisations, disabled persons organisations, I think it's a really great innovation to this
29
Convention.
30
MS LORD: The next slide refers back to the Hungarian process that we talked about earlier and
31
there has been a number of implementation guidelines put out there for helping analyse
32
implementation of various articles of the Convention, so here's just a few of those guidelines by
33
way of example that we might use to assess either the Hungarian process or any other
34
participation process.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
17
1
2
Were DPOs actively involved in the development of the legislation, or the policy? Was
3
consultation inclusive of the diversity of the disability community, inclusive of cross disability
4
representation? That's going to be extremely important. Were DPOs representing children with
5
disabilities involved? Were DPOs led by women with disabilities involved? Obviously getting
6
into questions about the nature of the consultation and was it meaningful, and the issue of
7
representing the diversity of the community is very important.
8
9
I worked with some DPOs for New Zealand who were very concerned about the lack of
10
representation of persons with Down Syndrome and families of children with Down Syndrome
11
in the formulation of a policy that directly related to people with Down Syndrome and the
12
response they got from the government was well we did consult with disability organisations, but
13
they didn't consult with any organisation specifically led by people with Down Syndrome or
14
representing people with Down Syndrome, and the government finally conceded the point and
15
said in the review of this policy we agree that people with Down Syndrome actually have to be at
16
the table.
17
18
So that was a great example and that organisation, very new organisation, hadn't been involved
19
in many law or policy advocacy in the past, they used the CRPD and Article 4.3 to press their
20
point and they succeeded in getting to the table, so I thought that was a super example of
21
advocacy around Article 4.3.
22
MS KAYESS: The really strong thing about Article 4.3 is it became very obvious in New York
23
during the drafting process wouldn't you say Janet that there was a need of capacity building on
24
both sides and especially within governments, because people with disability have been isolated
25
from mainstream education, from academic opportunities, and so they aren't represented in that
26
cohort of policy people, academia, where they engage in the policy discourse. So there was that
27
void of the understanding of disability, and this is a clear way of bringing people with disability
28
to the policy discourse, bringing them to the table and giving them a voice.
29
MS LORD: Article 4.4 a long provision, nothing in the present Convention shall affect any
30
provisions which are more conducive to the realisation of the rights of persons with disabilities
31
and which may be contained in the law of a State party or international law in force for that
32
State. There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the human rights and
33
fundamental freedoms recognised or existing in any State party to the present Convention,
34
pursuant to law, conventions, regulation or custom on the pretext that the present Convention
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
18
does not recognise such rights or freedoms or that it recognises them to a lesser extent.
2
3
So what does this mean? It means none of the provisions can be interpreted in such a way to
4
destroy any of the rights or freedoms in the CRPD. And that the CRPD and Article 4 is intended
5
to be protective of the rights of individuals rather than permissive of the imposition of limitations
6
by the State.
7
8
Now one of the arguments put forward by some opponents of ratification of the CRPD in the US
9
relates to the first part of this article, namely that, well this Convention is going to actually chip
10
away at existing protections under American disability law. That's clearly a bogus argument, if
11
one reading Article 4.4 but that was one of the arguments among many that were silly and had
12
no basis.
13
14
Then secondly there should be no restrictions upon or derogation from the human rights and
15
freedoms recognised or existing in any State party to the Convention under other laws or cuss
16
comes etcetera.
17
18
That was really important, if you look at, for example the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
19
negotiated prior to the CRPD and article 23 that addresses the rights of children with disabilities,
20
some have read that particular provision as actually making human rights for children with
21
disabilities a little bit contingent, a little bit lower than the rights of other children, and this
22
particular provision makes clear that that can't be the case, you can't -- this Convention gives
23
equal protection to all persons with disabilities and a State can't point to another law or provision
24
that provides lesser protection.
25
26
And again looking at some guidelines that have been created for helping to guide
27
implementation of Article 4.4, has a national legislative review been undertaken to ensure that
28
the CRPD will not under cut stronger domestic law? There may certainly be instances where a
29
government's domestic law is potentially stronger than certain provisions in the Convention, so
30
that requires a legislative review in order to, or a scoping exercise in order to determine whether
31
that may be the case.
32
33
Has there been a review of applicable international law to determine whether it includes stronger
34
protections than those in the CRPD? Obviously applicable to that, a particular State that's
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
19
ratified other treaties.
2
3
Has there been a review to assess whether any action has been taken that would restrict or dear
4
Oh gate from human rights recognised or existing in a state's legal framework on the basis that
5
the Convention does not recognise such rights or freedoms. In other words is the CRPD being
6
used to under cut human rights protections. So these are all questions to think about and ask in
7
relation to the implementation of general obligations.
8
9
And really important when we start looking at reforms that are taking place around legal
10
capacity.
11
MS KAYESS: We would argue that our discrimination act has a much higher threshold because
12
it has unjustifiable hardship as its element of reasonable accommodation as opposed to
13
disproportionate or undue burden, so we would argue that there is a higher threshold and we
14
would see that as being the threshold that we would keep rather than coming down to what we
15
see as a lower threshold with disproportionate burden.
16
SPEAKER: Can you repeat that point please?
17
MS KAYESS: Which point? The last proposition that Australia sees that unjustifiable hardship
18
is a higher threshold?
19
20
Unjustifiable hardship, we believe that unjustifiable hardship is a higher threshold for reasonable
21
accommodation, disproportionate burden holds not a lot of jurisprudence behind it so it's an
22
unknown quantity, where it has been used in the European context it's been very much arithmetic
23
assessment of disproportionate, whereas, or where disproportionate has been used in other
24
jurisdictional contexts it's been arithmetic proposition, whereas unjustifiable hardship is a much
25
broader analysis of the elements of hardship, so we think unjustifiable, as a term, is a higher
26
threshold than disproportionate.
27
MS LORD: All right in Article 4.5 talks about the application in the CRPD to all parts of federal
28
states without limitations or exceptions. Some of the ratifying States are federal states and
29
therefore it needs, the CRPD applies across all parts of federal states and there are various
30
approaches, Rosemarie can tell us about the Australian approach.
31
MS KAYESS: Yes, you are right the Australian approach is very much a process oriented
32
approach, in 1996 there was significant change in 2006 there was more change. What we did
33
was the process -- the federal government holds the obligation to international treaties under our
34
constitution, yet the states hold a lot of the jurisdiction in terms of the implementation of a lot of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
20
1
the obligations of our international treaties, so they there needed to be a process by which there
2
was State engagement with the treaty adoption and implementation process.
3
4
And what they did was they established a process that allowed for states to be part of the process
5
and so there is a Council of Treaties that examines the national interest and the impact on states.
6
The states have a role through the Council of Australian government of engaging with all of the
7
international law processes, in terms of when there is negotiations going on they are all
8
consulted about the impact on their jurisdiction, so it's very much a process orientated approach.
9
It contains several elements at the federal level but at Australian government level they are all
10
the Ministers, the relevant Ministers and then the step below is all the relevant administrative
11
offices are involved.
12
MS LORD: Okay with respect to the US approach...
13
SPEAKER: In India we follow Canadian approach.
14
MS KAYESS: I don't know the Canadian approach, Jerome you're Canadian, Steve you're
15
Canadian.
16
MS LORD: I think in Canada there has been a great deal of consultation across, I don't know
17
Steve if you can speak a little to the process of consultation around ratification of the CRPD?
18
MR ESTEY: I can, if you give me a microphone!
19
20
Is it on? In terms of ratification, what happened in Canada is the Canadian government signed
21
the Convention the day it opened for signature in 2008 with 80 other countries, and then what
22
happened is it went into a very internal process between governments at the provincial and
23
federal level.
24
25
So you had -- federally each department reviewed their policies and legislation and so forth to
26
make sure they were in compliance and so on. But at the same time departments of justice
27
across the country, in all of the provinces and territories performed a similar process, and there is
28
a committee of people, it's called, I forget the name of it, but what it is, is a committee of
29
representatives from departments of justice from each jurisdiction, one person from each
30
province and territory and a person from the federal Department of Justice meet to review all
31
human rights treaties, okay?
32
33
So they talk about all of them and as part of that committee's agenda over the course of a
34
three-year period there were discussions about the CRPD. And once each jurisdiction was able
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
21
1
to claim that it was in compliance then they moved forward, but it was all very internal, there
2
was no discussion with the disability community at all during the course of this, much to our
3
chagrin, we tried very hard to engage and to discuss and so on, but the government at each level
4
said no this is an internal review process, and we were closed out and simply informed at the end
5
of the day okay, we feel things are in place and we can move forward with ratification, but it was
6
not transparent at all, it was extremely frustrating for our organisation and other disability
7
advocates.
8
MS KAYESS: That's exactly the same as the Australian approach, I would have found it a bit
9
surprising if we didn't probably copy the Canadians! The only difference is that the transparency
10
gets greater once it's been through the couple of treaties process and it gets back to the federal
11
Parliament and then there is the national impact assessment process and people can make public
12
submissions to that process, so there is a little bit of transparency at the federal level in terms of
13
ratification.
14
MS LORD: Thank you. I am going a little cheeky in referencing the American exceptionalism
15
approach. Actually in signing the Convention, which President Obama did in 2009 thereafter a
16
similar very extensive review process was undertaken across different federal agencies and in
17
relation to looking at the laws of various States in some instances there aren't federal disability
18
law, but there is State by State law.
19
20
So for example guardian ship law would be looked at on a State by State basis, so very long and
21
extensive process of review in order to prepare what's called the ratification package, which then
22
goes to the US Senate and assesses in great detail the consistency or otherwise of American law
23
with the obligations set forth in the CRPD, and then recommendations are made on whether
24
certain reservations should be made or understanding or declarations in order to ensure that when
25
ratification happens the US is fully compliant with the treaty obligations in question.
26
27
And we do a strange thing with respect to entering a reservation to address the federalism issue,
28
some would argue that the reservation contravenes international law, I won't get into that. We
29
haven't ratified the treaty yet, but there was a federal reservation put forward to deal with cases
30
where the State law is inconsistent with CRPD obligations but we could talk all day about that, I
31
want to move on.
32
33
We were asked to look at some of the analytical tools that help us understand general obligations
34
of human rights treaties and that you'll see used by the UN, by human rights advocates.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
22
1
2
The first one is the very familiar respect, protect and fulfil framework. I guess we'll have time to
3
work through one of these.
4
5
So respect, the obligation to respect human rights mean that is states must not interfere with the
6
exercise and enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities.
7
8
The obligation to protect means that the State must prevent violations by non-State actors, such
9
as individuals, businesses, institutions or other private organisations.
10
11
And finally the obligation to fulfil human rights mean it is that states must take positive action to
12
ensure that everyone, including persons with disabilities, can exercise their human rights.
13
14
So what does this look like? For example taking the right to life article 10, what would the
15
respect, protect and fulfil framework, what might it look like or what examples?
16
17
So the obligation to respect, with respect to article 10, might include an obligation that the State
18
does not restrict access to medical care for persons with disabilities. That are would be an
19
example of an obligation to respect. We can think of many other examples that will fall under
20
article 10 that's one example.
21
22
Protect, the State takes measures to ensure careful monitoring of all settings where persons with
23
disabilities live or receive services, whether publicly or privately operated. So getting back to
24
the example that one of our participants provided of horrific conditions in psychiatric
25
institutions, that would be an example right there.
26
27
And the obligation to fulfil, in this context the State undertakes information campaigns that seek
28
to dispel the myth that persons with disabilities have lives "Not worth living" so again different
29
levels of obligation, you can use this framework to sort through different types and levels of
30
obligations for each right in the treaty.
31
32
Take another example right to participate in cultural life and sport, article 30 of the treaty. Again
33
the respect, protect and fulfil framework.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
23
1
We filled that out a little bit. The State repeals discriminatory regulations regarding fire safety
2
restricting the access of persons using wheelchairs to theatres, so this was an example under
3
equal participation in cultural life, fire regulations have often been known to discriminate against
4
persons with disabilities so that would be...
5
MS KAYESS: I won't tell you when I got kicked out of a live sex show in Amsterdam because
6
of a fire issue, know, when in Amsterdam you do -- university students backpacking through
7
Europe...
8
MS LORD: Protect, the State requires sign language interpretation to be provided for a cultural
9
event open to the public in a private museum. So the State has responsibility to ensure private
10
actors respect the right to participate in public life and to fulfil it the State adopts a national
11
Action Plan addressing a comprehensive strategy to make sporting arenas accessible to persons
12
with disabilities as participants and as spectators.
13
14
So useful framework, you'll see it time and again in documents prepared by special rapporteurs
15
and analysis used by office of the Commissioner for Human Rights and advocacy groups, so
16
generally helpful framework to use that might be helpful as we try to sort through legal capacity,
17
independent living later in the week.
18
19
So we thought we would work through one, we'll take the civil and political right, we'll take
20
Article 29 my favourite article, participation in political and public life. What would be an
21
example of respecting the obligation to respect the right to participate in political and public life?
22
Again going back to our framework, requiring states to refrain from interfering with the
23
enjoyment of human rights -- refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of human rights. What
24
would be an Article 29 obligation to respect participation in political and public life? An
25
example? Refraining from interference.
26
SPEAKER: Two things, one in response to that, to respect, would probably, the State should put
27
in place measures that ensure free voting rights for persons with disabilities, like remember the
28
case scenario that we saw yesterday, not imposing a legal representative to help a person with
29
disability to vote, but rather enabling the person with disability to freely exercise their right to
30
vote, that's where they are respecting the right to participate in public life.
31
32
But besides this, there is something I saw on the slide that you didn't talk about and I hope you
33
will get time to talk about, Maastricht guidelines? Thank you.
34
SPEAKER: To respect this article, country should remove all parts of law that require physical
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
24
1
ability to fill in the political post.
2
MS KAYESS: Excellent, so removing legal impediments to participating in the political parties
3
or political decisions, yes.
4
SPEAKER: I wanted to say not to impose any restriction on the right itself, to elect and be
5
elected by, for example requiring the sound mind and this kind of this.
6
MS LORD: So guaranteeing by law the rights of everyone, all persons with disabilities to
7
participate in political and public life and ensuring non-discrimination in that context.
8
9
Okay, what about obligation to protect? Requiring states to prevent violations of such rights by
10
third parties, so how would that -- what would be an example in the context of participation in
11
political and public life?
12
SPEAKER: What is the threshold of respect? How to respect? Now suppose I want to contest
13
an election and no political party is ready to give me the ticket, to contest the election, although
14
the law says hypothetically that they can't discriminate, so what is the threshold?
15
MS KAYESS: Well the threshold of respect is that you respect the right, so you do not deny the
16
person the right. So you're respecting their right.
17
SPEAKER: But then are you not making a distinction between capacity to hold the right and
18
capacity to act? So although you are giving us the capacity to hold a right, but you are denying
19
us the capacity to act?
20
CHAIR: The question was if a political party refused to allow you run for election does that
21
breach the right to respect?
22
MS KAYESS: Well it depends on what basis the political is not giving him a ticket to run. If
23
it's purely on the basis of his disability, that's one thing, if it's because they don't want you as a
24
candidate for some other reason, that's another thing.
25
SPEAKER: Because a case arose in our jurisdiction recently in local government, two disabled
26
people wanted to contest the elections and no political party gave them a ticket. Of course
27
disability, there is a discrimination and then they went to the court asking that we need quotas
28
because political parties are not ready to give us a ticket, and a very interesting direction came
29
from the bomb bay High Court, the direction was that all political parties must be asked to read
30
UNCRPD and understand the message of UNCRPD. This is coming from High Court.
31
MS LORD: So requiring States to prevent violation by third parties, ensuring that political
32
parties respect the right to political participation.
33
MS KAYESS: But yeah...
34
SPEAKER: To clarify a bit, political parties would argue that okay the they respect the rights of
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
25
1
the disabled to contest the elections, but we want to give tickets to winnable candidates,
2
candidates who will win the elections.
3
MS KAYESS: Well protect would be that there will be an ability for you to demonstrate
4
through anti-discrimination law, that that political party has discriminated on the basis of
5
disability, that's what I was saying, you should be able to challenge that decision, so they are in
6
breach of anti-discrimination laws because on the basis of disability they have denied you the
7
right to be a candidate for an election. But they haven't given you candidacy for other reasons,
8
you wouldn't do it under anti-discrimination law.
9
MS LORD: The State would be required to provide equal access to whatever electoral
10
complaints mechanism they have in place in the State.
11
CHAIR: Two more questions over here and we are now a little bit over time for coffee so I want
12
to take the two questions and then maybe we'll wrap it up for this part. So Steve?
13
MR ESTEY: What about a situation talking about people with disabilities being refused the
14
right to run and so on is one thing. But what about if a political party refused to provide
15
accommodation, say a deaf person wanted to run for a nomination, and they required sign
16
language interpretation, would a political party be obligate to provide that form of
17
accommodation? Is that the sort of thing? It seems like a different things to just deny a person
18
than it is to be compel to provide accommodation, which is a step beyond in my mind.
19
MS KAYESS: If that's the step beyond is that the step between protect and fulfil? So that about
20
fulfilling the obligation rather than protecting the obligation? The political party has an
21
obligation not to discriminate against you.
22
MS LORD: And to provide reasonable accommodation.
23
CHAIR: This is the last question over here before the break. We're going to come back to this
24
after break.
25
MS KAYESS: There are so many connections between this and the next session that you will
26
basically just keep going on and on...
27
SPEAKER: Just actually regarding Article 29, with regard to the obligation of political parties, I
28
think the article only imposes obligation on the State, and here it's a technical issue. Because
29
right to respect, protect and fulfil is not an obligation of the political parties, it's an obligation on
30
the State. I think we just need your view on this, whether...
31
MS KAYESS: Well the treaties are between the State and the community of nations, so the
32
State holds all obligations. So the nature of the treaty, there are two sides to the treaty, who
33
holds the obligation, but they have an obligation to ensure that people are protected from the
34
actions of third parties.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
26
1
MS LORD: Right so the obligation in this instance would be on the State to ensure that third
2
parties or political parties are not discriminating against persons with disabilities, in other words
3
they have to, the State needs to enforce its non-discrimination law in the context of political
4
participation, but you're absolutely right in pointing out, the obligation is one of the State. But
5
third parties are implicated in terms of the obligation on the State. So I think we'll end it and...
6
CHAIR: We'll wrap up for the break, we will come back to this because the second topic is
7
State obligations continued, where we'll continue to look at this issue so save your questions they
8
are not going to go away I'm sure and there will be time. Thanks very much for your
9
participation it made this session really, really important.
10
11
We have, it's now coming up to ten past 11 so we're running about ten minutes late, we'll maybe
12
make coffee break 15 as opposed to 20 minutes with a view to try to keep us back on time for,
13
because later we'll need food, so maybe now 15 minutes and see you back at 25 past. Thank
14
you.
15
16
Coffee break
17
18
MS KEANE: I have two quick announcements for you this afternoon before the next session,
19
the first is that the moot court teams have been decided, your teams have been uploaded onto the
20
drop box under moot court, your moot court folder you'll find your name there, there is also
21
notice board outside and you'll find your name up there so you have been divided into teams one,
22
two and three so look for your number and you'll find out the team.
23
24
The second announcement is the captioners have created a website www.seewritenow.ie and if
25
you'd like to view the captions directly on your own computer you can do so, I've also created a
26
file that you can do that on the drop box, so it's in under transcripts, there is a separate file and it
27
will link you to the website directly and you can view their amazing captions on your own
28
device.
29
30
Now I'll pass over to Shivaun for the next session.
31
DR QUINLIVAN: Now we're in part two. This session Rosemarie will lead with Janet, there
32
will be time for questions and answers throughout, so I'm going to let Janet and Rosemarie
33
control the questions but at certain points I will start to wrap it up, that's my job to keep it
34
moving, because there are people making lunch somewhere at this moment, so we need to keep
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
27
1
it progressing, but I will let Rosemarie and Janet to a large part run the session and I will move
2
them along every now and again, just to intervene. So I'll hand you over top again great round of
3
applause for Rosemarie and Janet for their assistance in this, thank you.
4
MS LORD: We're actually going to go back and wrap up a couple of slides from the previous
5
session. We were just finishing this framework, which, in the break I think we were considering
6
whether it actually clarifies or confuses, some like it, some don't but it's out there.
7
8
So we were finishing out the framework for Article 29, respect protect and fulfil. I think we
9
were on to fulfil. So any examples on, I think we were already getting started thinking about
10
what of the obligation to fulfil might look like in respect of Article 29 and remember again this
11
requires states to take appropriate legislative administrative, budge tree, judicial and other
12
measures towards the realisation of political rights.
13
14
So obligation to fulfil, what might that look like specifically? Any ideas and specific examples
15
under this obligation to fulfil?
16
SPEAKER: Just to make all materials, everything regarding elections and participation
17
accessible, in terms of materials, in the ability to vote and participate as well.
18
MS LORD: Okay, so for example providing accessible materials that might look like designing
19
and making available for use a tactile ballot for blind voters that might be an example, or taking
20
other measures to ensure accessibility, making sure that information is accessible, so if an
21
electoral commission is relying solely on radio messaging, that's not going to be accessible for
22
deaf persons, so taking measures to ensure that messaging is available in various formats so that
23
it can be accessible to all. Using plain language that's really useful for everyone, using
24
Pictographs can be useful for everyone trying to educate a voter on how to cast their ballot, there
25
is a whole variety that can make an electoral process, not only to persons with disabilities but to
26
everyone.
27
SPEAKER: I want to draw the attention of the organiser of this conference to when I came in, as
28
a delegate from Nigeria the Ministry of Justice, I perceived a set of flags on the table here and I
29
can't find Nigeria! We were talking about participation in public and political life, it starts up
30
here, I can't see my flag, the flag of my country, because I presume you are aware of my coming,
31
so that's noted, right?
32
MS LORD: Kind of a big country with kind of a big population, not an insignificant country.
33
SPEAKER: Nigeria, it has to be included! Talking about participation, right to participation in
34
political and public life, as we have a handbook here produced by my office, Lagos State office
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
28
1
for disability affairs, so in this we have participation in public and political life, social and
2
political life, we have here a particular provision that says that when a PWD is being invited out
3
to a function, social function, care and provision should be made for care givers for the
4
organisers of the particular event, to provide people that will take care, that will make them
5
enjoy their stay there as necessary.
6
7
So as part of the observation of the respect and the observation of the Article 29 with regards to
8
participation in political and public life. That is just my contribution. Thank you.
9
MS KAYESS: So the what you are saying is when there is a political function that people are
10
being invited to, that there is supports available for people with disability so they can actively
11
participate in the event. Okay, and that would include things like making the information that's
12
provided at the event available through sign interpretation.
13
CHAIR: Good and I'll tell them about the flags for next year!
14
SPEAKER: Zambia should be included as well
15
CHAIR: I'm going to get a list of participants next year and have a flag for every country I'll
16
ensure it, don't worry!
17
MS LORD: Moving on, this is the last slide in this section that we're going to address...
18
SPEAKER: Can I just make a small point, the point is laws are enacted for example in our
19
country, in India laws are enacted, we also have a constitution, but till this date I have not seen a
20
Braille copy, either of the constitution or any laws. Can we say that this amounts to denial of
21
political participation as well, apart from accessibility? Is it a crosscutting thing?
22
MS LORD: Yeah accessibility definitely is crosscutting.
23
SPEAKER: Then in this framework, at what level we should look at it?
24
MS KAYESS: Well it would be part of the fulfil -- because you are making available political
25
information to people to have an understanding of what their rights are under the constitution, so
26
to fulfil that right you should be making the information available in alternative formats.
27
SPEAKER: Because one argument which is thrown in, they say you can read the information
28
available on the website by using screen reading software, but then alternate more software
29
accessibility does not mean you deny the right to the law in Braille. So I would like to know
30
what is the initiative in the US for example, whether laws are available in Braille, is it an
31
obligation on the authorities for example to make available laws in Braille after they are
32
enacted?
33
MS LORD: I was just going to say that access to information is of course a specific obligation
34
in the CRPD. But the obligation is one of reasonable accommodation, so there will be
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
29
1
circumstances in which access to Braille text would be a reasonable accommodation. If
2
someone doesn't have access to screen reading technology, then that's not going to be a very
3
helpful accommodation.
4
5
So moving on to obligations of conduct and result, another framework for thinking about general
6
obligations which some people find helpful some people don't, I'll let you decide whether it's
7
useful.
8
9
10
So the obligations to respect, protect and fulfil each contain elements of obligation of conduct
and obligation of result.
11
12
The obligation of conduct requires action reasonably calculated to realise the enjoyment of a
13
particular right.
14
15
The obligation of result requires states to achieve specific targets to satisfy a detailed substantive
16
standard.
17
18
So what does that really mean? When applied, taking the right to health as an example, the
19
obligation of conduct could involve the adoption and implementation of a plan of action to
20
reduce maternal mortality. That would be an example of obligation of conduct. With respect to
21
the right to health, the obligation of result might require the reduction of maternal mortality to
22
levels agreed at the 1994 Cairo international conference on population and development and the
23
1995 Beijing fourth world conference on women, so again going back to obligations of conduct
24
and result.
25
26
The first requires action reasonably calculated to enjoy particular rights, and the second requires
27
State detail substantive state.
28
29
If we were to take Article 19 on living independently in the community, what might it look like,
30
what might an example be of the obligation of conduct?
31
32
Requiring action reasonably calculate to realise the enjoyment of Article 19. Any ideas of an
33
action, reasonably calculate to realise the enjoyment of independent living? Anyone? Right
34
down in front here.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
30
1
SPEAKER: The rights of PWD, the rights of tenants, the landlord or the right or the obligation
2
of the landlord -- an obligation of a landlord to a tenant who is a PWD, like a landlord chalet
3
how a person with disability who is a tenant to make every necessary modification to the
4
building that will allow the tenant assess his apartment as long as the tenant returns the building
5
to the original State at the end of his tenancy. It's part of a way towards giving, making a PWD
6
live an independent life. Thank you.
7
MS LORD: Okay, great example. So perhaps providing for that right in the context of
8
legislation concerning tenancy would be an example of an obligation of conduct I think. Are
9
there any other examples?
10
SPEAKER: I came from the mental health sector point of view. We have been seeing a lot of
11
this practice where people are mental health problems are always made to believe that living
12
independently is not something that they can enjoy, but living in an institution is their life.
13
Which has really been problematic and we are trying to say is it true that we can live in the
14
community? The answer is yes. But the authorities, the laws, the practice, don't suggest that, the
15
best place for people with mental disability is in the institution because they think we are a
16
danger to society.
17
MS LORD: Okay so what could a State do to move towards independent living? What kind of
18
an obligation does Article 19 require in order to achieve the realisation of independent living for
19
persons with mental disabilities?
20
SPEAKER: I think the State, especially in Ireland and I suppose other countries within Europe,
21
and around the world, is to get rid of institutions and get people with disabilities living out in the
22
community like the gentleman has just said, with the required resources, such as PAs and other
23
resources that may be accessibility in the home, rather than -- there needs to be more funding put
24
into that, it's going to be more expensive to live, to get people with disability living in
25
institutions, that's going back to the old times, and we can't go back into that, not in Ireland, not
26
in any other country in the world. I think just it will be more expensive on any State for people
27
with disabilities to live in institutions, thanks.
28
MS LORD: So perhaps an obligation of conduct in that context would involve the allegation of
29
sufficient budgetary resources into a plan to transition people out of institutions and into the
30
community, good.
31
SPEAKER: I think I'm going to say the same, PAs, Personal Assistant, and I think the
32
community should ensure that people with also intellectual and mental disabilities to live in their
33
own home with direct payment and Personal Assistants.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
31
1
And then, my daughters are doing that, they are intellectually impaired. And to ensure to do that
2
without being more expensive, I am the lead role assistant, I am not paid. It's not that difficult, I
3
don't think it's going to be more expensive, it's another way of doing it, my name is Helga Bloom
4
by the way.
5
SPEAKER: A quick comment up here if I may? Just a quick comment on, a lot of countries that
6
I have worked in with institutions, one made barriers keeping people in institutions and not being
7
supportive in the community, is that the money is often set up to follow the institution and not
8
the person. So as far as an obligation of an example of one quick change that can be had, is
9
always have the funds follow the person. Thank you.
10
MS LORD: Great example, thank you. Excellent. So then moving to obligation result, which
11
requires states to achieve specific targets to satisfy a detailed substantive standard. So what
12
might that look like? If you take the examples that you just referenced and then think about
13
specific targets that might help satisfy them? Then we get to an obligation and result. Any
14
ideas?
15
SPEAKER: Might it look like increasing say mental healthcare budget to ensure that mental
16
healthcare is provided within the community? I think I'm getting a bit mixed up between the two
17
of them, I think the distinction for me is not coming out very clearly.
18
MS KAYESS: Well if the action is increasing mental health budget to ensure that, is it about
19
putting a timeframe about closing the institutions? So one of the actions is to increase the mental
20
health budget to attach individualised funding to people so they can transit from institutions into
21
community living and that that process is successfully achieved by a certain date. So putting
22
ten-year framework around that process of de-institutionalisation, that would be…
23
SPEAKER: So an example linked to what you are saying, that in Ireland the suggestion is that
24
people would be supported to move out of institutions within a 7 year timeframe, and that no
25
new State funding would be used to build institutions and no people, people wouldn't be
26
expected to move into those vacated places within that timeframe.
27
SPEAKER: My question is really, I'm finding it difficult where to start, when you are looking at
28
countries like in the region where I'm working, that's Southern Africa, where the institutions that
29
might be existing at the moment are running at such little cost anyway, even to shut them down
30
and to convert the cost towards independent living, it's really not a significant amount to support
31
these individuals who need to live independently.
32
33
So my question is really, where to start in supporting independent living in such poor states? It's
34
one thing to know that in the UK or in Ireland you have independent living, you have PAs or
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
32
1
support workers, but in Southern Africa for instance it's really, where to begin?
2
SPEAKER: I have the say idea, because we from the developing countries and the history of
3
independent living is from the countries that have the institutions already. But in the poor
4
countries like that colleague mentioned, we don't have even enough institutions for people with
5
disabilities, and living freely in the community without any support. So if we mention about
6
independent living and say we should see the difference between well developed countries and
7
the other countries.
8
CHAIR: Just two points now if I could. Firstly on the issues you have raised about countries
9
without institutions, one of our students last year wrote a dissertation on that about how do you
10
actually achieve independent living in the context of countries where there isn't institutions and a
11
lot of the conversations about institutionalisation and de-institutionalisation and she talked about
12
the notion of independent living and interdependent living and there will be an article about that,
13
we'll get it sent out to everybody here that does discuss that.
14
15
Somebody said it's different to Ireland we are a country in bail out, cutting services all over the
16
place. To give an example in the papers in the last few weeks where they cut mobility
17
allowances, they cut payments to individuals one family was showing a situation where they
18
were being forced into a situation their daughter would be put in an institution because all the
19
particular direct payments had been cut to her, and the cost of that was going to be around
20
55,000 a year but the State were willing to support that rather than reinstate the individual costs,
21
so it is still very much a live issue in the context of developed countries as well.
22
SPEAKER: Can I just make a comment on that, perhaps a more constructive way to come at
23
that expense problem would be to challenge what seems to be an absolutely accepted idea that
24
disability is expensive. Like for instance to challenge the absolutely extortion ate charges for
25
things like disability equipment, which are in no way justifiable, if you look at hoists and things
26
like that, you buy an engine hoist for the tent of the price of a medical hoist. I this I that would
27
be a much more constructive way to come at the problem, drag down the costs, I don't accept
28
that disability is so expensive. Because I don't believe it is. We all seem to take it and accept it
29
as a fact. I don't believe it.
30
MS KAYESS: Sometimes it's worth to turn the argument around and say how expensive it is if
31
you don't do these things.
32
CHAIR: That's the point that that woman, her costs, the direct payments were a fraction of what
33
it was going to cost her in the institution, but they didn't want to re introduce the direct payments
34
that's exactly the point that living independently in a community with her family was a cheaper
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
33
1
alternative, but that the State went for the more expensive alternative begins their own policies,
2
again it's about thinking, if they stop to think about what they were doing they couldn't have
3
come up that solution.
4
MS KAYESS: Now I'm going to...
5
SPEAKER: I just have one mall point
6
CHAIR: We're going to start the next, we'll take them in a few minutes.
7
MS KAYESS: Now typical of these situations 90% of what I wanted to say has already been
8
said. So this is going to be a little bit strange, I'll jump around a little bit, hopefully it will make
9
sense in the end.
10
11
What we want to do is build on what we have just been talking being in terms of the obligations
12
that states hold. And specifically I have been asked to talk about progressive realisation.
13
Progressive realisation has been traditionally thought of in terms of the hierarchy or dichotomy
14
between civil and political rights which have been traditionally seen as negative rights and
15
immediately realisable, and economic, social and cultural rights, which are positive obligations
16
on states to do, to take actions, being seen as progressively realisable rights.
17
18
But it's become increasingly blurred if we look at how civil and political rights are to be fulfilled
19
and we'll come back to the table that Janet introduced in terms of the respect, protect and fulfill a
20
little bit later, but I suppose what I want to do is just come back to the rationale behind the
21
Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.
22
23
It starts to highlight the reason why civil and political rights can't be as easily herded into that
24
concept of negative rights, that people with disabilities being able to enjoy and exercise their
25
human rights is not always as simple as removing legal impediments, there is a lot more
26
structural implication about removing barriers within environments to ensure people with
27
disabilities can enjoy their rights.
28
29
So disability is actually quite a good example to talk about the fact that that relationship between
30
immediately realisable and progressively realisable is a lot more blurred in terms of civil and
31
political rights and economic social and cultural rights, it's not so simple to say one is about
32
immediate realisation and the other one is always about progressive realisation.
33
34
So we talked a little earlier about why we have the CRPD and I have just want to go back and
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
34
reinforce some of those points.
2
3
CRPD essentially was developed because existing human rights instruments had failed to
4
effectively protect the human rights of persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities had
5
always been recognised, not explicitly within other human rights instruments and especially the
6
instruments of general application, but it always got up under the others status, in the non-
7
exhaustive list of the protected classes, disability significantly in the jurisprudence of
8
international human rights law.
9
10
If you look at the human rights committee several of the cases that have gone before the human
11
rights committee or significant numbers of the cases that have gone before the human rights
12
committee pertain to disability, so it wasn't as if people with disability weren't recognised as a
13
protected class, it was just that what actions were being taken didn't seem to be making in roads
14
into the lived experience of people with disability.
15
16
So the Convention attempts to overcome this problem by ensuring that persons with disability
17
are now highly invisible rights bearers. So it really does focus on people with disabilities as
18
legal rights bearers and tries to remove governments away from the concept that people with
19
disabilities are objects of welfare and charity. So it's about really moving on from that medical
20
model, individualised pathology concepts around disability that see people with disability as
21
something to be treated, or to be cared for and to be objects of welfare. As non passive -- sorry,
22
as passive members of the community as opposed to active participants within the economic life
23
of the community within the social life of the community.
24
25
It also is about Tailoring and applying traditional human rights to some of the specific human
26
rights problems persons with disabilities encounter. So as I said earlier it's taking the traditional
27
framework of international human rights, which is established in the international bill of human
28
rights and tailoring them to the disability context.
29
30
And finally it's about building capacity in human rights implementation efforts to effectively
31
respond to the human rights of persons with disabilities.
32
33
done McKay the New Zealand chair of the ad hoc committee meeting for, basically three
34
quarters of the meetings, continually referred to this Convention as an implementation
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
35
1
Convention. So it's about building capacities within governments, seeking clarity and much
2
more normative content to the obligations that states hold to persons with disabilities. So it was
3
about building their capacity to implement the obligations, their obligations to persons with
4
disabilities.
5
6
We really don't need to go through that, yeah we'll get to this. So it's about capacity building, it's
7
about understanding, giving clarity to what needs to be achieved in meeting obligations. So it's
8
about promoting social change, and to promote social change and to achieve social change there
9
needs to be a level of compliance. Now most writing around international law that looks at the
10
level of compliance with international law says that compliance, non-compliance is not generally
11
about wilful disobedience, that states generally don't meet their obligations because of a lack of
12
capacity, clarity and priority, that they are the three identified areas that influence states in not
13
meeting their obligations.
14
15
So one of the challenges for CRPD was to be able to provide greater capacity, greater clarity and
16
hopefully through a binding instrument give greater priority to the obligations of meeting the
17
human rights of persons with disabilities. And one central element of that was the ability to
18
foster civil society engagement, because as I said before, traditionally people with disability
19
haven't been part of the policy discourse, socially isolated and excluded from mainstream
20
institutions such as education, there is a void for people with disability and lack of voice for
21
people with disability within academia and civil service or public service. So policy makers
22
don't have that knowledge base, so bringing in civil society or organisations of people with
23
disability was a way of building up that voice and building the capacity and the knowledge
24
around the lived experience of disability.
25
26
Now civil society engagement with the human rights process has until CRPD been very much an
27
informal treaty body practice, it was only through the informal procedures adopted by certain
28
treaty bodies that civil society, shadow reports and participation in observing negotiations was
29
able to happen.
30
31
Civil society engagement has always been slightly contentious, states have always seen it as their
32
role, they are the elected representatives of the State, they are the sovereign power and civil
33
society are not elected representatives, people with disabilities view that there is a level of
34
democratic process within their organisations and they are the elected voice of people well
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
36
1
disabilities but it has always been a bit of a contentious role whether civil society should engage
2
and to what extent they should engage in this process.
3
4
It brings the engagement of civil society or disabled persons organisations, as I said it brings the
5
lived experience of disability to the policy table. It brings that personal knowledge and
6
understand, and it's about representation, so it isn't just about bringing civil society and people
7
who claim to be disabled person as organisations, but ensuring that there is a level of
8
representation there that those organisations are representative organisations and that they are
9
organisations of persons with disabilities, not organisations for persons with disabilities.
10
11
And it's also been ensuring that there is a representation of the level of diversity, both within the
12
general population, but within disability itself. Because disability is not a homogenous group at
13
the level of abstract rights, most disability groups can agree. But when you get down to policy
14
application the needs of people with vision impairment as opposed to the needs of someone with
15
intellectual impairment are really quite different, so you need to understand that from a very
16
specific point of view. So civil society engagement gives that opportunity to be very specific as
17
Janet said before to make sure that you have, if something is specifically about Down Syndrome
18
that you are engaging with representative organisations of people with Down Syndrome.
19
20
This is something that we talked about yesterday, people with disabilities, there is no definition
21
within the Convention, I want to enforce that. The Convention does not include a binding
22
definition. It applies to all persons with disabilities and it's framed in scoping what the class of
23
people are that States have to, States have an obligation to. So it's a class of persons protected by
24
CRPD is open rather than closed. And disability is viewed as an evolving rather than a fixed
25
concept. So it's about trying to ensure that CRPD has some temporal longevity, so that what we
26
see as disability now and what we see as disability in 50 years time is not fixed in how we saw
27
disability in how 2006.
28
29
Just to go back over the structure of the Convention, Janet and I come back to the structure of the
30
Convention time and time again because if you understand the structure of the Convention and
31
you come do know the structure of the Convention it really does help your interpretation of each
32
and every article, a lot easier.
33
34
So it holds the general obligations that we've just talked about, which include civil society
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
37
1
engagement, specifically representative organisations of persons with disabilities. That is one of
2
the major innovations of CRPD, it was seen as a fundamental capacity building process and I
3
think it's been incredibly successful, and it will be incredibly successful.
4
5
It also has several facilitation articles, the general principles, Janet's favourite article, and then
6
there is the two specific population group articles of women and children that start to build on
7
the concept around multi-faceted discrimination and double disadvantage. Then there is
8
awareness raising, accessibility and data and statistics, these are seen as measures that need to be
9
taken to ensure that rights can be fulfilled.
10
11
And then we have the debate about whether some of these rights are new rights or whether they
12
are just translated rights and I put my cards on the table before, I believe these are purely
13
translated rights, I believe that we are just looking at the core human rights as identified in the
14
international bill of human rights and these are just looked at through the disability prism.
15
16
So equality and non-discrimination increases reasonable accommodation into the definition of
17
discrimination for the first time in international law. Freedom for violence and abuse, picks up
18
from elements of Convention on the Rights of the Child and develops it further. Protecting the
19
integrity of the person, drawn essentially from jurisprudence around the Convention against
20
torture but also taken from the European charter of human rights. Living independently in the
21
community and personal mobility are a translation of freedom of movement.
22
23
And then we have various implementation measures, so they are north rights per se, but they are
24
implementation measures that states should take to ensure other rights are, can be exercised, so
25
situations of risk, rehabilitation and habilitation, access to justice, and international co-operation,
26
and I would add in there accessibility, but I have so many debates with a certain person on the
27
other side of this room over that, that I was being diplomatic!
28
29
State obligations, the level of obligations that states hold is both immediate and progressive
30
realisation, traditionally seen as the difference between civil and political rights and economic,
31
social and cultural rights. So civil and political rights have always been referred to as rights of
32
non-interference and economic, social and cultural rights have been seen as duty on State action.
33
So this has always been seen as holding different levels of State obligation, that of immediate
34
realisation and that of progressive realisation.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
38
1
2
But modern jurisprudence and modern thinking about how these rights are to be implemented
3
has recognised that its not mutually exclusive, that you can't just pile all CPR rights into rights of
4
non interference, that there is some duty on State action to ensure that the rights are not only
5
respected, but that they are protected and fulfilled as well. And that it's a continuum of
6
application and that from rights of non-interference through to those rights that have a level of
7
duty on State action, and that the very minimum that states should take are steps to the maximum
8
extent possible within resources. So all rights are seen as immediately realisable to the
9
maximum extent possible within resources.
10
11
So progressive realisation, what do they mean by progressive realisation? Does this mean that
12
we can all go okay, education, progressively realised, we'll just put that okay the back burner and
13
think about it in ten years time? Is that the obligation States hold because it's progressively
14
realised? Well no. Fundamentally there have been some things they have to do immediately,
15
because there is no resource implication. It is quite within states power to do things that don't
16
hold resource implications.
17
18
So respecting people's rights, so all those elements of non interference, so if there is elements of
19
say education, legislative elements of education that deny people with disability the right to
20
education, they can be repealed, they can be nullified, they can be modified, with no resource
21
implications to the State. So they are immediately realisable and should be immediately
22
realisable.
23
24
But when we move to elements that need to be progressively realised what are states being asked
25
to do? Well they are being asked to take steps, okay that's not very helpful, so where does it get
26
us to? So the steps need to be deliberate, concrete and targeted. So fundamentally states are
27
being asked to make a plan of how they are going to implement this obligation. So they have to
28
immediately undertake to ensure there are no rights of -- sorry there is no interference in a
29
person's right to the obligation and then they need to take steps, deliberate, concrete and targeted,
30
to ensure compliance with the obligation.
31
32
So they need an overall plan to meet the obligation. And that plan needs to, has to be
33
measurable. So it needs to set budgetary allocations and it needs to set targets and it has to be
34
within a specific timeframe.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
39
1
2
So within that there are minimum core obligations, so for education the minimum core
3
obligation is free primary school education. So that is seen as the very basic that they must
4
achieve first.
5
6
And that you cannot, you cannot rise the issue that you need international co-operation to meet
7
those goals. So we cannot meet the minimum core obligation unless we have international
8
co-operation. So they need to be able to demonstrate how they will meet the minimum core
9
within their resources.
10
11
So what are measures? Legislative measures, so legislative measures are having legislation in
12
place that ensures the right, say to education. Having legislative framework that ensures that
13
education is inclusive. Adopting certain principles with -- sorry I went a step too far!
14
15
So having legislation in place to ensure the right to education. Then adopting principles within
16
education to ensure that education is inclusive. Other measures are about the right of claim, so
17
providing a remedy if those rights are violated, and that could be through the provision of non-
18
discrimination. So a prohibition of discrimination within education.
19
20
We now tend to talk about rights as being transformative, what do we mean when we talk about
21
rights being transformative though? Rights being transformative is trying to get to that process
22
of social change that I was talking about, about moving forward towards more inclusive
23
communities.
24
25
For CRPD it's about the implementation of the obligations contained within CRPD, and
26
fundament me it is the principle of inclusion, that is the transformative nature of CRPD rights.
27
28
So principle of inclusion should be seen as a universal norm. So do you understand what I mean
29
by a universal norm? That it should be a driving principle around everything. Everything
30
should be accessible to persons with disabilities. And that that should be embedded in policy,
31
design and planning.
32
33
So if we embed it in policy, design and planning, we then need to think about from the very start,
34
that the whole cohort that any legislation, any measure has included within its focus people with
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
40
1
disability. And so people with disability are seen as one part of human diversity and so it's part
2
of the jurisdiction that any legislative framework is being directed at. So inclusion becomes a
3
part of the policy design and planning process.
4
5
So what does that mean in terms of progressive realisation? Well if people with disability are
6
seen as part of the core framework then any steps, any measures that are taken must also
7
demonstrate how people with disabilities rights are being respected, protected and fulfilled.
8
9
So what we want to do now is look at the very tricky request that Gerard gave us, about how you
10
would go through this process, about legislative reform, about protection which will include a
11
level of policy development and then fulfil which will take a significant amount of planning, the
12
area of legal capacity, traditionally seen as a civil and political right, but as we'll hopefully
13
identify through this exercise, there is not only a requirement of non interference, there is
14
significant levels of duties of State action.
15
16
So what are the requirements in terms of progressive realisation and how do you approach that?
17
Is this all making sense? Everyone's really, really quiet, I'm getting a bit concerned! Thumbs up
18
Anna? Thank you.
19
20
Okay Janet it's purple, everything else was red, purple's her favourite colour!
21
22
Okay, so respect, if we're thinking about legal capacity and we're talking about respecting a
23
person's right to legal capacity what might we put in the empty box? So we're talking about
24
those immediately realisable elements of legal capacity.
25
SPEAKER: Guardianship legislation -- I would start by removing guardianship legislation.
26
MS KAYESS: Removing guardianship legislation? Yeah. If guardianship legislation is
27
contrary to the elements of Article 12, say if it sets out plenary guardianship solely on the basis
28
of disability, yes, so repealing legislation.
29
SPEAKER: I was thinking about repealing laws that don't give persons with disabilities
30
capacity.
31
MS KAYESS: Yes so if there is legislation that denies legal capacity to persons with
32
disabilities, repealing that is definitely immediately realisable, it would have to happen
33
immediately before point of gratification, yeah.
34
SPEAKER: One comment, talking about the distinction between CPR and E SC R, while
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
41
1
researching one of my papers for the L M course which I am doing here, I came across a piece
2
by one writer in which he advanced the notion that the African charter makes little distinction
3
between CPR and social economic rights and that one of the result sincere that this hazy
4
distinction has resource allocation implications, this was an issue in the Buro versus Gambia
5
case on the treatment of mental health patients and violation of the rights, the government of the
6
Gambia went on to repeal the archaic -- the government of the Gambia went on to repeal the
7
archaic lunatics detention act and align legislation with international norms. But when you think
8
about the resource implications progressive realisations etcetera the African charter does not
9
seem to come out clearly on such qualifications. This is more of a comment really, but your
10
clarification or elaboration on this is welcome. Like, how can Africa strike a balance between
11
CRPD and its charter in light of the resource implication question, putting in the legislative
12
initiatives not backed by resources or remedies, is it the African charter problematic.
13
MS LORD: I will summarise the case you referred to which is, just so everyone's on the same
14
page you may not know about the case that you were referring to which is from the African
15
regional human rights system a case Buro versus the Gambia, a really interesting case which
16
involved violations, a number of different human rights violations against persons with mental
17
disabilities who were in psychiatric hospital in the Gambia and they were detained under this
18
lunatic's detention act, tellingly named, archaic piece of legislation and there are a number of
19
different violations, including health rights violations as well as political participation rights
20
were removed etcetera.
21
22
So a number of violations were found by the court. And there are some interesting things that
23
the court had to say about resource constraints, because of course the government of the Gambia
24
was arguing that there were tremendous resource constraints and that this prevented them from
25
putting in place appropriate systems or having in place some appropriate conditions and the
26
court did not buy that at all. So there are some interesting things said about resource allocation
27
and that the court acknowledged that the Gambia was a very resource poor country, but
28
nonetheless this did not excuse at all the conditions and human rights violations against these
29
persons who were in the psychiatric hospital and that even a resource poor country could
30
certainly put in place measures that would protect these individuals and also that their political
31
rights should not have been removed etcetera.
32
33
So a really interesting case concerning disability issues and concerning this issue of progressive
34
realisation and resource constraints.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
42
1
MS KAYESS: Do you want to deal with it as a comment? I can't give any greater clarification,
2
I think the African charter, not one of migrate areas of expertise, but from what I understand
3
you're quite right it doesn't clarify any difference between civil and political rights and social,
4
economic and cultural rights, so that element of progressive realisation is really unanswered.
5
6
But to the extent that it really is still unanswered in the international arena as well. Because we
7
still raise, people still raise this point time and time again of it's progressively realisable, as if
8
there is no element of a immediate realisation within economic, social and cultural rights, and
9
that's not quite right.
10
11
And then the other side, that it's a civil and political right, it has to be done right now, and states
12
say we can't sign up to this if it has to be done right now because there are serious resource
13
implications, and it needs to be -- we don't have clarification. There is indicators that it should
14
be seen as a continuum and that the rights are immediately realisable when they are an obligation
15
of non interference, but when there is a positive duty on the states for action, that there is some
16
level of progressive realisation to the maximum extent possible, and that that's the threshold
17
measure that needs to guide how states actions are measured. Does that help?
18
SPEAKER: Just on the issue of progressive realisation and it may sound like a slight -- in the
19
African context the problem is more often than not, not so much the African charter but actually
20
the fact that the social economic rights are not in the constitution of the particular country as a
21
right as such, but as a directive of State principle or something that doesn't really look like a
22
right, and for that reason it's not judicable in the national courts.
23
24
And that's also how the governments generally get out of the progressive realisation bit. The
25
African Convention on human and people's rights which is the treaty monitoring body, one of
26
them, of the African charter, pretty much looks to the international interpretation of
27
socioeconomic rights around the charter, so that's not the controversial issue, the issue is what is,
28
whether such economic rights are under the national constitutions.
29
MS KAYESS: That's the age-old argument.
30
SPEAKER: Yes and that's pretty much the difficulty that we also come up against around the
31
CRPD, whether it's domestic or not, because that's the argument in that context.
32
MS KAYESS: Yes the committee on economic, social and cultural rights suggest that there are
33
judicable and there are measures that can be -- sorry, there are ways in which economic, social
34
and cultural rights can be measured in a justiciable framework.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
43
1
SPEAKER: It may be a digression; you can choose to answer it according to your time. I want
2
to have clarification on point W in the preamble of UNCRPD. Because I feel that it has a
3
bearing on general obligations, and can we say that it is a kind of, it reflects horizontal effect,
4
because W is very interesting, although I don't have Braille text.
5
MS LORD: I want to understand the question, you are asking about the relevance of the
6
preamble?
7
SPEAKER: No relevance of the clause W of the preamble.
8
MS KAYESS: Which clause in the preamble?
9
SPEAKER: UNCRPD clause W.
10
SPEAKER: Realising that the individual having duties to other individuals in the community to
11
which he or she belongs is under a responsibility to strive for the promotion and observance of
12
the right to recognise international bill of human rights. So it's about the responsibility to other
13
individuals and to the community to which someone belongs.
14
MS LORD: So duties on the part of the individual that's recognised in the African charter.
15
MS KAYESS: Yeah it's no different to provisions in non-determination, individual acts of
16
discrimination, to be protected.
17
SPEAKER: Can I say a word? Do you want to finish? I just want to say just a little thing about
18
the economic social and cultural an political rights, I believe this terminology should be
19
abandoned simply, because the category of economic social and cultural rights is actually a
20
garbage category, because they saw that, they put some rights together, they called them civil an
21
political rights of which there was an agreement in the western world, and the rest was to be put
22
together, we could have had civil, political and cultural rights if there was another agreement,
23
because surely an historical accident and it's a pity that, I think the UNCRPD puts an end to this
24
discussion because we realised it does not make sense to say that the rights to education is purely
25
in one category, in many countries, including in mine some people have no access to mainstream
26
schools, just for legal, although they can come with their own reasonable accommodations to
27
this school, this is refused, so there I don't see why we speak about economic, social or cultural
28
rights. And if you see for instance access, access to justice, access to justice has nothing to do
29
with economic and social issues, especially for more vulnerable people. That's just one point I
30
think we should forget about this separation. As was in the intention in the beginning, in the
31
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
32
33
Second thing the respect, protect and fulfil, it's useful to understand what kind of obligations the
34
State have, but I think sometimes it is useful but it has its limits and I think something which is
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
44
1
very important as well in the Convention is it's about discrimination and for instance reasonable
2
accommodation is a very, very strong tool, because as you said whatever the legal framework,
3
states should take this or accept that this should be taken in a particular situation, so you can
4
have measures in this school -- then of course you have broader measures which affect
5
accessibility.
6
7
But I think maybe it would be interesting to see that we have different approaches that can also
8
be helpful.
9
SPEAKER: I think the problem I've seen in most African states including where I come from is
10
getting action in locating the resources; already in our constitution we do have economic and
11
social rights provided for. But now the tricky bit is moving from the paper to the ground, actual
12
implementation of those rights, I think that that for me, if there are any tips on how to get the
13
State to actually spend, I think that will be the missing link.
14
15
A second comment on this is that as a result of the State not taking over these duties, what has
16
happened is that DPOs and other international NGOs come in to fill in the gap and therefore then
17
the State never really has to do it. So how do we -- on the one hand it's a good thing, because
18
then these rights are being provided, but on the other hand it means that the State can simply,
19
you know...
20
MS LORD: Exactly, the State can't get around the obligations by shifting it over to others. And
21
I think you raise a great point, it raises the question of what form of advocacy can we as
22
disability rights advocates usefully engage in, in order to make progress in this particular
23
context. I think some of the most interesting advocacy work being done to address resource
24
issues is using human rights budget analysis advocacy, which of course requires that a
25
government's budget actually be open and transparent and accessible and it also requires a
26
human rights activist or disability organisations that they have the tools at their disposal to
27
undertake budgetary analysis and then advocate with a government around that.
28
29
I think traditionally disability organisations have very often been narrowly focused in their
30
advocacy, perhaps on a single government Ministry, maybe the Ministry of health or social
31
welfare and certainly not engaging with Ministers of finance and Ministries of planning, so I
32
think the CRPD really challenges us to broaden our advocacy aperture and think about these
33
newer tools of advocacy around budget analysis to address this issue of resource allocation. And
34
there is a huge amount of work to be done in that area and disability groups are going to have to
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
45
1
equip themselves to undertake that kind of advocacy in order to address budget allocation.
2
MS KAYESS: I agree wholeheartedly. We might just fulfil the obligation to fulfil Gerard's
3
request that we look at progressive realisation, not just progressive realisation but the
4
implementation around legal capacity.
5
6
So let's start thinking about how one goes about protecting the right to legal capacity? So we've
7
removed legal impediments, we've gone through the non-interference prism, we've established
8
the right to legal capacity, how do we protect that, what mechanisms?
9
MS LORD: How do we make sure that states prevent violations of the right to legal capacity by
10
third parties? And themselves?
11
SPEAKER: May I be allowed to combine the two? I think from experience in our, trying to
12
develop a new, better health law, we have learned that actually government who want to rely
13
very much on professionals, and they are relying on professionals -- sorry to mention this, but I
14
can also in a small way, say that we are also psychiatrists by experience, which can as well help
15
drive the agenda of mental health in any given country, but what we have experienced on legal
16
capacity, governments do not want to listen to this other sector, which is professionals by
17
experience, but they want to listen to professionals by training, which also has made it very
18
difficult for us to move, especially from the issue of legal capacity, and as far as professionals
19
are concerned, we are not of sound mind, we are lunatics, we are idiots and they want to create a
20
law that will promote that.
21
22
So I'm just trying to find out, because yes I've got a mandate, as I go back home I need to make
23
this concept very clear, or else we are not moving in the next ten years, because the approach
24
that we are using where it involves professionals, oh professionals yes, we are also professionals
25
by experience, is actually not bringing us together.
26
27
But at the end of the day it is about, we are into this issue together. To find solutions together.
28
And we'll implement such piece of legislation, plans together. So we are trying to see how, I
29
will end here but I want to go home a happy person, with your help.
30
MS KAYESS: Wow, that's an obligation on us Janet! You're quite right, what Janet was talking
31
about earlier, with the general obligations is there is a clear obligation on States to include
32
persons with disabilities in the development of any legislation, that affects them and that is about
33
talking with groups that are relevant to mental health legislation, so there is a clear obligation of
34
states not to be talking to just psychiatrists in the area of mental health, they need to be including
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
46
1
people with psychiatric disabilities in that policy discourse.
2
MS LORD: Related to that and in thinking about the requirement that states prevent violations
3
of legal capacity rights by third parties, one of the examples that was shared yesterday in the
4
lunch break was the example in one country of the heads of institutions or psychiatric hospitals
5
providing monthly lists of persons in those institutions or hospitals, persons with mental
6
disabilities to the electoral commission so that the electoral commission would know what
7
individuals need to be stricken from the electoral rolls.
8
9
Now clearly under the CRPD states would have an obligation to address those kinds of things,
10
whether those institutions are run publicly or privately and they would certainly have to have a
11
system in place whereby political rights were not being stripped in this kind of way.
12
MS KAYESS: So removal of those sorts of policy provisions are an immediately realisable
13
element, but if you wanted to, if a country needed to put in place mechanisms where there was
14
legal redress for people who have had their legal capacity removed in anyway, it might be, it
15
might require the establishment of a tribunal, and they may require resources that they don't have
16
available, so they would need to be able to develop a plan of how they would set up a relevant
17
tribunal and allocate budgets to that.
18
SPEAKER: In terms of the obligation to protect, at least in African context we'll have to have a
19
system that can monitor especially families, because if one is perceived to have a mental
20
impairment, the family is the first one chaining this person, or locking this person away. But
21
also denying this person a choice to get married, and all these issues happen at family level, at
22
community level, and not very much with the legal system because it's more informal, and it's at
23
that point there is no excuse for government not to act and prevent this systematic violation of
24
respect of rights, of privacy of persons with mental disability, are subjected to today in the
25
community.
26
27
So it would be trying to intervene, not much by law because law is not a problem there, it's just
28
our parties, we don't, as African in certain families, we don't respect the privacy of mentally ill
29
daughter or son and then we are saying that he is naked just because he walks ill, so that's bad.
30
MS LORD: Great examples so the question becomes what measures should the states take in
31
order to prevent a variety of violations by third parties, so it's not only establishing justice
32
mechanisms, redress through the courts clearly, that's not going to work for people, but also
33
undertaking other measures, whether in training, whether in awareness raising in the community,
34
and a whole range of other types of measure that is can be taken.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
47
1
MS KAYESS: And the extent to which obligations can be realised in the private domain and
2
awareness raising is a very important point to pick up, so it's about breaking social stereotypes so
3
people can't informally deny people's legal capacity.
4
MS LORD: Actually there is an interesting example coming from Kenya where I was a few
5
months ago, they were looking at issues of inclusive education and how to ensure that the CRPD
6
was implemented for students with disabilities so they would have access to education and one
7
of the things they came up with was there was a provision in the Kenyan Education Act in which
8
the failure of parents to send their kids to school would result in a particular violation, they could
9
be fined. But what they were trying to do was raise awareness among parents and the
10
community tea, that they actually had an obligation top send their kids to school.
11
12
So the disability community was looking at how to utilise that provision to raise awareness
13
among persons of kids with disabilities that they have an obligation to send their kids to school
14
to address that, so that was an interesting way of using an existing piece of legislation, but
15
tailoring it to the needs of the disability community around education.
16
MS KAYESS: If we move on to fulfil we'll start to look a little bit more about how things might
17
require a bit more structured approach and of the steps around progressive realisation. So has
18
anyone got any suggestions about how we fulfil the right to legal capacity for people with
19
disabilities?
20
SPEAKER: Yes I have an example in my country, they refused completely legal capacity
21
recently and now the move from substitute decision-making to supported decision-making, it
22
looks very beautiful on paper and one of the problems is that it will be for the judge to decide
23
how far a person can exercise his legal capacity.
24
25
And one question, the main question there is the training of judges.
26
MS LORD: Exactly, so training of judges would certainly be one measure in order to give full
27
effect to the new legislation.
28
MS KAYESS: And so training of judges, if it has a resource implication, but somewhere like
29
Belgium wouldn't be able to argue, that should be really immediately realisable in Belgium's
30
resources but there may be pacific island nations that would say we'll have to do this
31
progressively over the term of say new recruitment for judges as well, so they could set
32
budgetary allocations for training to happen over the next several years and that they he a plan to
33
ensure that all the judges trained over a five year period say did.
34
SPEAKER: My view is to a measure to fulfil the right to legal capacity is also to empower the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
48
1
PWDs themselves with information and sop on and so forth, so they have the capacity to actually
2
make that.
3
SPEAKER: Beside training judges and setting also the procedure on how to practice legal
4
capacity and when and how, I think we need also to train the families of people with mental
5
disabilities on the issue of legal capacity, because most of the time, like in our region, violation
6
comes from within the families, not only the government or the legal or judicial system, so I
7
think also families need to be educated in that and society needs to be educated in that as well.
8
MS KAYESS: Families can be great facilitators for people with disability in terms of
9
opportunities but they can also be sometimes great barriers for people being able to exercise their
10
rights.
11
SPEAKER: I just wanted to say not so much about training or legal capacity; it's about actual
12
fulfilling of the right. In this country for instance in services somebody has a right to make a
13
complaint, but that leaves, I imagine it's the same in any other country, people feel very
14
vulnerable if you are in an institution or something, in this country you can't make a joint
15
complaint, in other words you can't take four or five people together and there by strengthen
16
each other to make a complaint, complaints are individual or not at all. Equally, you don't take
17
class actions in this country, it's the same situation and I think that at a service level or a
18
day-to-day, every day level it is a huge issue that needs to be addressed, the singular nature of
19
the right is a problem and needs to be looked at.
20
21
Ms Kayess. Of the that's where the facilitation article of access to justice comes into play so you
22
look at what are the barriers that are created for people accessing justice that have their rights
23
protected and fulfilled.
24
SPEAKER: For the application of legal capacity I would stress that we also think not just about
25
the law of people having the legal right to capacity, but also situations where people are de facto
26
denied their legal capacity. I have been in plenty of institutions, psychiatric hospitals, adult care
27
homes where the director will say oh every adult here has their full legal capacity, we make sure
28
of that, but in reality 75% of their pension goes to the institution, they can never leave, they can't
29
get employed, they can't be supported to get an apartment outside, so in radio reality they have
30
absolutely no control over their lives whatsoever, despite the fact that they legally have their
31
capacity.
32
MS LORD: That's a great point and it point to the failure on the part of states to effectively
33
monitor what's going on in those institutions absolutely.
34
SPEAKER: One point which I would like to stress, it is one thing to train the judges, but quite
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
49
1
another to also look for appointing persons with disabilities as judges. And I wonder whether
2
any study has been initiated to see how many judges, around the world how many persons with
3
disability have been appointed as judges?
4
5
Because I think the Convention, the material of the Convention is nothing about us without us,
6
and legal process cannot alienate persons with disability. And myself I am a victim of litigation
7
and therefore I can say that without considering or without having the persons with disabilities to
8
act as judges we cannot achieve the final target. So have we thought about it? What is
9
happening in countries like yours? I believe that in the UK they are talking about bringing
10
diversity in the judiciary, I have heard that somewhere, but what is happening in other countries,
11
what is happening for example in Canada, US? Are we learning any lessons from South Africa
12
where justice Jacob did act as one of the judges of the constitutional court?
13
14
What -- the Chief Justice was heard to say he was hypnotized by his legal acumen.
15
MS LORD: This is a fabulous point of discussion and sharing for the lunch time hour! I do
16
know in some countries there have been shared by the folks at the CRPD committee, explicit
17
prohibitions on domestic legislation against persons with disabilities being judges so there is a
18
lot of work to be done in this area, I am not aware of a specific study but there needs to be a
19
tremendous amount of work in that area.
20
CHAIR: Janet just beat me to it, I was going to steal the phrase from Gerard we have a right to
21
food. So as a good academic I gave him credit.
22
23
I think we need to give Janet and Rosemarie a huge round of applause for their tower de force
24
this morning. A lot of conversations started and can keep going over lunch and the coming days.
25
26
But there was a few points I really wanted to pick up on, both Rosemarie and Janet referred to, in
27
particular Article 4.3 where they referred to the right to participate and be consulted, and I think
28
a lot of time consultation has been a meaningless process, but the New Zealand experience
29
where people argue to get to the table, argued to be part of that process it becomes much, much
30
harder to ignore the voice of people with disabilities if you are at the table. And if you are
31
making those points, so again from our perspective it's important that we push to get to the table,
32
and make sure that it is as broadly presented as possible and that people can participate in the
33
process which is how we create change in the long term, so on that note I'll bring us all to food.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
50
Luncheon adjournment
2
3
CHAIR: Welcome back everybody. We are going to discussion Article 12, unfortunately Gabor
4
is ill and can't with be with us but we have a very esteemed panel to take his place. I won't re
5
introduce Rosemarie you've already heard her this morning, we're making her work for her flight
6
this year so she's here, so please if I can introduce Anna. She is a lawyer called to the bar in
7
New York, she is currently a fellow of the CDLP working in the centre in the dream training
8
network, her research is focused on the right to equal recognition before the law, legal capacity
9
and supported decision-making and she spent the last two years working on legal capacity, Law
10
Reform, strategic litigation in several jurisdictions including Ireland, India, UK and New York,
11
the state of New York in the US.
12
13
Eilionoir Flynn here is the senior research fellow in the Centre for Disability Law and Policy,
14
she has responsibility for the research programme and activities and some of the activities
15
contained include work on legal capacity, supported decision-making, independent living and
16
individual budgets as well as financial independence. She is also a member of the national
17
advocacy service working to develop a non-instructed advocacy policy in the State and a
18
member of the human rights board of local Brothers of Charity here in Galway.
19
20
So the three of them are very well place to discuss this topic of voice and personhood in relation
21
to legal capacity, so on that note I'll handover to our three experts, I am going to try and keep us
22
to time. We'll allow for questions, again I will let them dictate the questions to a certain amount
23
but at certain points I will push them on to make sure we keep to time, so enjoy the afternoon.
24
25
You should all have a copy of Article 12 in front of you, so it's been handed around by the
26
interns, so you should all have a copy, okay.
27
MS KERSLAKE: Okay hi as Siobhan explained I have been doing research in this field of legal
28
capacity for four years, the last two years I have been working here in the centre, specifically on
29
Law Reform and more recently doing strategic litigation around the issue.
30
31
And Eilionoir and I have done a presentation on the ABCs of Article 12, several times now to
32
different audiences and this is probably one of the most diverse audiences that we have done it
33
in, in terms of background knowledge. So we're going to try to provide the basics for people in
34
the room that maybe haven't heard about Article 12 and a right to legal capacity and what the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
51
1
implications and obligations are around it, and we also want to delve into some of the deeper
2
issues for people in the room who have maybe already heard the basics and are going to be
3
looking to get into the analysis and talk about how the problems arise in practice and how
4
change can actually occur in this area.
5
6
So this is what we want to cover in the next hour and a half. We want to start with a discussion
7
of personhood, equality and capacity. What those three things are and how they interact with
8
each other, and how they affect human rights.
9
10
Then we want to move on to talk about Article 12 of the Convention, its history and
11
interpretation and Rosemarie was there during the drafting of the article and she is going to
12
provide us with a really valuable look into exactly what happened around the language and some
13
of the politics as well.
14
15
Then finally we're going to talk about implementing Article 12, and how to achieve equal
16
recognition before the law for people with disabilities through mechanisms of support.
17
18
What I want to do right now requires your participation, so try to get out of the food coma from
19
lunch and I just want to think first, before we get into all the legal stuff, about what personhood
20
is and what it means to be a person.
21
22
Particularly recently actually there has been a lot of court cases around the personhood of
23
corporations and whether and how far personhood is extended in that context, and Article 12 has
24
a very specific emphasis on personhood, so first I just want to get from you guys -- I want you to
25
answer the question what does it mean to be a person, it can be a philosophical or legal answer or
26
whatever first popped into your mind, so what does it mean to be a person in our society?
27
SPEAKER: Not an animal.
28
MS KERSLAKE: That's a perfect answer. So there is a distinction between an animal and a
29
person, so in that sense maybe it's okay to be a little bit species-ist, what else does it mean to be a
30
person? What are the qualities of personhood?
31
SPEAKER: To have rights.
32
MS KERSLAKE: Yes do you want to explain that a little more? Now you're on the spot.
33
SPEAKER: I suppose what we were talking about, to have the right to recognition and to have
34
the right to recognition and everyone have the same dignity. To have rights respected, to be
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
52
1
different -- and that's all.
2
MS KERSLAKE: The right to recognition under the law and the right to recognition and dignity
3
in personhood, that's exactly right.
4
5
Then addressing the second question here what exactly are those rights and responsibilities of
6
persons? Are they the same for everyone or do we give different groups of people -- do we
7
classify people differently and give them different rights and responsibilities?
8
SPEAKER: Treat people equally.
9
MS KERSLAKE: Yes, for example do women have different rights and responsibilities than
10
men?
11
SPEAKER: They do but sometimes you have to take steps to help people realise rights, so for
12
example for women equal access to the workplace right require steps to be to be taken to provide
13
for maternity rights for example.
14
MS KERSLAKE: So rights and responsibilities are different for men and women? No, they are
15
not different
16
SPEAKER: But you have to do different things to realise the rights.
17
MS KERSLAKE: Yes exactly. And does anybody think that there are any groups that would
18
have separate and distinct rights and responsibilities from other groups?
19
SPEAKER: Of course. You might put it all people are equal but some are more equal than
20
others!
21
MS KERSLAKE: Can you explain that more?
22
SPEAKER: Yeah of course. My name is Jorge, you know people are not equal, the society is
23
not a flat landscape, it's vertically segregated, so it means people actually have different rights
24
and obligations, even if it might sound a little bit tough I suppose, at least in this context.
25
MS KERSLAKE: I think a really clear legal example of that actually are immigrants, to keep it
26
out of the disability realm for a second. Immigrants and undocumented ones in particular, do not
27
have the same rights and responsibilities in a jurisdiction as documented citizens and
28
immigrants. So that's a really clear distinction that our legal systems made.
29
30
But are we striving to change that? Do we want that to be different?
31
SPEAKER: Can I just ask a question, back to personhood again and the concept of it, there is
32
one or two people that may argue people with maybe less intelligence, and the classification, I'm
33
not saying I agree with it, but perhaps people with more severe profound intellectual disabilities
34
and an IQ below 20? And it brought me back to some of the freak photography and the images
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
53
1
and where they words came out of, like vegetable or perhaps somebody in a coma where does
2
this personhood lie and how does legal capacity come into it.
3
MS KERSLAKE: I'm glad you brought that up that's where I'm going with the discussion, that's
4
true, there is discussions of that in moral philosophy, but we can see that, can't we. Everything
5
day in the kind of demonstrations that Rannveig spoke of yesterday the freak photography, there
6
is as underlying and sometimes explicit assumption that particularly people with cognitive
7
disabilities, so psychosocial disabilities, intellectual disabilities, developmental disabilities
8
somehow don't merit the same status of person as others and therefore don't have the same rights
9
and responsibilities.
10
11
Most people wouldn't say this outright, but if you look at the practices and the way that the law
12
restricts the rights and responsibilities of people with cognitive disabilities you can see that our
13
societies are complicit with this conception of personhood that's different, and less.
14
15
So that's exactly what we're talking about today.
16
SPEAKER: Actually I entirely agree that persons with psychosocial disabilities and intellectual
17
disabilities, they face the problem of denial of legal capacity. It is very true. But this does not
18
mean that people with other disabilities, they don't face the problem of denial of legal capacity.
19
20
Just two days ago I myself faced the problem of denial of legal capacity, a small example, I
21
applied for a credit card, and the bank says that because you don't sign you will not get the credit
22
card because your credit card may be misused by somebody. I told the bank that don't act like
23
my mother, I will take care of myself, if my card is lost I will be responsible. No, but they said
24
no, anybody can put a mark on your card and it may be misused. This is only a small example.
25
26
Therefore I believe that denial of legal capacity indeed the examples of the psychosocial
27
disabilities and intellectual disabilities are very clear examples, but that does not mean that other
28
disabilities do not face this problem. This is one issue.
29
30
And the second point which I would like to make is, it is one thing to have rights in that sense
31
most of the persons with disabilities are vested with rights and on paper it may be I said that they
32
have legal capacity, but we need to appreciate the distinction between a right to legal capacity
33
and capacity to act. Capacity to act is crucial and when it comes to capacity to act there are huge
34
problems with persons with disabilities.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
54
1
MS KERSLAKE: Thank you for that comment you are exactly of course right but the problem
2
spans more than just cognitive disability and very much true. It's more about the barriers that are
3
put up, the social barriers that are put up to exercise legal capacity and a lot of times people with
4
cognitive disabilities are disproportionately affected. But it affects people with disabilities,
5
without disabilities, with physical disabilities, with intellectual disabilities and thanks very much
6
for sharing that story, I think that's a perfect example of exactly what those barriers are.
7
8
And the question now is, and Article 12 has brought this question to the fore, do we want
9
equality under the law? Are we searching for that or do we actually believe that some equality is
10
okay but there is areas in which we're okay with actually formal equality not being met in this
11
area?
12
13
And when I say that, obviously I'm bias so I'm structuring it in a way that makes it sound
14
terrible, but there is many, many people in the world and structures in the world that are
15
perpetuating the idea that equality in the area of legal capacity is not something that's appropriate
16
for certain groups. And mostly that group is people with disabilities at this point.
17
18
This slide is just re emphasising what I have just said. Is it important that we are all persons
19
before the law? Or is it okay that the law takes a paternalistic approach to some people,
20
particularly people labelled with certain disabilities and says these individuals we're actually
21
going to protect and they are not going to be counted as people under the law in the same as
22
everyone else, instead we are going to do what's needed in their best interests.
23
24
Does that mean also that you are not a person? That's an issue that comes up, where does
25
personhood lie and how far can the State infringe on your rights and responsibilities before your
26
personhood is removed, and that's something to really think about, where is that line, and does
27
that line have to be the same for everyone.
28
29
As was spoken about, I think yesterday, this discussion of equal basis with others, that's
30
absolutely critical that phrase in Article 12, it's absolutely critical when you're talking about
31
equality and personhood. Because what Article 12 really asks for when you look at this phrase,
32
is not that no-one's legal capacity is ever restricted, because in a way that's what the State is. We
33
all live under the State and we agree to have our legal capacity restricted in certain ways.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
55
1
If we break the law our legal capacity is restricted. We can't -- if we're convicted of a crime, we
2
do not have the same rights and responsibilities as people that haven't been convicted of a crime.
3
Declaring bankruptcy, you lose some legal capacity in that context.
4
5
And those are, in theory anyway, baseline ways that the State infringes upon legal capacity, that
6
should be in theory equal, and is not based on any form of disability. And Article 12 is really
7
asking that legal capacity is respected on the same baseline for everyone and not just formally,
8
but in both purpose and effect which we'll talk a bit more about later. And it has a lot to do with
9
this distinction.
10
11
So it's easy to say a functional test of capacity is applied to everyone on an equal basis because
12
you are not asking if someone has a disability, you are asking if they can understand and weigh
13
the information that they have been given and if they can then make a decision based on that
14
information. And the argument is that that could in theory be applied to anyone and it's not
15
specific to disability. But the problem is if you look at who it's applied to, it's severely
16
disproportionately applied to people with disabilities and people without disabilities largely don't
17
have to meet that threshold, and that's a huge problem.
18
19
One of the problems that that has arisen from is this confliction of mental capacity and legal
20
capacity. So what legal capacity is and what I have been talking about in this session is about
21
the right to be a holder of rights as was mentioned earlier, and the right to be an actor under the
22
law, as was also mentioned earlier.
23
24
So it's not only the ability to have legal personality, to be recognised as a legal subject, but also
25
the ability to interact with third parties and interact with your government and courts as a legal
26
agent and to enforce your rights. So that means the ability to sign contracts, ability to get
27
married, the ability to vote, all of these things are encompassed in the term legal capacity as its
28
used in Article 12.
29
30
Mental capacity merely refers to decision-making skills, which is much different than legal
31
capacity. And I don't think anybody would try to claim that everyone's decision-making skills
32
are equal, they're not. Everyone has different decision-making skills based on a variety of
33
things, environment, education, wealth even, and sometimes inherited will effect
34
decision-making skills.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
56
1
2
But the fact that someone might have challenges making decisions doesn't mean that their right
3
to legal capacity is any less. That's what Article 12 is telling us. And its telling us that the only
4
way to recognise, to achieve equal recognition before the law is to recognise this right to legal
5
capacity for everyone, regardless of decision-making abilities.
6
7
So the way in which legal capacity has been regulated in the past and currently, although Article
8
12 has started moving away from this, is substituted decision-making. And that is when legal
9
capacity is removed from the individual and vested in another person who makes a decision in
10
the person's best interests.
11
12
Now this definition of substitute decision-making is one that has actually merged from what the
13
CRPD committee has said and also emerged from what the disability community has identified
14
as being problematic and barriers to decision-making and the exercise of legal capacity.
15
16
So this is what we're defining as substituted decision-making and the thing that Article 12
17
doesn't allow. The support model, which is what Article 12 calls for, asks for quite the opposite.
18
No removal of legal capacity and instead the provision of access to support for exercising legal
19
capacity and making decisions regarding, related to legal capacity when people desire that.
20
21
So they are quite different things, and the distinction there in the paradigm is between vesteds
22
and will and preference. So all decisions about a person compliant will Article 12 should be
23
based on will and preference as oppose to someone else's determination of what's in that person's
24
best interest, which is how most systems work now.
25
26
And that can come in many, many different forms. This type of support. And this support
27
paradigm and it should be culturally specific. So we're going to talk about it a bit more. But
28
now Eilionoir is going to talk to you about the history of legal capacity in general.
29
MS FLYNN: So as Anna said this issue of legal capacity is something that touches on all areas
30
of law and all areas of our lives, but we kind of tend to think of it as something new that
31
appeared in Article 12 and something that really mostly affects people with disabilities, but in
32
fact the reality is that since there has been organised societies and since the emergence of the
33
State, we have started to think about how certain people are within the circle of who are subjects
34
of that State and citizens with rights, and how certain other people can be exclude the, this is not
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
57
1
unique to disability but I would say disability is one of the areas in which we still as a society
2
perhaps accept it, or think it might be permissible, when in a lot of other areas in which we used
3
to deprive people of legal capacity we now accept that was not valid.
4
5
So I like to think of legal capacity as being part of this continuum so we don't just think it's a
6
unique problem and something to do with people with disabilities we have to fix for people with
7
disabilities, this is an issue for everybody and different people throughout history have been
8
excluded or denied legal capacity.
9
10
So I have just put a few examples on the slide to get you thinking about it. So slaves is a very
11
obvious example, where you would not be recognised as a person before the law. Women,
12
especially perhaps in more recent history upon entering into marriage would not be recognised as
13
having a separate legal personhood from that of their husband. Asylum seekers as Anna
14
mentioned undocumented immigrants would not be recognised as persons before the law in
15
some jurisdictions, ethnic minorities in others and LGBT Q people who in recent times are
16
continually prohibited from in many jurisdictions entering into the institution of marriage but
17
also into other types of legally binding decisions or denied recognition as persons before the law.
18
19
But like I said we have mostly assumed deprivation of legal capacity for those individuals is
20
unfair and unjust but we still, most societies still accept it's permissible for disability and we
21
need to think about why that is.
22
23
Just to give a bit more detail about the ways in which legal capacity is removed from individuals,
24
there are many different ways of doing this, they vary in all the countries that you come from,
25
but these have been categorised mostly into the three different types, I think it's important to
26
understand the different ways in which substitute decision-making has been done and has sort of
27
evolved. We like to think that through time we have retained substitute decision-making for
28
smaller and smaller groups of people, so we are giving more people back the power to make
29
decisions and limiting the groups that we prevent from making decisions.
30
31
We try to, many societies try to argue that they have done this in a progressive or human rights
32
complaint way and the Convention is a really radical departure from the development of most
33
legal frameworks on substitute decision-making.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
58
1
So the most outdated I guess way of doing substitute decision-making is the status approach,
2
which essentially means that the person's status, for example status as a person with an
3
intellectual disability or a person with an IQ below a certain level or with a particular diagnosis
4
or something as vaguely general as a person of unsound mind, means that the person's legal
5
capacity will be removed, it could mean it for all decisions, it usually does, which we call
6
something like plenary guardian ship or your status could mean you don't get to enter into certain
7
types of decisions.
8
9
There is also the outcome approach; I should say as well for example what we currently have in
10
Ireland the ward of court system is generally categorised as a status based approach, similar to
11
plenary guardianship.
12
13
The outcome approach is instead of looking at the person's diagnosis or label you think about the
14
outcome of the decision they want to make. So if they want to make a risky decision or a
15
decision what seems that other people might think would be bad consequences, you use that as a
16
reason to deny them to make that decision, the example that's commonly given here is where for
17
example someone has entered into a psychiatric facility willingly and to undergo treatment but at
18
a certain point wants to leave, they are decision to leave might be regarded as risky or unwise if
19
their physicians feel they haven't completed a certain course of treatment. In most legal systems
20
there is a way of retaining that person and not granting their wish to leave, a way of involuntarily
21
detaining and treating that person if it is felt that the outcome of their decision is one that cannot
22
be supported.
23
24
Then finally there is a functional approach, which is the most common in more modern legal
25
systems, or systems that have evolved from status or outcome based approaches. And this is
26
what Anna referred to earlier as the ability to understand information, to weigh and use that
27
information, to re tape it, to communicate your decision and some functional tests include this
28
idea that you must be able to appreciate the nature and consequences of your decision. Which is
29
actually a really high test, if any of us were asked to undergo it for any given decision there is no
30
guarantee that we would actually pass, depending on what the decision is, depending how much
31
caffeine we've had, all of these things are, as Anna said, decision-making skills in an individual
32
vary constantly depending on a broad range of factors.
33
34
The point I want to make about these three approach sincere they are all premised on the idea
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
59
1
that if you don't have a certain mental capacity you no longer deserve legal capacity, whether
2
that's for one area of your life or all areas of your life, and some people in recent times have
3
argued that the functional test is more human rights friendly than previous approaches, that it
4
could be in theory applied to any one of us, that it could, with support, a lot of people might meet
5
the function all test, but in reality as Anna says it's disproportionately applied to people with
6
disabilities and for a way that non-disabled people are generally not expected to understand the
7
nature and consequences of their decisions.
8
9
So in the interests of time I want to get on to Article 12 which you should all have a copy of in
10
front of you, but we've highlighted particular bits that we think are important and Anna and I are
11
just going to go through the text with you now and then Rosemarie will explain how they got to
12
that text.
13
MS KERSLAKE: We just want to introduce you now to you Article 12 which we didn't want to
14
do before because we wanted to first give you a bit of background on the issue before we bias
15
you with the actual text that we think you should take on and absorb and use.
16
17
The first thing that's important about Article 12 is the title, equal recognition before the law.
18
Does anybody happen to know if this is the first time we've ever seen that right in human rights
19
instrument? No-one? It's not. It's a very popular human right, it's been in many instruments,
20
including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the international covenant on civil and
21
political rights, and also importantly in Convention on the elimination of discrimination against
22
women.
23
24
And it is one of the recognised fundamental civil and political rights, what's interesting being it
25
is that a lot of times people overlook it, maybe because they don't understand exactly what it
26
means or how to do it. But what CEDAW and now CRPD have done is enumerated specifically
27
how this right can be realised, for those groups but also for society as a whole, for humanity,
28
how the right -- what the obligations are under the right and what rights actually attach to the
29
individuals.
30
31
So the first line is that states parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities have the right to
32
recognition everywhere as persons before the law. So this is referring broadly to legal
33
personhood as we've been discussing. And the right that attaches to the individual. Because this
34
is a civil political right and as I mentioned, well documented as a civil political right, it attaches
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
60
1
immediately upon ratification and there is a, as Rosemarie described earlier, a right to immediate
2
realisation or to take steps to immediately realise civil, political rights, so this right falls under
3
that category.
4
5
The second bit is that states parties shall recognise that persons with disabilities enjoy legal
6
capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life. CEDAW and the CRPD are the first
7
conventions, international human rights conventions that specifically said there is a right to legal
8
capacity on an equal basis, although it all falls under the penumbra of equal recognition before
9
the law, which again is well established.
10
11
The third is that State parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with
12
disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity. So this is new.
13
This we haven't seen in another Convention. This is a description of how the right to equal
14
recognition before the law can be realised in the context of disability specifically.
15
16
And Rosemarie will talk more about how that came about. But the important thing is that it
17
recognises that autonomy doesn't mean isolation and exercising legal capacity doesn't have to
18
mean in isolation, doesn't have to mean that an individual can only exercise legal capacity if they
19
can do it without anyone around, without any support.
20
21
This paragraph says everyone is entitled to legal capacity and not only that, they are entitled to
22
the support they need to exercise that legal capacity. So it's a really important hybrid of
23
autonomy rights and support rights, and in that way it's really not a kind of neoliberal focus on
24
autonomy, it's actually a focus on the interdependence of everyone. So Eilionoir will cover the
25
last couple of paragraphs and then we'll talk about requirements.
26
MS FLYNN: Usually when we talk about Article 12 Anna and I just do one, two and three
27
because we think those are the really important bits, but since we have an hour and a half we
28
thought we'd look at the last two paragraphs also.
29
30
Paragraph four is sometimes talked about, I remember the first time I read Article 12 I thought
31
paragraph four was really confusing because the first three are really empowering everyone is a
32
person before the law, you have a right to legal capacity on an equal basis with others an a right
33
to support. Then paragraph four talks about safeguards, but some of the things that it says like
34
that measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity should apply for the shortest time possible
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
61
1
and are subject to regular review sound very much like the safeguards that you already have in a
2
guardianship system which remove legal caps fee for people, I got confused and thought
3
paragraph sounds like substitute decision-making might be okay but the rest doesn't sound like it
4
then I talk to Anna and she said read paragraph four in light of the whole article and the
5
Convention and the drafting which Rosemarie will tell us more and you focus on the fact that the
6
safeguard, the committee elaborated on that phase which is why I highlighted it that any
7
measures related to legal capacity must respect the rights, will and preferences of the person.
8
9
So there is actually a way to read this discussion about safeguards that is fully in keeping with
10
the idea of no substitute decision-making, support to exercise legal capacity is the only way
11
forward.
12
13
But of course as Rosemarie will tell you, this was a negotiated text so Rosemarie will talk more
14
about some of the politics behind some of the language in here. But essentially I think the main
15
thing is not to get bogged down in 12.4 but to read it in light of the rest of the article and to focus
16
on the fact that 12.4 can be read in a way that allows only for supported decision-making or
17
support to exercise legal capacity.
18
19
And then paragraph five, I was also a little bit interested or confused about why this was in here
20
because if you've got the right to legal capacity in all aspects of life which it already says that
21
you do, why would we've specific section about property, but again Rosemarie knows the history
22
of the drafting in terms of why this was something particularly important and worthy of specific
23
mention, and as the experience of people with disabilities shows all around the world, the right
24
to legal capacity is often only brought into question where there is an issue of property, certainly
25
for example the ward of court system in Ireland is one that was designed for people who had
26
assets or wealth an there were question marks raised over whether they were able to exercise
27
their rights in respect of those assets. So that's why paragraph 5 is there separately talking about
28
the right to inherited property, to control financial affairs, equal access to credit and that people
29
are not deprived arbitrarily of their right to property.
30
31
Sop Anna will just explain what we think Article 12 means from what the committee have said
32
and what the discussions around it since it has come into force have been.
33
SPEAKER: Could you elaborate the point that legal capacity is purely a civil and political right
34
and therefore the obligation is immediate?
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
62
1
MS KERSLAKE: Sure that's my favourite one to do actually! So we talked a little bit already at
2
the summer school about this division between social, economic and civil political rights. And I
3
believe we've covered also that the moving trend, which we can see in CEDAW and the CRPD
4
is actually to recognise, you can see it in many other places as well, to recognise the
5
interdependence of all these rights. So there is kind of, I think I want to answer your question by
6
first giving a disclaimer that I think this distinction is becoming less and less meaningful and I
7
think even the distinction between progressive realisation and immediate realisation is becoming
8
less and less meaningful.
9
10
Also because immediate realisation all, the only requirement is to take steps to immediately
11
realise the big difference actually is that the rights attach immediately upon ratification. But that
12
being said, that I kind of think those distinctions are fading, governments are still quite interested
13
in them, especially as Eilionoir and I have done this talk and spoken to people in governments in
14
a few different country that is are trying to reform their laws to bring them into clients with
15
Article 12. It is one of the questions they still ask, because they want to know what their
16
responsibilities are, and if they are going to get in trouble or not basically.
17
18
So I think the answer, and the answer that I can give is that the title of Article 12 is equal
19
recognition before the law. That's the title, and the paragraphs within it are enumerating how we
20
achieve equal recognition before the law and there isn't any question that the right to equal
21
recognition before the law is a civil political right.
22
23
And all of the ways in which you realise that rights are rooted in the civil political, in the civil
24
political silo, to use Gerard's term, of rights. And then you can say that if these distinctions
25
between rights still exist, if civil political and social economic are truly different things that have
26
different State obligations, some progressive, some immediate, then the right to equal
27
recognition before the law falls into civil political and there is an immediate obligation to realise
28
those rights.
29
MS FLYNN: I think what governments have often wondered about is, as Anna say what is do
30
they need to do immediately, so some governments might say okay if we abolish guardianship
31
right now then we have fulfilled the immediate obligation, and if it takes us 20 years to construct
32
a support system to enable people to exercise their right, well that's progressive realisation we'll
33
do that later, we don't need to worry about that. So what Anna is saying and what we argue is
34
that no, because support to exercise legal capacity is part of the civil political content of the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
63
1
right, it needs to happen now and you can't separate out the distinction between oh abolishing
2
substitute decision-making and waiting before introducing a support system.
3
MS KERSLAKE: Exactly. I think a good example of this is the right to vote, the right to
4
participate. That's a civil political right, it's accepted as that, everyone knows that. In order to
5
do that the State has to provide a really well established structure to allow for that right to be
6
actually realised so people can actually vote.
7
8
That's a huge burden on the State to do that and it recognises that as an immediate obligation
9
because the right to political participation is a civil political right.
10
11
Similarly the right to equal recognition before the law is a civil political right and there are State
12
obligations that are resource intensive related to realising that right. That's my argument are you
13
satisfied?
14
SPEAKER: I'm not, because at one hand you are saying the distinction is -- most importantly
15
don't take the easy example. If I want -- if the application is immediate and if I were to close
16
down the institution then where will I put the people? How can you link institutions and support
17
systems at once, the support system takes time?
18
MS KERSLAKE: That's a great question, I think I'll leave it for tomorrow when we talk about
19
de-institutionalisation and community living but thank you for raising it, I think we have another
20
question in the middle.
21
SPEAKER: Yes I'm from Norway I just wanted to hear your comment on what I myself tried to
22
underline in paragraph 3 which you didn't say anything because I think the Norwegian new act
23
of guardianship is in conflict with paragraph 3 because it says to give people guardianship if they
24
may require, may require support. It's not taken for granted that anyone needs support. But they
25
may. And I think that's a very, very important distinction. Because in the Norwegian
26
legislation, which they have drafted just because of this new Article 12, they have taken for
27
granted that people, that it is still the State which decides if someone is to get support.
28
29
So I think that's very important that we are not taking for granted that anyone needs support, but
30
that they may require support to exercise their legal capacity, is that an important point or is it
31
not?
32
MS FLYNN: I think there are two important points there. One is who gets to decide if someone
33
requires support which is really important, so it should, on my understanding of Article 12 be the
34
person's decision, whether or not they would like support and what kind of support and when
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
64
1
that support is no longer required, not a decision of an outside party like the State or a social
2
worker or the person's family members, so that's really important, and I think it comes back to
3
that issue of choice which of course is quite central to Article 19 as well and the theme of this
4
wholesome is school.
5
6
So the issue of who decides is important. And also a starting point that I think we have to
7
acknowledge two things, one that all of us in fact pretty much use some kind of support in how
8
we make decisions, we talk to our friends, the people with trust, we might ignore them but we
9
talk to them, so on the one hand recognising that interdependence, but also recognising that it's
10
ultimately our own decision and we can't just presume that everyone will require a certain level
11
of support or that a certain diagnosis or label will mean a certain level of support is needed, it
12
really needs to be the individual's choice as to what support they will get.
13
CHAIR: We'll just take those three questions and then we'll move on.
14
SPEAKER: Eilionoir I don't know but the previous question just prompted something, the very,
15
very difficult issue of deciding who that group is who needs support, because it becomes a kind
16
of a -- very difficult to define that group without defining that. Sometimes you want to define
17
them and sometimes you don't and you end up in a legislative mess that you can't get out of.
18
And that's one of the things, one of the reasons why we don't yet have legislation.
19
SPEAKER: My question is linked to that as well, you for Anna, you said is a very quick
20
statement, you said support system has to be culturally specific, I wonder if you can elaborate a
21
little bit on that.
22
SPEAKER: Eilionoir I know you will be sick of me asking you this question, but I think it's no
23
harm to bring it up anyway, in terms of the Irish perspective on the Convention, is there any
24
further updates on what the hold up is here now? I know that there is something with mental
25
health bill or act or something, I just think it's no harm to find out if there is any updates, thanks.
26
MS FLYNN: We're just discussing who will answer what.
27
MS KERSLAKE: We'll say really quickly about the Irish bill, we're actually going to do another
28
20 minutes I know everyone's excited! On exactly that topic, just in an hour and a half, so you'll
29
get a lot of information on that.
30
31
The other questions, right the question about how do we decide who needs support. And it's a
32
really interesting question and that's a question, it's a never ending question of how do we
33
provide -- how does the government provide support to anyone, how do they identify the people
34
that need support and the people they have an obligation to support.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
65
1
2
It might be highlighted in the context of disability but it applies across the board. I think one
3
thing interesting about Article 12 is that the languages provide access to support and that of
4
course can be used positively or negatively actually. But I think -- I think what the obligation is,
5
is to start building structures so that the support is available so that there are people that, when
6
someone doesn't have anyone in their family or friends to turn to for support in making
7
decisions, especially like decisions with legal implications, that they have an independent party
8
to go to that is, that knows thousand provide this kind of support and is recognised as providing
9
that support and third parties will recognise that support.
10
11
So I think that's kind of the first step, having those structures available, and then not -- and those
12
structures being not forced on people at all. And support should never be forced on anybody.
13
But you don't, for those kind of structures the problem of identifying who needs that support
14
goes away if you start having it available and then people that want it, and making people aware
15
that it's there and then people that want it will start coming to it. So you don't have that problem
16
of trying to reach into the community and pull those people out and give them the support in that
17
way, instead you start building those mechanisms for support and the people start coming to it.
18
19
I think it's actually really dangerous to start going down the road of assessing for support,
20
because that really quickly becomes a test of mental capacity and a limiting of rights again. So
21
that it's a legitimate challenge but I don't think it's actually a new challenge that governments
22
have had to deal with, I think it's going governments deal with whenever they are giving out
23
benefits or support, and it is something to tackle but like I said the first step is making it
24
available and letting people come to it.
25
MS FLYNN: You mentioned culturally specific but I think what you mean is that -- for example
26
it depends on the legal system that you're talking about and what opportunities for reform are
27
there, and what is actually useful to individuals in that country. So in some countries where
28
there is no institutionalisation because it never occurred to anyone to institutionalise people that's
29
not saying that everyone with a disability in that country might have an amazing life but
30
nonetheless, where there might be no formal way of depriving a person of legal capacity in that
31
country currently, even though people would be in practice not allowed take decisions, whether
32
prevented by family members or their interactions with others wouldn't be recognised.
33
34
The most important thing then is to try to build grass-roots, community initiatives that are
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
66
1
realistic, practical, that mean something to people's lives, that connect with the individuals and
2
the community that is people actually interact with, not to try and impose some sort of perfect
3
structure.
4
5
We are not trying to build a model statute out of Article 12 and tell every country to ratify it.
6
Sometimes you might not need law, teams hard to say as lawyers, but if there is no legal barriers
7
to remove legal capacity in that country, the most important thing is to ensure the supports
8
people practically need are available and the interactions with others are recognised, that can be
9
done differently depending on country and the situation, we don't want to be very prescriptive
10
about what legal structure is required to allow support to happen.
11
MS KAYESS: Eilionoir raised a really important point. I think one of the greatest things about
12
equal recognition before the law is that it needs to be recognised as an organic thing, we can't
13
lose sight of this. Once we have more inclusive communities, once people with disabilities are
14
living in the community, developing trusting relationships, have trusting relationships around
15
them that they can depend on and can support them, then supported decision-making will be
16
organic and it's not going to be something embedded in legislation, that's structured in any really
17
formal way, it will be organic, like it is for every other person who doesn't have a disability.
18
MS KERSLAKE: I think that's exactly the point.
19
SPEAKER: I think I just have an example from my country it could help you analyse that.
20
Three years ago we had a divorce case, it was between a man with a hearing impairment an his
21
wife, the court case was going on without any participation of that man because no-one did the
22
interpretation, so he didn't understand what happened until the end and he cried when he saw his
23
child being taken away by his wife without any words in that court.
24
25
And then we approached the court and we expressed our support that we could bring an
26
interpreter to help him and then we discovered that that man didn't know any sign language,
27
because he didn't go to school. In our country I think 1 out of 1,000 children with hearing
28
impairment go to school, so he used body language not sign language. So even in that case we
29
had sign language interpreter we could not help him because he could not understand it.
30
SPEAKER: I was actually so happy to hear finally the statement that obviously society will also
31
make definitions of things. What I mean to say is if you want to define personhood you can only
32
partially do that by legislation, society will always define, and it just might be the social
33
definitions might be much stronger than the legal ones. Otherwise if you don't have this it can
34
kind of turn the argument upside down. So when it comes to the problem of disability, that you
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
67
might have rights, okay, but in society you also have to contribute to be defined as a person.
2
3
So if he misses this out from the argument we'll soon turn into nonsense. This is extremely
4
important. And we can define concepts up and down, we can clarify, we can do whatever, still a
5
blind man is blind actually. And if he wants to be a person he must still participate in society.
6
And it's not only, or let me put it more positively, it's not just the law who makes this possible.
7
Thank you.
8
SPEAKER: I just wanted to say first of all the person who, I don't know it's another view, but I
9
think the personhood comes way before any rights or any laws or anything, it's not a requirement
10
that you be recognised as a person, that you are a person. Other people's recognition of you as
11
such a not important, it's important to your feeling about it, but you are a person.
12
13
The other point I wanted to make is regarding capacity and it's true of support systems across the
14
whole community if you like, I would be wary of looking for ways to set up support structures to
15
support the capacity to supported decision-making for people with disabilities specifically, it's
16
much more about broadening the support for community. As legal systems and legal
17
frameworks become more complex who here in this room other than the lawyers could do
18
anything without the support they need? So rather than setting up specialist supports it's about
19
broadening normal ones and that's true of everything, otherwise all you are doing is setting up
20
bunches of vested interested that are interested in keeping you dependent on them, that's just
21
human nature. So I think we need to start looking at this the other way around and broaden the
22
concept of a citizen rather than trying to chop up and define people with disabilities more and
23
more.
24
SPEAKER: My concern is that I think you kind of Eilionoir, you rushed over Article 12.4, but I
25
think we need to undress the other clear provisions in that article conflict of interesting, undue
26
influence, proportional and tailored to the persons circumstances apply for the shortest time
27
possible and are subject to regular review by a competent independent and impartial authority or
28
judicial body. Undressing that for the practical point, compared to institutionalisation and
29
community or rather empowering the community support, more elucidation really.
30
MS FLYNN: Just to go back to the first question first, the example of the court case. I think the
31
thing I would say about that is I think it really highlights the interaction between Article 12 and
32
Article 13 which is access to justice, I think we need to think a lot more about how support to
33
exercise legal capacity can be done in the justice system I'm happy to talk more about that later,
34
but it certainly is linked in a way that people haven't given sufficient consideration to.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
68
1
2
And then just to agree with the comments about law not being the whole answer, we are
3
definitely advocates of that. And to say related to the gentleman at the back who talked about
4
you're a person whether or not the law recognises you as such, I agree but I also say if the law
5
says you are not a person that's a problem. Maybe because we are lawyers but we would like the
6
law not to say that, so yes it's about more than the law, but where the law is against you, we need
7
to get rid of that.
8
9
And I would certainly agree that supported decision-making is not about disabled people, it is
10
about everybody. And I think that really is important from the shift from mental to legal
11
capacity, because if we're really concerned about all of us exercising our rights then legal
12
capacity is an issue for everyone, not a specific thing for people with disabilities and like I says,
13
we all use supports in how we make decisions and the supports we use are not professionals they
14
are people with trust in our lives. So that's a really important point and I think people need to
15
understand that, because the Law Reform movements often around changing the guardianship
16
law have been trying to limit guardianship to less and less people, or limit types of support to
17
very small groups of people, that's completely as you say the wrong approach.
18
19
12.4 yeah I would like to talk more about 12.4 I think it's important to hear the history of the
20
drafting, so I want to get on to Rosemarie to talk about that, but also to talk about the safeguards,
21
when we show the Irish principles as well and some of the other discussions we'll show how you
22
can read 12.4 in a way that makes sense with the rest of the article, because I agree it's confusing
23
but I don't want to spend too much more time on that naught without hearing the history of the
24
drafting if that's okay then we'll come back to 12.4 if it's not clear.
25
MS KERSLAKE: Just to say quickly those were all amazing comments and it's really refreshing
26
to hear a whole group of people that are asking all the right questions and on the right track to
27
figure out these issues, they are really hard issues and it's really encouraging to know that the
28
right questions are being asked. And we'll talk more about paragraph 4.
29
30
So I think we'll just turnover to Rosemarie now to talk about drafting.
31
MS KAYESS: Okay thank you. Article 12 was, well there are three incredibly contentious
32
articles during the negotiation, one was education, the other was Article 12 and article 17. There
33
is a little bit of a relationship between 12 and 17 I'm not going to delve into the problems around
34
17, but just to highlight that article 17 which is personal and mental integrity, had quite a sister
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
69
act role to Article 12.
2
3
One thing you have to remember, international human rights treaties are negotiated texts. So
4
what you get are not always fine examples of legal construction. They are an act of diplomacy
5
and they are constructed in a way to achieve consensus. And so what Article 12 does is it
6
reflects the consensus that can be drawn in New York in 2006, argued over a four-year period,
7
four and a half year period, but fundamentally the consensus that we can get to literally at the
8
very, very last minute on the Friday evening in August 2006.
9
10
This was not the article that we thought it was when we went into -- when we started the
11
negotiations we had always been in a conference room, it didn't have voting facilities because it
12
was obviously accessible. And where we got to the point where we thought the Convention had
13
been put to bed and going around to the conference room that had voting facilities all of a sudden
14
a spanner was thrown in the works around Article 12 and we'll get to that, I'll get to that.
15
16
So this was the, one of the most contentious articles, a lot of that was because it was such a
17
fundamental shift in the way departments of justice understood their obligations to people with
18
disabilities.
19
20
There was, as van have I gone introduced to us yesterday, wow, only yesterday! That there was
21
lots of resources in guardianship regimes around the world, most countries have established
22
guardianship regimes and the discussion around Article 12 was very much around guardianship
23
and very much focused on people with cognitive disabilities. Yes there are implications around
24
both guardianship and legal capacity, but people with sensory disabilities, but primarily the
25
greatest violations and greatest abuses occur in the area of cognitive disability.
26
27
And there was significant, significant calls from NGOs for a significant extreme shift in the way
28
we understand legal capacity. One of the biggest problems was the understanding of the
29
fundamental right of equality before the law. That was the difference between the way civil law
30
and common law approach equality before the law.
31
32
The common law system or the Anglo system of law accepts the principle of the two limbs of
33
the right to capacity and the capacity to act as two elements of the one statement. So they are not
34
separated out. So once you have the right to capacity, you have the capacity to act. That is not
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
70
how it's formulated within civil law jurisdictions.
2
3
So you can hold the right to capacity, but that doesn't automatically flow that you have the
4
capacity to act. Now this was pointed out by the delegation to Costa Rica and it was noted in the
5
drafts around Article 12 that for any non English versions of the Convention that that element
6
would need to be dealt with for Spanish speaking countries and Arabic speaking countries.
7
8
And that footnote stayed within the draft throughout the negotiations, and I think Jorge noted
9
that in about 2004 so that footnote was around for a while through various variations of Article
10
12. So we'll just hold the footnote for a moment.
11
12
That was one issue that to be got through, the second one was okay there's lots of resources
13
embedded in guardianship in countries and countries were very, very reluctant to give up
14
guardianship. They saw it as a fundamental protection for people with disabilities, they were
15
doing the right thing, embedded in all the paternalism of years gone past, but they thought they
16
were doing the right thing. They had people in place to make decisions in their best interests.
17
18
So it was about taking those people on board and getting them to see that basically it was
19
paternalism and that we needed to move away from that and empower the person with their own
20
personhood and not to deprive them it have their personhood, but to support them in being able
21
to exercise their personhood.
22
23
So then came the tricky bit. If you remove substituted decision-making, what do you do for that
24
core, small residual amount of people that would require significant support? And then we got
25
the discussion around 100% supported decision-making. So is that creating a legal fiction? And
26
several countries couldn't wear the notion that it would be 100% supported decision-making,
27
they saw that as a legal fiction and that if somebody else, even if it was based on the will and
28
preference of the person, that if somebody else was fundamentally making that decision, they
29
were making that decision, and the nuance of language was really difficult to get around,
30
because legally -- the UK were really quite emphatic that this was creating a legal fiction that
31
they could not support.
32
33
So how did we negotiate around that? Well it was really, really difficult. And who picked up
34
four? Right the construction of four is about how we try and resolve that legal fiction.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
71
1
2
The other things about the negotiations and the drafting process was that there are extreme
3
positions on both sides. There are extreme positions from the non-government sector that
4
basically just wanted to have a statement or principle that said people with disability have equal
5
recognition before the law. That's it. That you remove anything that relates to people with
6
disability in terms of decision-making. And there was great reluctance to not recognise that
7
people would need supports, and how you could ensure that states made sure that those supports
8
were in place, and that those supports were in some way safeguarded so people weren't left
9
vulnerable.
10
11
But there was also extreme positions on states that wouldn't move and would not be prepared to
12
see anything that didn't still allow for guardianship provisions. So as I said before this is a
13
negotiated text. And sometimes to get negotiated -- to get consensus you might have to create
14
some structural ambiguities in the legal construction of the article.
15
16
Now some may accuse us of slight of hand but it's much more fundamental than that. Because
17
how can we get the elements that could have the transformative ability, that could be interpreted
18
in a way that was positive, that was transformative and that could be aspirational whilst giving
19
the opportunity to build capacity with these governments to move them beyond where they had
20
investment in guardianship.
21
22
Can we get Article 12, the first three? Okay so why does it look the way it looks? I'll let you
23
know that I was sitting at a table where there was about 12 people when this particular article
24
was written, it was not easy. It was one of the most taxing experiences of my life! And I was so
25
impressed with some of the legal minds that were around that table that crafted this, when I say
26
crafted I mean crafted!
27
28
Okay one was not negotiable, we were not going to get a Convention unless there was an explicit
29
statement that people with a disability were recognised everywhere as persons before the law so
30
that was non negotiable. The good thing about that was we got it through fairly easily.
31
32
But it was the next elements about how you dealt with state's concerns about people's ability,
33
their functional capacities, because that's how they understood disability and decision-making.
34
So it was the crafty around legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
72
1
2
So we wanted to really reinforce the first section, that yes okay you give people legal capacity
3
but that you cannot remove it in anyway based on disability. So on an equal basis with others
4
means that you can't make exceptions for disability.
5
6
3 says states parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with
7
disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity. Okay provide
8
access meant that we weren't looking -- people aren't looking for some government run structure
9
that supports them, that this was about empowering a person to have the, to have access to the
10
supports in their lives, not necessarily having it enforced through some formal regime.
11
12
And then there's 4. Four is the slightly de facto, slightly guardianship subparagraph. If you can
13
create a guardianship regime that meets all these requirements good luck to you. But that's
14
basically what we set to do. That's basically what four does. Four allows for that situation
15
where there is 100% supported decision-making, I am one of those lawyers that do see that as a
16
work much fiction. I do struggle with the notion of 100% supported decision-making. But I'm
17
willing to bend in the breeze a little bit for the sake of my peace of mind.
18
19
But what this was about was placating states and making them feel that there were protections
20
being built in, that there were safeguards in place and that it was all about the process being
21
proportional to a individual. So if someone just needs to be guided through what the decision is
22
they have to make, if they have got a trusted friend that they go to for those things, that's fine,
23
safeguards are probably not relevant, and you wouldn't engage the process.
24
25
But if it's a significant decision being made by somebody in a 100% supported decision concept,
26
there would need to be safeguards in place, because you need to ensure that that person that is
27
taking on a very significant role is engaging the process in, that meets all these requirements, that
28
it respects their rights, wills and preferences. That it's not -- that it's free from conflict of
29
interest.
30
31
So people's rights needed to be protected, but they also need to be empowered, so this was the
32
way that we could bring states along and say we're not abolishing guardianship, and the
33
Convention is actually silent on guardianship, but if a State can get a guardianship regime that
34
meets the requirements of Article 12, good luck to them.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
73
1
2
Five, it's there specifically because of a question that was asked earlier, so much was put into the
3
first four paragraphs and it was dominated, really dominated by cognitive disability and I'll be
4
more blunt than that, it was dominated by psychosocial disability networks.
5
6
And there were really important issues for people with sensory disabilities, and they pushed
7
really hard to have a specific sub clause around access to financial resources so that's why it
8
looks like it looks.
9
MS FLYNN: We have very little time so we'll cut out what we were going to say and add them
10
on top when we go to talk about Ireland. I am just going to say this and let Anna wrap up with
11
the ideology of Article 12.
12
13
All we know about what Article 12 means from the official source on the committee on the
14
rights of persons with disabilities is this sentence which they have repeated over and over in
15
every country they have examined, now seven countries, they have produced concluding
16
observations on and there is a process to develop a general comment on Article 12, but as of yet
17
there is no general comment.
18
19
So this is all we know, that the State party must review the laws allowing for guardianship and
20
trustee ship and take action to develop laws and policies to replace regimes of substitute
21
decision-making by supported decision-making, which respects the person's autonomy, will and
22
preferences.
23
24
I've highlighted to replace there, because I think it's really important. It didn't say you can
25
develop supported decision-making alongside substitute and retain both, you must eventually
26
replace -- now how quickly do you that, how soon you get there, they are not being so
27
prescriptive about, they also don't define what substitute is and what supported is but luckily we
28
did that for you, Sure you have our definition and I'm sure those definitions will come out in the
29
general comment in terms of substitute decision-making and what should replace substituted
30
decision-making regime would look like.
31
MS KERSLAKE: I just want to wrap up with hammering home what I think and what
32
Rosemarie has just described as the draft, also interpretation of the most important things about
33
the article and about equal recognition before the law.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
74
1
As countries try to conform their laws to Article 12 and try to reach formal and substantive
2
equality for people with disabilities of all kinds, and for everyone, they are struggling within the
3
context of their own quite restrictive laws as they exist now and matching those up to Article 12,
4
requirements of Article 12. Because as we've heard many times before it requires a paradigm
5
shift, so it requires a new way of thinking.
6
7
And you have to think, you can't think within the box as it has been prescribed, so the box of
8
capacity law as it exists now. Or mental health law as it exists now. In order to reform laws in a
9
meaningful way to provide equality, you have to sweep away the old, at least when you're
10
thinking about how to do this, sweep away the old and just think about the end goal, which is
11
equality.
12
13
So first you have to focus on how do we reach equality, what are the baseline things we need in
14
our law for equality. And then you ask the question of how do we provide supports to have that
15
equality realised, not only on a formal legal level but also in the day-to-day lives of people.
16
17
So how do we make sure that the right to make decisions about your own life and to have the
18
decisions be legally recognised is not a legal fiction, it's actually a reality for every individual, on
19
an equal basis.
20
21
So we'll be talking to you more later about legal capacity related things but now is, I'll pass over
22
of the thank you very much.
23
CHAIR: I realise I have the best seat in the house as vary just things have been said I have
24
watched the audience and some are nodding furiously and some are going no furiously, so
25
clearly to see the kind of reaction from the audience, then bring back to what Rosemarie said and
26
bring them into a room where they try to negotiate a text, that's why you get compromises
27
because there are different views a opinions, so it's really interesting to sit here and watch
28
reactions.
29
30
We're going to take a quick 15-minute break and then we're back for three case studies. I'd like
31
everybody to say particularly toe Rosemarie who has been here all day working, a huge round of
32
applause, obviously that goes for Anna and Eilionoir also but we can reserve we can give them a
33
separate round of applause in 15 minutes time.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
75
Coffee break
2
3
CHAIR: Okay can I just make one or two announcements before we start? Firstly I have been
4
doing great on my timekeeping, can people come on in.
5
6
We're doing great timekeeping until I had a moment's weakness I needed a serious coffee so we
7
delayed slightly, so we're going to push on ahead now, what we'll do, an hour and a half session
8
is quite long so just to break it up I'll introduce each set of speakers as they go so we have a little
9
bit of a break between speakers before that I have one announcement.
10
11
Everybody who is here as an OSF grantee or Soros scholarship student, there will be a meeting
12
here at 5.30 tomorrow so can you stay in the room and there will be a meeting at that point, so
13
we'll talk to you then, it was meant to be today I think but it has been changed to tomorrow
14
evening. So that's the first announcement.
15
16
Now it gives me great pleasure to intro do you say Dr Lucy series, I say Dr because she has just
17
been awarded her PhD so it's very important to give her the doctor on this occasion.
18
19
She is an associate legal researcher with an interest in legal capacity and community care law,
20
she is working at the moment with us in the centre for disability law and policy and we're please
21
to have her with us. She just completed her PhD, which was on the Mental Capacity Act of 2005
22
and institutional domination of people with learning disabilities.
23
24
But before she commenced her PhD Lucy worked in a variety of areas in health and social care,
25
including as a support worker, social inclusion worker, a family worker, care coordinator as well
26
as an assistant psychologist so she comes at this from every angle and in that sense we handover
27
to Lucy and look forward to hearing what she has to say thank you.
28
DR SERIES: Thank you, as Shivaun was saying I have finished my PhD on the Mental
29
Capacity Act, I feel I should explain, actually I came to do my PhD because I was so concerned
30
at the way the Act was being used in care settings by psychologists and so on to really
31
subordinate people's will. And it really has controlling effects in care settings, that's where I
32
came to the theme of the PhD.
33
34
The Mental Capacity Act is quite a popular Act in England you will hear people saying it's very
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
76
1
empowering, promotes autonomy and I don't agree with that. And I want to talk about a specific
2
act, it's complex in some ways but I want to talk about how it deals with legal capacity so I'll
3
quickly remind you of a distinction that Eilionoir and Anna talked about, between mental and
4
legal capacity.
5
6
Mental capacity is this hypothesized construct under Acts like Mental Capacity Act and similar
7
acts of what's going on in your head when you make a decision, it's kind of a set of functional
8
attributes pseudo cognitive criteria that some people underpin decision-making. So mental
9
capacity what people think is going on in your head.
10
11
Legal capacity is the way other people respond to you in terms of your legal decisions, whether
12
or not people recognise the outcome of your decisions as legally binding.
13
14
Founder functional approaches like the Mental Capacity Act your legal capacity, so that's how
15
other people respond to your decisions, is hitched to your mental capacity which is what they
16
think is how you made the decision, what's going on in your head, so under the Mental Capacity
17
Act mental capacity and legal capacity become the same thing, because people only treat your
18
decisions as legally binding, if they think you have mental capacity.
19
20
And the reason Article 12 is so radical is because it blows these two apart, it says forget about
21
mental capacity, stop asking what's going on in somebody's head and respect the outcome of
22
their decision. So legal capacity exists regardless of mental capacity.
23
24
Now I am going to use the phrase mental capacity a lot today I'm talking about this hypothesized
25
thing which under acts like the Mental Capacity Act are the gateway to legal capacity, that
26
doesn't mean it always has to be the gateway, it just means it is in this legislation.
27
28
So it's quite hard to fit the mental capacity on two slides but I've tried, the basic function of the
29
Mental Capacity Act means that people are allowed to make -- third parties make decisions on
30
your best interests, what they think are your best interests if they are satisfied that you lack this
31
thing mental capacity. And mental capacity is measured by a functional test which I'll go into on
32
the next slide. Best interests decision makers can be a range of people, the first person that can
33
make best interest decisions on your behalf is the court especially created under the Act called
34
court of protection. The court of protection -- so I could apply to the court of protection and say
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
77
1
I think so and so lacks the mental capacity to make this decision what do you think is in their
2
best interests and the court will conduct an inquiry, it sort of adversarial and sort of not, about
3
whether they think you have the capacity and they can make an order in your best interests.
4
5
Now the really controversial cases, really controversial cases around things like abortion,
6
sterilization, withdrawal of life sustaining treatment are meant to go to court. But actually only a
7
very, very small proportion of cases are decided by the court this way. The court is really a
8
substitute decision maker of last resort.
9
10
Much more commonly the court will appoint somebody called a deputy to make decisions on
11
your behalf, now a deputy is kind of like what we mean by a partial guardian in other
12
jurisdictions. It's somebody who has a limited range of powers to make decisions for you in
13
your best interests.
14
15
Usually in the UK or in England and Wales at least deputy ship is only used for financial and
16
property decisions. You can create deputies to make health and welfare decisions, that's
17
decisions like where a person lives, what medical treatment they should have, but this is really
18
rare.
19
20
The reason this is really rare is because the law also has something called the general defence.
21
The general defence means that if somebody reasonably believes that you lack a capacity and
22
that a particular course of action is in your best interests that's connected with your care and
23
treatment they have a defence against litigation that you might bring, perhaps under the torts of
24
trespass or human rights law, they kind of immune from liability, so long as they can show they
25
were satisfied that you lacked capacity and that the course of action was in your best interests.
26
27
Now I find this quite scary, this is really quite an extraordinary power; I'll give awe couple of
28
examples. Your doctor might think some treatment that he is in a position to provide is in your
29
best interests and you might refuse that treatment. If your doctor is satisfied that you lack the
30
mental capacity to make that choice and that the treatment is in your best interests he would be
31
protected against you litigating him for battery when he then gave you that treatment.
32
33
So there is no need for him to go to court, he can just do it.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
78
1
A social worker might decide it's about time you move into a care home because you are no
2
longer safe at home. Unless they need to access your finances which would require some kind of
3
formal authority like a lasting Power of Attorney or deputy ship or a court order, they can make
4
the decision to move you into a care home, in the face of your objections without any formal
5
legal authority under this general defence.
6
7
Now there are some fuzzy edges to where these cases should go to court but they go to court
8
very, very rarely. The vast, vast majority of health and welfare decisions under the Mental
9
Capacity Act are made on this very piecemeal informal basis.
10
11
This means that the people determining your mental capacity won't be a single deputy, they
12
won't be a court, they could be any number of people, they could be your doctor, your social
13
worker, your care worker, a whole range of people. And that's really important to understand
14
when we go on and think about the process of assessment.
15
16
This is what the functional test looks like under the Mental Capacity Act. The test defines
17
mental capacity as the ability to make a decision for yourself. And the ability to make decision
18
for yourself according to the Mental Capacity Act consists of the ability to understand the
19
information relative to the decision, ability to retain the information, use and weigh that
20
information as part of the process of making the decision, or to communicate that decision by
21
talking, using sign language or any other means. If you lack any of these criteria in relation to
22
that particular decision you are said to lack mental capacity and others can make decision on
23
your behalf.
24
25
It's not a pure functional test it's hitch to something approaching diagnoses it's not just enough
26
that you lack the functional abilities you have to lack them because of an impairment of or
27
disturbance in the functioning of the mind or brain. This is interesting because research by
28
people like Gustav and Applebaum found actually large numbers of people who have no mental
29
impairment fail the functional test, they won't be picked up by Mental Capacity Act because
30
their lack of functional ability is not caused by an impairment there are really interesting
31
questions around whether that's discriminatory, is it even a question but I won't go into them
32
here.
33
34
Okay this slide is just to remind me to tell you that mental capacity under the Mental Capacity
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
79
1
Act is very fragmented, what I mean by this is there isn't a single gateway to loss of legal
2
capacity, it's not a case that court determines once and for all whether you have capacity in all or
3
no matters. Your mental capacity could be called into question in a huge range of contexts, this
4
slide is really a subset of lots of slides which have come up on all the different points.
5
6
So let's take machinery of justice, your mental caps toe to instruct a solicitor might be call into
7
question. If you are seen to lack the mental capacity to instruct a solicitor by your solicitor, a
8
litigation friend will be appoint to instruct your solicitor on your behalf in your best interest it's
9
and they may run a case in your best interests that's not the case you want them to run. They
10
might argue for example in a recent case about anorexia that you may be force-fed, where you
11
didn't want to be force-fed.
12
13
Your mental capacity to manage property and affairs can be called into question. We have a
14
framework for deprivation of liberty under Mental Capacity Act. Your capacity to marry, to
15
concept to sex to choose who you have contact with could be called into question and all of this
16
can happen on a very fragmented basis, each of these decisions will be taken in cheery, in
17
isolation.
18
19
It's kind of like a weed, you can show you have mental capacity on one area and the question
20
will just pop up somewhere else.
21
22
So in this talk I don't hope to cover everything to do with the Mental Capacity Act or even every
23
nuisance I just want to leave you feeling unsettled by the concept of mental capacity. I am going
24
to do that by first of all saying just stop for a minute thinking about mental capacity, as this
25
really obvious things that goes on inside our head and focus not on what's going on in people's
26
head but when their mental capacity has been called into question, what social and legal work is
27
this concept of incapacity actually doing and what's it enabling us to do?
28
29
So in order to do this I want to look at how and when functional capacity is called into question
30
and assessed, I want to think about what it feels like to have your mental capacity be assessed,
31
and then I want to go on hopefully if I have time to challenge the notion that functional capacity
32
is value neutral. And if I don't have time to get through all these because you have lots of
33
questions, there is a reading list on the drop box with some great papers written by much
34
cleverer people than me that you can go to.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
80
1
2
When is mental capacity assessed? There have been a few really good empirical studies of the
3
act published last year, I am going to talk about them throughout this talk so Emmet is a small
4
scale 30 people or so ethnographic study ethnographers are people who hangout and interview
5
lots of people and find out how they tick. They hung out in a hospital department where people
6
with dementia were admitted and looked at processes around discharge and whether people were
7
allowed go back to their own home or bundled into a care home, that's a really good paper.
8
9
The study by Williams et al. is one of the most comprehensive studies we've seen of what's
10
happening on the ground I urge to you read it, it was sponsored by the Department of Health and
11
involves interviews with hundreds of practitioners. I am going to say at this point to the best of
12
my knowledge there is literally no research on how people who are alleged to lack capacity feel
13
about the Mental Capacity Act, that's a massive and fascinating gap in a booming literature on
14
Mental Capacity Act. But it's one I haven't been able to remedy just yet.
15
16
Empirical studies show mental capacity assessments come up when people make a choice we
17
don't like, that's predictable. But what's interesting is we find people's mental capacity is not
18
called into question perhaps when it should be according to the law, when they are making a
19
decision that we do like. So the Care Quality Commission are responsible for monitoring the
20
Mental Health Act, under the Mental Health Act you can do what you want for three months but
21
after that if you want to give them treatment they must give capable consent, or you must give a
22
second opinion appointed doctor to confirm. And year after year, the body for monitoring the
23
Mental Health Act, the body say where people are compliant doctors don't consider the capacity
24
because they don't want to have to go to the trouble of getting a second opinion appointed
25
doctor. So it's a kind of strategy.
26
SPEAKER: Excuse me, can you go a bit slower.
27
DR SERIES: Okay does anyone need me to repeat anything? Last slide? To summarise the last
28
slide empirical studies and regulatory reports show a person's mental capacity to make a decision
29
is called into question when they are making decision we don't like. When people make decision
30
that is we do like we tend not to worry about how they got is there, we tend not to question their
31
mental capacity.
32
33
And this has led researchers for writers like Sabatino and Wood, which was quoted in a great
34
paper by Booth Glen, to call incapacity a legal fiction, so a legal fiction to tell us when a State
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
81
1
legitimately may intrude into an individual's affairs and take action to limit an individual's rights
2
to make decisions about his or her own person or property.
3
4
And part of the reason we want to intervene in people's affairs and isn't by any stretch the only
5
reason, but perhaps the most defensible reason is to do with this thing called the protection
6
imperative with judges in the court of protection worry about. So protection imperative is where
7
we see someone doing something that we think will bring some harm about and we desperately
8
want an excuse or reason or something to legitimate an intervention which will stop them
9
making the choice we don't like. And incapacity offers us that opportunity.
10
11
And judges at the court of protection repeatedly raise concern that is people fudge capacity
12
assessments in order to be able to intervene. Now Article 12 doesn't even have a concept of a
13
good capacity assessment, but I think we do need to still take the protection imperative seriously
14
in various ways.
15
16
We need to be thinking about other strategies which are consensual to support people, we also
17
need to look at how best interests and substituted decisions are creating the situations of risk and
18
we need to accept that sometimes people have a right to make risky choices, they have a right to
19
refuse to be protected and people with a disability should enjoy that right on an equal basis with
20
anybody else.
21
22
I want to stop and think now about what it feels like to have your capacity be assessed. So this is
23
what Her Honour Judge Hazel Marshall said about capacity assessment: Consider the
24
implications of taking a test, where you are judged by standards you know nothing of, you have
25
no idea what are or are not the right answers, and the result of not passing may well be to have
26
control of your own affair and destiny removed from you.
27
28
Susan Stefan is a feminist scholar I'll read a quote of hers from this slide: It says, far from being
29
an internal characteristic of an individual a judgment of incompetence is a judgment by those in
30
power that the conversation has broken down, often the failure of communication is due to the
31
dynamic between the two people.
32
33
When we talk about mental capacity we almost automatically assume it's a characteristic of an
34
individual and something going on inside their head. But if we stop and think about the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
82
1
dynamics of capacity assessments we realise that the outcome of that assessment is very, very
2
contingent on the relationship between the assessor and the person being assessed.
3
4
There are a whole range of relational factors which can influence the outcome of that
5
assessment, so it might be that the assessor is pressed for time, the assessor may lack the skills
6
necessary to communicate with the person, the person might not like the assessor, might not like
7
this nosey person prying into their life, the assessor may well have a different set of cultural and
8
social values and understandings which may influence how they understand what the person is
9
saying, or they may not understand the person's communication med out.
10
11
But the point is where the assessor feels the conversation has broken down is the consequences
12
fall to the individual who is said to lack capacity, not to the assessor.
13
14
On this slide is a quote from a case called RT and LT not a particularly important case but one of
15
very few cases under the Mental Capacity Act where we actually have some quoted text from
16
capacity assessment so very often the court won't meet the person said to lack capacity they will
17
rely on assessments by experts. So the quote on the slide reads: Ms Markus put to the Dr K that
18
he had not really given LT the opportunity to go back and identify the negatives. This was the
19
negatives for the return home. LT lived in a children's home and she wanted to go live with her
20
family and in order to do this she had to demonstrate her mental capacity to make that choice and
21
the doctor decided this meant she had to identify the negatives of a return home. So Dr K
22
responded to this question that he had tried but he had been met with don't knows, and I want to
23
go home, why don't you understand that.
24
25
Now I think that last sentence in the passage I have just quoted is really, really striking. Because
26
the outcome of this capacity assessment was that LT didn't understand. But actually isn't it the
27
assessor who didn't understand LT, who couldn't Hmm pat eyes and understand her reasons for
28
wanting to live with her family. But it's LT who couldn't go home.
29
30
As I said I wanted to find some research to share to you how it feels to have your capacity be
31
assessed and perhaps my literature review skills aren't very good I couldn't find any. So I
32
thought I would do the best I could with a story and this is a story about two heroes of mine,
33
Stephen and Mark Neary in the picture on the slide.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
83
1
So Stephen is a young man who lives with his dad Mark and about three years ago Stephen went
2
to respite care because his father had flue, he became very distressed in respite care, they tried to
3
break down his routine, Stephen had autism and found this incredibly difficult, these people
4
trying to break apart the routine and make him more flexible and he lashed out. Was it was
5
decide he couldn't go home, he lacked the mental capacity to go home and it took his dad a year
6
to get him home, this experience has been incredibly traumatic for Stephen but the court founded
7
been unlawfully defined of his liberty under Mental Capacity Act.
8
9
Three years later in part because of Stephen's damages for being unlawfully deprived the family
10
are about to be made homeless. Mark writes a blog about his experiences of the social care
11
system and I really encourage to you read it, it's one of the most insightful things I have ever
12
read on the social care system in the UK and Stephen because they are about to be made
13
homeless, might become the tenant of their new home. So the local authority for some reason,
14
which isn't entirely clear, decided they need to assess Stephen's mental capacity to enter into a
15
tenancy.
16
17
I am going to read to you what his father wrote on his blog about this assessment. The absence
18
of Echolalia -- it's a symptom or sign where people mimic back what's said to them, they don't --
19
the absence of Echolalia is a sign to me that things are going well, the presence of it indicates a
20
problem. And usually it is framed that the problem is with Stephen. It couldn't possibly be that
21
the problem is with the person communicating with him. It's a shame though suspect it, that the
22
only outcome of a mental capacity assessment is to trigger this typical autistic sign of deep
23
anxiety that he had out grown many years ago.
24
25
Now as I said there isn't comprehensive research on how it feels to have your mental capacity be
26
assessed but this story and others that I can share with you certainly suggest that it's quite a
27
traumatic experience for at least some if not many people.
28
29
I want to go on to my fourth topic for discussion about the value neutrality of functional
30
capacity.
31
32
So one of the attractions of the functional approach to capacity is that it's supposed to be value
33
neutral. This is contrasted with outcome approaches which Anna and Eilionoir talked about, so
34
the idea is that whether or not a person can make a decision shouldn't be about what decision
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
84
they want to make, it's about how they made the decision.
2
3
And Veitch a great writer who I'd recommend, says we like this because it allows us and
4
members of the judiciary to declare that we are not involved in making value judgments about
5
people's proposed courses of action nor in making explicit decisions about life and death, we are
6
just talking about what's going on in their head aren't we, we don't care what they would decide.
7
8
And the Mental Capacity Act has a safeguard built into it against outcome oriented assessments
9
it reads: A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because he makes an
10
unwise decision. And this is meant to guard against outcome approaches.
11
12
But the empirical studies that I described at the beginning of the talk repeatedly find that we're
13
not very good at doing this. So Williams and colleagues this is the big Department of Health
14
sponsored study, said: Unwise decisions were very hard to disentangle from an assessment that
15
someone lacked capacity, especially when the assessment was made on the basis of lack of
16
understanding of one's own needs or protection or care.
17
18
The other study by Emmet found the same thing: Professionals from a range of disciplines
19
explained how it could be difficult to unpick whether a patient lacked insight into his or her
20
situation and therefore could not weigh things up properly, or whether the patient was simply
21
being unwise.
22
23
On the slide are two quotes from a case CC v KK. This is a really, really important case under
24
the Mental Capacity Act. Astonishingly this is the first published case in five years since the
25
Mental Capacity Act came to court where somebody has successfully gone to court saying I have
26
capacity and the court agreed. There have been other cases where people had capacity and got
27
there other ways but this is the only time a person has actually manage to apply to court by
28
themselves to assert their capacity. Which raises a whole load of interesting access to justice
29
issues.
30
31
Mrs KK was in a care home she didn't want to be there the food was diabolical; she missed her
32
home and wanted to go back to her bungalow and be surrounded by her things. Three expert
33
assessors of capacity came to the conclusion she lacked a mental capacity to make this choice,
34
now unusually the judge in this case actually met Mrs KK an asked her why do you want to go
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
home, what's wrong with the care home, have you thought about the risks, now the local
2
authority had said: KK's awareness of her care needs is superficial.
85
3
4
When the judge actually said to her have you thought about how risky a return home might be
5
Mrs KK responded: If I die on the floor, I die on the floor. I'd rather die in my own bungalow, I
6
really would.
7
8
Now that sounds a lot to me and it sounded a lot to the judge, like a situation where it wasn't so
9
much she didn't understand the risks it was more that she was prepared to tolerate risks that the
10
rest of us would rather that she didn't.
11
12
There are other situations that arise where it's very clear that the outcome of a person's decision
13
is what's contributing towards a finding of incapacity and anorexia is typically given in the
14
critical literature so there is a lot of reading that I have given you in the reading list from this
15
critical literature, of a situation where the outcome of a person's decision, that's a decision to
16
refuse food or refuse treatment is seen as a key factor in whether or not they are said to be
17
capacitors, in effect you can't have capacity and refuse to eat.
18
19
The outcome is entirely determinative of your capacity. So we had a case recently called re E
20
about a young woman who had anorexia for about, well one or maybe two decades who was
21
refusing treatment, she made two lasting, two advanced decisions refusing treatment with
22
support from an advocate her mother and a lawyer and the expert said anyone with severe
23
anorexia would lack capacity to make such a decision.
24
25
The treatment that was proposed was only given a 20% chance of success, that's an 80% chance
26
that she would die whilst being force fed and the court found she lacked the capacity to refuse
27
this treatment with such dismal prospect of success and such unbearable process and it was
28
ordered that it was in her best interests to undergo it.
29
30
But I don't want to suggest that it's always straightforward the case that when people with
31
disabilities make decisions that people don't like that they are found to lack capacity, that would
32
be too simplistic. But what I do want to say is that in those published cases where people are
33
being found to have capacity, to make a problematic choice, so Mrs KK returning home possibly
34
to die on her floor, other cases where people for example have refused amputations which were
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
86
1
thought to be necessary to save their lives, one of the common threads through these cases is the
2
people found to have capacity to make these difficult and painful decisions tend to have fairly
3
good verbal fluency and narrative skill. They are fairly good at conjuring an argument for why
4
they should be allowed to do this. Constructing a kind of bittersweet ending to the narrative.
5
6
Morgan and Veitch have a really useful quote that highlights this I think. They write: The real
7
point of legal tests for mental capacity is not to be to assess some projected future or indeed past
8
ability to make a choice, but to assess whether the person making that decision can construct a
9
convincing case why he or she reaches the standard of ability that the law expects. So what
10
capacity assessments on this view are assessing is not how we're making a decision, it's how we
11
justify our decision and how good we are at justifying our decisions.
12
13
One minute, that's almost the last slide! That's really important. Because a lot of people with
14
different impairments may find it difficult to communicate, they may find it difficult to be
15
persuasive and this means that these kind of tests will really penalise them.
16
17
Now research I haven't listed on the slide or put in the readings which I can tell you about if
18
you're interested, suggests most of us make our decisions on the basis of gut instinct it is,
19
emotions, all kind of rational reasons and we only conjure up a rational explanation for our
20
decisions when we are called upon to do so. And psychologists who manipulate variables have
21
shown often it bears no resemblance to the explanation that would explanation our patterns of
22
behaviour, so our explanations for why we have made the decision in ordinary circumstances
23
often actually have very little insight into things that influence the outcomes of them.
24
25
And my question is, is it fair that people with impairments of the mind or brain should be called
26
upon to exhibit a higher standards of decision-making which psychologists think probably
27
doesn't even underpin decision-making than the rest of us?
28
29
I have two summary slides but I'll spare you those.
30
CHAIR: I'm going to suggest the three next sets and then we'll have a question session at the
31
end. I want to thank Lucy for a powerful piece and yes I am uncomfortable! Uncomfortable
32
disquieted and all the things you wanted me to be, that was powerful. Thank you.
33
34
If we maybe wait and hold questions unless the very end, we have Anna and Eilionoir again.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
87
1
2
I'm not going to re introduce Anna and Eilionoir because we already introduced them today so
3
just it handover then we have one more speaker and then open up to questions and answers, if
4
you don't mind writing down your questions, hold the question in your mind, however you want
5
to do it, until the end, okay.
6
MS FLYNN: Okay so Anna and I are going to talk about the Irish process of Law Reform
7
around the incapacity and we're going to try to get through a quick explanation of the current law
8
who for those of you not familiar with it, talk about the timeframe of reform and I'm going to try
9
and do those parts and then Anna will talk more about the process of bringing the coalition of
10
organisations interested in legal capacity reform together, which we did in co-operation with
11
amnesty. And the process of building that coalition and lessons we learned and if we have time
12
we'll tell you more about the principles we came up with at the end of the process, we actual
13
very copies of them down the front if people would like to have a look at those.
14
MS KERSLAKE: I just wanted to highlight before we get into it we kind of entered the reform
15
process about two years ago now, in Ireland here, what our goal really was, was to avoid getting
16
exactly what Lucy talked about from the MCA, because there was an instinct in Ireland to kind
17
of grab on to what the reform which is relatively recent is in England and Wales, and to just
18
transplant that here and use that. And we panicked, for all the reasons that Lucy just described
19
we wanted to do everything we could to try to stop that from happening, so that's how we kind of
20
entered into the Law Reform journey that we're going to tell you about now.
21
MS FLYNN: I won't spend too much time on this, just to say that in terms of deprivation of
22
legal capacity, in Ireland the only way to do that right now is to have a person made a ward of
23
court which is something that can be done under really antiquated legislation from Victorian era,
24
ironically called regulation of lunacy Ireland act and definition of a person that can be made a
25
word of court a person of unsound mind who is incapable of governing his person or property
26
and generally evidence from two medical experts as to the person's unsoundness of mind is
27
required.
28
29
Once you are found to be unsound of mind incapable of governing yourself or your property a
30
committee of the ward is appointed, a committee is deceiving here it's usually one person, that's
31
why I have put, analysed it to guardianship, often it's a parent. Alternatively the High Court,
32
which makes the decision about whether a person is made a ward of court, can act as the
33
committee of the ward and make the decision.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
88
1
Based on what we talked about earlier in terms of approaches to deprivation of legal capacity
2
this would be a status based approach akin it plenary guardianship in other jurisdictions the
3
person is no longer recognised as a person before the law effectively, they are not -- none of their
4
decisions can be legally recognised once they are made a ward of court, they have no
5
decision-making power in any area of their life, although because we all recognise that this is so
6
awful, enforcement is weak, so people, especially people who have supportive parent who are
7
made wards of court do actually make decisions in parts of their life, but legally speaking that's
8
really not possible.
9
10
Just to say as well about mental health law and again I'm not going to spend too much time on
11
this, it's very relevant to capacity Law Reform, in Ireland we currently have a system of
12
involuntary detention and treatment, our 2001 Mental Health Act allows for, talks about
13
voluntary and involuntary patients who may be detained in approved centres, essentially
14
psychiatric hospitals.
15
16
Detention can occur if a person has a mental disorder, which within the Act includes a type of
17
impairment but also the risk of harm to self or others. And as long as you have been certified by
18
a doctor to have a mental disorder an confirmed by a second medical opinion within 24 hours of
19
detention your detention can be valid. The Act contains a set of safeguards if you are detained
20
how you can challenge that, how it must be reviewed and so on, generally this is done through a
21
process of mental health tribunals, at which it is decided whether your detention is still
22
necessary, not whether the particular course of treatment is the correct one or permissible, and
23
also a person is entitled to independent legal representation at that tribunal.
24
25
So the reform journey, where do you start! We decided to start the conversation with the
26
publication in 2006 of the Irish Law Reform Commission's report on vulnerable adults, there had
27
been a consultation paper in 2003 and it say 2006 but really I suppose in terms of the timing of
28
this it's important to note that the CRPD was finalised at the end of 2006 so there was a gap
29
between the Law Reform Commission's report being published and before we actually knew
30
what the final wording of Article 12 would be or thought much about what that would mean.
31
32
So because of that in part, the Law Reform Commission recommended adopting essentially an
33
approach which would reflect the men at that tall capacity in England and Wales to a certain
34
extent except instead of what Lucy described which is where almost anyone the person interacts
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
89
1
with can make a best interest decision under the general defence, there was going to be more
2
safeguards around that, there would be adult guardians appointed to make substitute decisions
3
they were capable of being reviewed by an independent tribunal.
4
5
Not the courts.
6
7
Essentially they proposed a functional assessment in mental capacity as Lucy explained that
8
currently exists in the Mental Capacity Act but also court fin formal decisions to be made about
9
day-to-day decisions, which maybe would have ended up being something like what happened
10
with the Mental Capacity Act.
11
12
In 2007 Ireland signed the UN Convention and in 2008 the government published this scheme of
13
the mental capacity bill. What this means is it wasn't the official act, it's not even really a draft,
14
it's more the heads of different sections with some explanations about what would be contained
15
in the bill and largely this followed what the Law Reform Commission had suggested, so it
16
allowed functional test of mental capacity, it set out a system of adult guardianship, the only
17
difference really I guess between that scheme and what the Law Reform Commission had
18
suggested was the government proposed this whole thing be done through the court system,
19
whereas Law Reform Commission had recommended the establishment of a new separate
20
independent tribunal with a range of experiences including different professions, but also lay
21
people.
22
23
The great thing about, that came out after this scheme was that the Department of Justice had to
24
do a regulatory impact assessment to decide what the impact of that law would be and in that
25
they mentioned that this law would be needed in order for Ireland to ratify the Convention and
26
that's where our whole advocacy campaign started. Now they linked the re coram to Article 12
27
and we decided okay it's quite a long way from Article 12 and we needed to think about how it
28
could be different.
29
30
So after that not much else happened for quite a while, there were some private members bills
31
introduced in Parliament which basically either took the form of what the Law Reform
32
Commission had proposed or some version of the 2008 scheme but private members bills are
33
very unlikely to pass in our Parliament, so they didn't.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
90
And then we had an economic crisis and we weren't so worried about capacity for a while.
2
3
In the following two years there wasn't much progress, some conferences touched on this issue
4
and many organisations would repeat calls for action, but mostly the line was that why hasn't
5
Ireland ratified, we need to ratify the Convention and the response from the government was we
6
haven't changed our capacity law, we're working on it, when we finish that we'll then ratify.
7
8
In February 2011 more due to economic crisis and concern there was a change of government
9
and lucky for us there was a commitment, one line that said this government committing to bring
10
forward capacity legislation that will Enable Ireland to ratify the CRPD. So we latched on to
11
this and used it advocacy tool to say if the purpose of legislation is to enable us to ratify then it
12
must be compliant with what the CRPD is asking to you do and a straightforward functional
13
assessment of mental capacity and adult guardianship regime as proposed in 2008 is not going to
14
achieve that aim of enabling us to ratify the Convention.
15
16
Then in August 2011 the justice committee of our Parliament called for submissions to the
17
committee on what the capacity legislation should look like, it was an open call everyone
18
panicked because it was in August in the middle of the summers, everyone was on holidays and
19
we had a narrow timeframe to get submissions in but we did And eventually the justice
20
committee held hearings with some of the organisations who made submissions almost a year
21
later.
22
23
So I'm just going to handover to Anna to talk about how the coalition came about and some of
24
the issues that we experienced during that.
25
MS KERSLAKE: So as I mentioned and Eilionoir did as well, we were panicking, it looked like
26
this was going to happen really fast, it looked like there was going to be a bill that was going to
27
be pushed through, that denied legal capacity and also had the risk of potentially looking like the
28
Mental Capacity Act in England and Wales as Lucy described, and being very invasive into the
29
lives of people with disabilities.
30
31
And one particular challenge also was that there had been a need to change this lunacy act for
32
many, many years and disability rights organisations had been pushing for change in this type of
33
legislation for a long time, so many people were eager to get any kind of legislation out that
34
would replace the lunacy act which is obviously that. And everyone agrees that the lunacy act is
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
91
bad, that's not really controversial.
2
3
The problem was that when we looked at the bill as it was, it was not what we wanted as all. So
4
we decided to build this coalition in conjunction with Amnesty Ireland as Eilionoir mentioned.
5
Because we thought this was going to happen so fast we didn't have a great master plan at the
6
beginning, we just thought that we should bring as many people together, as many stakeholders
7
and as many powerful disability rights organisations as well as powerful people in the
8
government that could be on side with us. We thought we should bring those people together
9
and try to figure out what to do.
10
11
So in September 2011 ourselves a amnesty Ireland convened our first round table discussion
12
with mental health groups, mad pride and Irish advocacy network, intellectual disability groups
13
inclusion, older people, Alzheimer age action, brain injury and then also mainstream human
14
rights organisations. So we actually had a really great broad range of people involved and that
15
were interested.
16
17
In the beginning. And we met with all of them and initially our main goal was to try to raise
18
awareness amongst this group on Article 12 because it actually wasn't something that was well
19
understood, and still really isn't well understood by a lot of people.
20
21
So we wanted to first get everybody up to speed on what Article 12 was and what the right to
22
equal recognition before the law was and then make a plan for what to do. So to do that
23
Eilionoir and I and Gerard as well tried to provide that education on Article 12 and then we
24
brought in Christine Gordon from British Columbia to talk about coalition building, she did a
25
Skype call to one of our meetings where we had all of our coalition there and she was one of the
26
leaders behind representation agreement act in British Columbia which maybe some of you have
27
heard of.
28
29
It's a piece of legislation that allows for an individual to designate certain people to support them
30
to make decisions and they can also designate someone to make decisions for them if they like.
31
But it places the power in the hands of the individual instead of the hands of the court or the
32
State or a substitute decision maker, it's not a perfect piece of legislation, but there was -- it's one
33
of the only pieces of legislation that has supported decision making within it and there was an
34
amazing grass-roots movement that Christine Gordon was involved in that is what got the
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
92
representation agreement act passed and into existence.
2
3
So we used that expertise from her to try to build this coalition. And before I pass it over to
4
Eilionoir to talk about the key decisions I just want to say how important I think that coalition
5
was. Because it was not a single voice of what should be done in capacity legislation, it was a
6
whole group of people that were coming from very diverse areas and had very diverse interests
7
that were coming together to try to negotiate something.
8
9
So in a way we were mimicking, trying to mimic as best we could with the resources we had, the
10
process behind the Convention that Rosemarie talked about earlier today to make sure that it
11
wasn't just us as academics saying what we thought was the right thing to do, that we were
12
bringing people together to make sure that what we were pushing for and what we were
13
advocating was as much as we possibly could achieve, the voice of people with disabilities in
14
Ireland and we'll talk more about that challenge.
15
MS FLYNN: We have copies and we can discuss that later, the round table tomorrow will be
16
helpful.
17
18
The key decisions we made in the coalition early on, the first meeting was interesting because
19
we had all tried to, a lot of us tried to make submissions to the justice committee and basically
20
the first meeting all we could agree on, we had very different perspectives on what we wanted
21
the law to look like from the different organisations but we agreed we didn't with the law to
22
enable us to ratify the Convention, that's as far as we got in the first meeting, ultimately out that
23
have we decided what would help to us get there.
24
25
We thought about drafting our own legislation at various point we discussed that but felt that
26
wouldn't necessary be helpful it might be seen as too much of a threat to the legislative drafters
27
so we decided to do instead to develop principles for the recommendation and if all the coalition
28
organisations could sign up to the principle that is would give them some good standing and
29
legitimacy and then we would publicise these principles and put them in the face of the
30
legislative drafters and politicians and try to make sure they took them into account when they
31
were writing the law.
32
33
So we wanted to influence the political process that was clear, there was another key decision we
34
made and again to make the agenda that guardianship should be replaced with supported
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
93
1
decision that was our goal, it might not have been the goal of everyone in the process but it was
2
our goal and ultimately what the principles represent.
3
4
We want to build support for the idea of a legal capacity system, not a system based on mental
5
capacity which would lead to the denial of legal capacity and we need to do that among
6
practitioners and service providers as well, because otherwise we wouldn't have the support
7
needed to make sure that the law actually meant something in people's lives, that was quite
8
important to us.
9
10
Given the time shall we try and rush through the different challenges?
11
MS KERSLAKE: As I mentioned we initially thought we had very little time because the
12
government had expressed that the bill would be coming out very quickly so we were rushing to
13
get these things done and we were trying, we had a meeting every month for the first year almost
14
I would say, and it was very difficult to get everyone to attend these meetings because the
15
different organisations are situated in different cities in Ireland we were having the meetings in
16
Dublin, but it was still difficult to get everyone there.
17
18
What we did do, and because we thought we were under time pressure, was quickly organise two
19
separate international conferences, where we brought in international speakers to basically raise
20
awareness and try to get the points across that were coming out of the Convention on the rights
21
of legal capacity and the practice of supported decision-making.
22
23
It was probably good, we thought that we were under time pressure because we were able to
24
organise those pretty quickly in November 2011 and April 2012 and based on those conferences
25
partly and I think the momentum that it instigated the justice committee hearings, and the reports
26
coming out of it have reflected a lot of language about the Convention and about protecting the
27
right to legal capacity as opposed to talking about when to infringe on the right to legal capacity,
28
which is what the bill looked like initially.
29
MS FLYNN: Just to acknowledge as well in terms of how we achieved there, there is no way
30
we could have done this without amnesty, especially amnesty's back room team that were
31
constantly meeting with politicians and decision makers and policy makers and legislative
32
drafters and putting this in bullet point format in a way they could understand in terms of what
33
was needed, that was really, really important.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
94
1
The challenge in stakeholders like Anna said although we thought we a good spectrum of
2
individuals represented we would have wanted more and if we had more time we would have
3
tried to have more representation of self advocates for intellectual and psychosocial disability in
4
particular fore there wasn't a national organisation of people with intellectual disabilities to
5
attend, we were asking people to April tend on an organisational basis not on a personal basis we
6
wanted people to have a community behind them to bring with them and share the knowledge
7
that they were getting.
8
9
We are in the centre along with Inclusion Ireland involved with the supporting the establishment
10
of a national platform of self advocates with intellectual disabilities but at the time there was no
11
way we could have, there was no organisation we could ask.
12
13
So difference of opinion among stakeholders they reflect what is Rosemarie said in the drafting
14
of Article 12, some people have really, really different positions on legal capacity and some
15
people ultimately left the process because they felt they couldn't support what we were asking
16
for, which was a support model of legal capacity.
17
18
We had statutory bodies involved or at least attending such as the Law Reform Commission and
19
Irish Human Rights Commission but because they were statutory bodies they couldn't, they felt
20
within their remit sign up to the principles because they felt the principles were an advocacy
21
issue and not something they could do within their mandate. Plus the Law Reform Commission
22
had a difference of opinion with what we were trying to do in the principles because they had to
23
stand behind their report that they produced in 2006, which recommended the establishment of a
24
system of adult guardianship and they felt they had to stand behind the research and the report.
25
MS KERSLAKE: In the interests of wrapping up I will just share with you the other two
26
challenges were the scope of the reform and there were people that wanted to not include mental
27
health was one, mental health law was one of the major challenges there and we don't have time
28
to get into more but Eilionoir and I are happy to talk to people afterwards, and the last challenge
29
was political will. There was -- it was interesting because we had this opportunity because they
30
said the government had promised to make this change before ratification and it had promised
31
ratification, so we had this door into pushing for this but actually stirring political will to really
32
realise the rights in Article 12 was much more difficult.
33
34
And now Eilionoir is just going to give you a really quick sum up of what the developments
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
95
1
have been and where things are right now.
2
MS FLYNN: Basically as we heard from Minister Lynch yesterday the publication of the bill is
3
imminent I know there are people who will sigh at that and roll their eyes probably me included
4
because we have heard it so often, however I think from what we know that it will be published
5
very soon and I think, but the question is of course whether what's published is something we
6
can accept that we think reflects the principles. Good things that happened I would say in terms
7
of trying to keep the focus on the need for this reform to happen and need to be CRPD compliant
8
would be for example the amnesty conference that we co-hosted with them at which Gabor was
9
present and also Cheryl Nicholson from the public advocacy office in south Australia and also a
10
conference with DFI with Theresa Degener and she actually met the officials from the various
11
departments and had a private session with them where they discussed what their issues were
12
with how were they going to incorporate the Convention into the new law and she gave them
13
good guidance.
14
15
So I have hope there will be positive things in the law and we'll see it soon but I'm sure it won't
16
fulfil all the requirements of Article 12 because we've never seen a law that's done that, but it's
17
an interesting process and we are ear happy to talk more about the principles tomorrow or if you
18
grab any one of us in the coffee breaks. Thanks.
19
CHAIR: We'll also have time just at the end for questions just bear with us we're running about
20
20 or sop minutes behind but that's it. We have our very last speaker, we are very glad to be able
21
to introduce our last speak.
22
23
This is Yoshi, he started working as a lawyer for mental disability issues after he studied
24
independent living in Berkeley in California in the mid 90s. He is now the chair of Expanding
25
Committee on Establishing Disability Rights Tribunal in the Asia Pacific area, and a senior
26
attorney of Tokyo Advocacy Law Office and a member of the Task Force on Anti-discrimination
27
of Committee on Disability Policy under Cabinet Office.
28
29
It's great pleasure we get to welcome somebody that travelled so far to be with us and it's also
30
really important we do tend to get very focused on what's happening in our own regions we get
31
focused on the African region or European region or the Americas in various different contexts,
32
it's most important that we see and hear the examples from other jurisdictions and other regions
33
to see what we can learn from I'm very pleased to have Yoshi speak today.
34
MR IKEHARA: I'm Yoshi from Tokyo, and this afternoon I would like to report our situation on
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
96
1
the eve of ratification of CRPD and I'm focusing on the cases, on voting rights for persons under
2
guardianship and disability rights in formation in Japan.
3
4
At the beginning let's look over the history of the formation of Japanese disability law and policy
5
over the last ten years. The special task force for reformation of existing law and policy -- sorry
6
this is different!
7
CHAIR: Sorry bear with us, a minor technical hitch at the last possible moment. Just like that
8
it's fixed.
9
SPEAKER: So let's straight away overlook the history of Japanese reformation of disability law
10
and policy over the last ten years. In 2004 Japan Disability Forum is organised, J D F is national
11
alliance of organisations of persons with disabilities and their families, and its aim is to
12
harmonise existing disability law and policy with CRPD.
13
14
And 2006 as you know CRPD was adopted and the next year Japan signed it. In 2008 the
15
change of the government happened, from Conservative Party to a progressive party, this change
16
of political climate influenced very positively our situation.
17
18
And in 2008 the headquarters for reformation of disability law and policy was established under
19
the Prime Minister and the headquarters organised the committee for reformation of disability
20
law and policy and the majority members of this committee are persons with disabilities.
21
22
In 2010 we raised a lawsuit voting right of persons under full guardianship, we raised a lawsuit
23
not only Tokyo, but other big cities too like Osaka, various kinds of city, and in 2011 basic Act
24
on persons with disabilities, that had been enacted in 1970 was amended. And in 2012 the
25
government was changed again, this time from progressive party to Conservative Party and so
26
this change influenced very negatively our situation.
27
28
In 2013, this year, our plaintiff won her lawsuit case. This is the first case in Japan. And in
29
2013, this year, Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities Act, that had been enacted
30
in 1960, was amended and promotion of relief from Disability Discrimination Act is under
31
discussion now.
32
33
The draft of this Act will pass this month.
34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
97
1
So at the beginning that's a voting right case. The Japanese election law had deprived people
2
under full guardianship of their right to vote, but the Tokyo District Court ruled on 14th March
3
2013, this year, that provisions of the law is unconstitutional. And after that the congress
4
amended the election law last month, 74 days after the court decision, very quick amendment.
5
They just deleted the provisions. So this seems to be some kind of triumph for a person with
6
disability and advocates. But there are some problems.
7
8
So the court reasoning is problematic. The court said that is reasonable to require a capacity to
9
vote. But, we can not say that a person under full guardianship is always incompetent to vote
10
because a person under full guardianship is allowed to purchase daily items, to marry to divorce
11
and to leave his or her will by oneself. And, a capacity to manage one's property is different
12
from a capacity to vote.
13
14
The court mentioned that it would be possible to establish a different capacity examination
15
system, properly for election. And the court did not referee quality of legal capacity and
16
supported decision-making.
17
18
So what is the premise of this adjudication? A diversion of guardian ship into an election is just
19
unconstitutional. Court says diversion is unconstitutional, or unreasonable.
20
21
But it is reasonable to require capacity to vote. And some persons with disabilities may be
22
incompetent to vote. Then, it will be constitutional to exclude a person with disabilities who is
23
teleologically examined to be incompetent to vote.
24
25
Since the purpose of guardianship is different from a purpose of election capacitive assessment
26
of guardianship is different from capacity assessment of voting right, then if the government
27
developed a new capacity assessment system properly for voting right the court will regard it as
28
constitutional.
29
30
So there were some misconceptions on capacity in Japan. So general public or the government
31
were to the court, the only analyse capacity from a purpose of legal system. They lack an aspect
32
of social factors that support a human decision. And the government may establish a new
33
capacity examination system to vote, though they simply deleted the provisions at this moment.
34
So this is a problem, we are afraid of this.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
98
1
2
And there is some -- there are some problems on legal capacity in Japan. So existing systems are
3
strongly based on medical model. Especially guardianship system or involuntary commitment
4
and hospitalisation system are very much based on medical model.
5
6
And the judiciary and the government do not recognise supported decision-making model. And
7
existing system too much leans toward guardianship system and institutionalisation. And
8
national budget is partial toward hospitalisation.
9
10
Please look at this table. This table shows the ratio of full guardianship. So Japanese Civil Code
11
provides three types of guardian ship, one is total or full guardian ship, it limits capacity of a
12
ward totally, and number two is half full guardian or half total guardian, it sounds curious, but it
13
limits capacity of a ward in 13 legal categories provided by Civil Code such as contract of their
14
estate, contract of important assets or succession or lawsuit or death. And partial guardianship
15
limits capacity of a ward in a few legal categories that are selected from these 13 legal
16
categories, but as you know the total guardian is almost 80% of guardians and partial guardian is
17
just 3%. And half full or total guardian is almost 20%.
18
19
So the court decision very much leans toward full guardianship.
20
21
So the family court examine capacity and appoint a guardian, but they easily use guardianship
22
and lean toward full guardianship. Lots of lawyers and social workers in Japan do not regard
23
guardianship as a last resort, they believe a guardianship can protect a ward and a full
24
guardianship is very powerful and convenient for them.
25
26
This table shows numbers of involuntary inpatients to 1 million population, it is obviously Japan
27
out does other countries.
28
29
How about this national budget data, this shows national budget for mental health and welfare
30
and astonishingly 97% of the national budget is spent for medical treatment and the budget for
31
community living is only 3%. On the other hand hospitals get 70% of the national budget.
32
33
These tables show that Japan is most institutionalised country. So let's go to the next theme, new
34
disability discrimination abilities, victory or half victory? I'd like to get at least half this time.
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
99
1
2
So Japan Disability Forum J D F had worked to harm Monday eyes because this disability law
3
and policy is CRPD since 2006 and the government enacted three acts, number one, number two,
4
number three.
5
6
So how about basic act for persons with disabilities? This act was enacted originally in 1960,
7
very old act, and amended 2011. The Act defines disability based on social model. So this old
8
act defined disability based on medical model, but in 2011 the definition was changed. It
9
provides an anti-discrimination provision and it provides a reasonable accommodation provision.
10
11
So this seems to be a kind of victory. But there is a problem. The anti-discrimination provision
12
and reasonable accommodation provision are not based on civil rights but on a political
13
obligation. I will explain it later. And they are interpreted as just principles of administrative
14
policy. And the anti-discrimination provision is just a single simple provision, not
15
comprehensive provisions like ADA.
16
17
This table shows the kind of structure of this law so basic act provides political obligation for the
18
national or local government, and the Act provides also principles of disability policy, but this
19
law does not provide civil rights or human rights or any rights to a person with disabilities.
20
21
Then a person with disabilities cannot raise a lawsuit directly based on this basic law. This is a
22
problem.
23
24
How about promotion of relief from Disability Discrimination Act. This law sounds in Japanese
25
very curious, but this act provides authority and responsibility of the government to promote
26
relief from disability discrimination. And the government has to provide guidelines to promote
27
relief from disability discrimination and the government has to listen to opinions of persons with
28
disabilities when elaborating a guideline. And the Act requires to establish a committee on
29
disability discrimination in the government and every municipal tea.
30
31
And the committee run a kind of mediation system and they gather information about, relating to
32
our discrimination. But this is also the structure of this law, so this law provides obligation of
33
the entity but this obligation is to the government and the government provides administrative
34
guidance along with mediation, but this does not provide any right to persons with disabilities,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
100
1
and so a person with disabilities can ask the committee to start mediation, but they can not raise
2
a lawsuit to the court based on this law. So this is very much limited law, so this is a problem in
3
Japan.
4
5
The public sector has a legal obligation to abide by this guideline but the private sector does not
6
have any legal obligation according to this law. So this is another weak point of this law.
7
8
And conservative lawmakers try to avoid admitting civil or human rights to a person with
9
disabilities, this law was so enacted just after the change of the government 2012, so the power
10
of law is made weak. And their aim is to protect majority from litigation by anti-discrimination
11
law.
12
13
How about Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities Act. Now this act was enacted
14
in 1960, so a very old one, but amended this year and this act originally provides a quota system
15
for persons with disabilities. So this law is a kind of social welfare law, but it adds
16
anti-discrimination provisions and reasonable accommodation provisions in an employment
17
field.
18
19
And private companies have an obligation towards the government to abide by those provisions.
20
And if a company does not follow those provisions it will get an administrative guidance or an
21
administrative order, or they have to pay a fine.
22
23
But, and the Act provides a mediation system too, which is composed from the representatives of
24
an employer and employee and general public. But a person with disabilities cans not raise a
25
lawsuit directly based on this provision claiming discrimination or reasonable accommodation
26
because an obligation of an employer is not to an employee with disabilities, but to the
27
government.
28
29
The structure is almost the same, so the obligation is just to the government and the government
30
will provide some order or allow mediation, but a person with disabilities does not have any
31
right under this law.
32
33
So there are four types of anti-discrimination law criminal, constitutional or civil and social
34
welfare model, and Japanese anti-discrimination act now are sorted into a type of social welfare
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
1
law. They are not civil rights law and they do not give persons with disabilities rights, but
2
expect the government to play a paternalistic role to protect persons with disabilities from
3
discrimination.
101
4
5
So even so there are some advantages in this law. So this law can raise the standard of equality
6
and reasonable accommodation in general. And it will provide easy, inexpensive and speedy
7
solution for persons with disabilities, and also for discrimination.
8
9
But there are some disadvantages. So an individual with disabilities cannot guarantee his or her
10
rights. And the guideline while standard cannot fulfil every individual need. This is not so
11
tailor-made. It is difficult for a person with disabilities to demand an individualised reasonable
12
accommodation by judicial procedure.
13
14
My conclusion, the reformation of the election law was one of the most marvellous success. But
15
its way of thinking is still based on medical model and they do not come to realise that a human
16
capacity is mainly based on social factors. We need to accomplish paradigm shift on a legal
17
capacity. And we have to push the government to enact civil rights based anti-discrimination
18
act. Otherwise persons with disabilities in Japan will not have any power to control his or her
19
life.
20
21
Thank you very much.
22
CHAIR: It has been a long day and I'm aware it's been a long day so I'm going to give, open the
23
floor to questions in a moment but just to let you know the purpose of the summer school is that
24
you don't be shy, that you see these people around over the coming days, that you do nab them,
25
that you do corner them and you do ask the questions. Really it's the only floor you are going to
26
do it so forget shyness, any inhibitions, go up and ask questions, I am going to open the floor for
27
just a couple of minutes for questions, if anyone has any questions then I'll wrap up for today so
28
if you have any questions hands up, no shyness as I said. We're all shattered -- no we have one
29
at the back. I'm going to maybe just have four or five questions and that's it for now.
30
SPEAKER: My question is related to the fact that we, the presenters did not mention the self
31
determination as a criteria that challenges the legal environment, and it can project people to
32
overcome any challenges, because the legalistic approach when we say okay CRPD, it's the
33
orientation, but if we take the citizen actions, the slavery and that, they didn't have a CRPD to
34
guide them, but they created the movement to assert their own rights. That issue of being legal,
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
102
1
to be a person, whether it's very important on top of self-determination for instance. Thank you.
2
CHAIR: We'll take all the questions in one go.
3
SPEAKER: My question is to Yoshi, how are the other traditional grounds of discrimination
4
dealt with under Japanese law? For example if a woman experiences discrimination at work,
5
under what law would she bring that? I'm assuming that there is some kind of
6
anti-discrimination law that will fall under the civil rights, if you can just clarify that.
7
SPEAKER: This is to Lucy, I just needed clarification, this was something very interesting you
8
said at the end about what psychologists have found on how to determine, when a decision is
9
made and the justifications people give afterwards. Did you say you think it's a good basis to
10
rely on the explanation someone has for their decision or to still rely better still on the fact that
11
you have to establish what the decision actually is rather than why, so I need your clarification
12
on the analysis of the justification and which side is better. Thank you.
13
SPEAKER: Is it true that I should jump into the water to learn how to swim? Because to some
14
extent we are meant to believe that making a mistake is the learning process, but we found
15
people who are denying us to make a mistake for us to learn.
16
MR IKEHARA: Thank you very much, very good question. We have civil law of course and in
17
civil law it provides a contract law and tort law. In contract law so that there is a good faith
18
provision, and tort law there a kind of legality criteria.
19
20
So if the -- so employers or some discriminator infringes a right, a person with disability law or
21
some other anti-discrimination administrative law, it means his or her action is illegal and not
22
good face, and so using a civil code good face provision or legality criteria, so we can raise a
23
lawsuit. But it's a very complex way or indirect way to sue a discriminator, so it is not easy for
24
plaintiff to win the case. But there is some way to raise a lawsuit.
25
DR SERIES: I just want to check I understood your question, did you want to know more about
26
the research which suggests there is a disjoint between how we explain our decisions and how
27
we make our decisions?
28
29
So there is a body of research that's really well explained by a neuroscientist Dimassio about the
30
emotional basis for decisions, so a lot of that draws on cognitive neuro-science, a psychologist
31
called Gigarenza did research looking at how decisions are made on the basis of gut instincts, I
32
can't actually tell you off the top of my head but if you e-mail me, you can find me in the list in
33
your pack, there is also a body of research that I remember learning from my days as a
34
psychologist which is where psychologists manipulated variables about people making choices
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
103
1
and then asked people to explain why they chose a particular thing and their explanations for
2
why they chose a thing, so let's just say for example jam, they say well I just really like
3
strawberry jam, but if you look at the history of their choices they have chosen all kinds of
4
different jams, marriage laid, so our research suggests that our insight into how we make choices
5
is actually quite limited and the point I was trying to bring home is that the mental capacity
6
assessment process can really only tap into how good we are at explaining and justifying our
7
choices and that's something research suggests we are not very good at doing.
8
9
It also presumes our decisions are made in a rationalistic way this understanding and evaluating
10
way when actually a lot of psychology research suggests most of us don't make decisions in that
11
way.
12
CHAIR: By the time I get home I have ten reasons why the shoes were necessary and not one
13
went through my head when I picked them up.
14
MS FLYNN: We're going to try and answer Gabriel's question on self determination, that's a
15
very important point and I think if we had lots more time we would like to talk about that, but it's
16
very important that you raised it, it is very relevant of course to the issues of personhood and
17
legal capacity.
18
19
I think there is a lot that we can learn from other grass-roots human rights movements in terms
20
of how people organise and identify themselves, even from the disability movement in the last
21
century thinking about organising, identifying, developing things like a social model and use that
22
experience and learn from that in the context of legal capacity, but what I would say is many of
23
the things of the previous movements had might not have, they might not be present in the same
24
way in the disability movement. So when women or minorities were asking for equal civil rights
25
there were charismatic leaders who had very clear communication that other people could
26
understand, there are very charismatic leaders in the disability movement too but sometimes
27
don't communicate in the ways others can easily understand and that has been interpreted by
28
other people to mean oh well they shouldn't have the same right to self determination and Article
29
12 does free to reverse that and it's important.
30
31
But I would also say it's not just about empowering one specific movement or a particular type
32
of people with disabilities we have to go back to the point that was raised that legal capacity is
33
an issue for everyone, we should all be concerned and it's about mobilising the community as a
34
whole, until the broader public think it's important and not just a speciality there won't be a
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
104
1
commitment to change.
2
MS KERSLAKE: Thanks so much for bringing up the term self determination, while we didn't
3
say it specifically I know that it underpins all the work I do and it underpins Article 12 itself,
4
even though the word isn't in there. That is what Article 12 is about, trying to secure that in the
5
law, but formally and informally as well. And I think it is really important to highlight the past
6
movements for self determination and the importance of it and there is plenty of research out
7
there, which I think Lucy mentioned a bit of, but that shows self determination is essential for
8
well-being and flourishing and that.
9
MS KAYESS: You know why self-determination is not in Article 12?
10
MS KERSLAKE: Rosemarie will explain why it's not in Article 12.
11
MS KAYESS: It's an accepted principle in international law and relates to the rights of people's
12
as opposed to an individual right.
13
MS KERSLAKE: It makes sense. Thank you.
14
CHAIR: On that note I'm going to thank you for your attention. I also thank you for your
15
participation, you have made it very interesting the fact that you have been willing to participate.
16
I'd like to thank all the speakers and presenters today, we have learned an awful lot from their
17
valuable considerations and willingness to engage, but I think for me there is one thing has stood
18
out probably and has stayed with me and I hope it says with you, it's a quote from one of the
19
quotes we heard, I hope it stays with you for all the right reasons, to inspire to you change either
20
the laws or the policies or the situations in your countries, that was a quote I think from J T case,
21
that Lucy mentioned when she talked about a child and the child said I want to go home, why
22
can't you understand? I think that really says it all, I don't think I need say any more.
23
MS KEANE: Can we also thank Shivaun for presenting today, a huge thank you from the
24
CDLP, she's a member of our staff there, so a thank you to her as well.
25
26
Conclusion
27
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
A
abandoned 43:19
abide 100:5,19
abilities 56:5 78:26 98:34
ability 9:14 24:1 25:3
27:17 35:17
55:24,25,26,27 58:26
71:17,32
78:17,18,19,30 86:8,9
able 1:34 9:14,17,18
21:34 25:5 33:24
35:15,29 39:8 46:16
47:29 48:9 58:28
61:26 70:20 80:14
81:12 93:23 95:20
abolish 62:30
abolishing 6:13 63:1
72:32
abortion 77:5
about 2:24,25,34
3:5,9,20,23,34
4:29,32 5:10,15,16,24
6:5,10,12,23,33 7:4
8:19
10:12,19,20,21,23
12:16,18 13:8 14:16
15:3,8,9,18,34
16:17,20,23,25,30
17:6,9,22 19:6,27,30
20:8,33,34 21:30
23:32,33 24:9
25:13,14,19 26:11
27:9,29,33 28:13 29:5
31:12,18,19 3
absence 83:17,19
absolutely 9:13 10:5 26:4
32:23,24 48:30,33
54:30
absorb 59:15
abstract 36:13
abuse 37:17
abuses 12:32 69:25
academia 17:26 35:21
academic 17:25 49:21
academics 92:11
accept 32:27,28 44:3
57:2,3,20 81:18 95:6
acceptable 11:14
accepted 32:23 63:4
104:11
accepts 69:32
access 1:31,32 9:13,14,17
11:5,6,13 12:3,6,9,12
14:8,10 15:11 22:18
23:2 25:9 28:33
29:1,2 37:25 43:25,28
47:6 48:21 52:12
56:18 60:11 61:28
65:3 67:32 72:6,8,9
73:7 78:2 84:28
accessibility 9:9,33 14:7
27:20 28:21,22,29
30:23 37:8,26 44:5
accessible 8:18
9:12,17,33
10:18,25,31
11:2,15,29 14:3,10,13
15:18,27 23:11
27:17,18,20,21,23
39:30 44:25 69:12
accessing 48:22
accident 43:23
accommodate
11:23,24,29
accommodated 9:30
11:33
accommodation 6:31
8:30,31 9:34 11:4,23
12:7,12 15:24
19:12,21
25:15,17,18,22 28:34
29:1,3 37:16 44:2
99:9,12 100:16,25
101:6,12
accommodations 43:26
accomplish 101:16
accordance 4:23
accorded 5:18,20
according 43:1 78:18
80:18 100:6
account 4:24 5:4,7 92:30
accountable 5:23
accuse 71:16
achieve 29:15 30:18
31:11 32:10 35:8
39:4 49:8 51:15 56:4
62:20 69:5 90:14
92:13
achieved 5:12 31:21 35:7
93:29
acknowledge 64:7 93:29
acknowledged 41:27
across 6:3 19:29
20:16,27 21:16 41:1
65:2 67:13 93:20
act 7:34 12:24 14:2
15:30,32 16:3 19:11
24:18,19 41:7,18
46:23 47:7 49:8,12
53:22,33 63:22 64:25
69:1,4,33,34 70:4
75:21,29,30,34
76:2,6,14,17,25,29,33
78:9,16,18,29
79:1,14,22
80:3,13,14,20,23
82:15 83:7 84:8,24,25
87:24,32 88:12,16,19
89:8,10,13 90:28,3
action 19:3 22:11 23:11
29:12,19,26,32,33
31:18 37:32 38:4,7
40:14 42:15 44:10
73:20 77:22,25 81:1
84:5 90:4 91:13
102:21
actions 25:34 31:19
33:16 34:13 42:17
48:17 101:33
active 34:22
actively 16:9 17:2 28:10
activist 44:26
activities 50:14
actor 55:21
actors 22:8 23:10
acts 8:15 10:12 43:15
76:6,7,25 99:3
actual 5:19 44:11 48:11
59:15 87:12
actually 4:10,11 8:8
9:16,18 13:15 17:15
18:9,20 21:15 25:27
27:4,6 32:10 33:29
42:19 43:19 44:13,25
45:12,25 47:4,10 48:1
51:4,22 52:23,25
53:16 54:9,10,20
56:12 58:29,30 59:28
60:24 61:9 62:1,4,11
63:6 64:27
65:4,19,21,27 66:2,30
67:5 72:33 74:18
75:29
acumen 49:14
adapted 3:7
add 37:26 73:9
address 9:2 21:27 28:17
44:23,33 45:1 46:9
47:14
addressed 12:29 48:18
addresses 18:19
addressing 6:10 23:11
52:5
adds 100:15
adjournment 50:1
adjudication 97:18
administrative 6:13
20:10 27:11 99:13,33
100:20,21 102:21
admitted 80:6
admitting 100:8
adopt 6:23 7:30
adopted 35:27 96:14
adopting 6:13,21 8:8
12:12 39:13,15 88:32
adoption 7:17 20:2 29:19
adopts 23:10
adult 48:26,27 89:2,16
90:13 94:24
adults 88:26
advanced 41:2 85:21
advantages 101:5
adversarial 77:2
advising 1:30
advisor 1:17
advisory 1:27
advocate 44:27 85:22
advocates 5:17 21:7,34
44:22 68:3 94:3,10
97:6
advocating 92:13
affair 81:26
affairs 28:1 61:28 79:13
81:1,4
affect 17:29 44:4 51:8
affected 14:13 54:4
affects 45:32 54:4 56:31
afraid 97:34
after 1:10 25:24 28:31
80:21,22 89:23,30
95:23 97:3,4 100:9
afternoon 26:18 50:23
95:34
afterwards 94:28 102:9
again 2:28 3:11 4:24
6:1,14 8:8 13:8,10
15:25 18:26 22:28,32
23:14,22 27:2,10
29:23 33:2 36:30
42:7 49:31 50:22
52:31 60:9 61:21
65:20 86:34 88:10
92:34 96:25
against 12:29,32,34 13:4
15:33 23:3 25:21
26:2 37:19 41:16,28
42:30 49:17 59:21
68:6 77:23,31 84:8,10
age 42:29 91:13
agencies 21:16
agenda 20:33 45:15
92:34
agent 55:26
ago 47:5 53:20 66:20
83:1,23 87:15
agree 17:15 36:13 45:2
52:33 53:16 54:33
68:2,4,9,22 76:1
92:20
agreed 29:22 84:26
92:21
agreement 43:21,22
91:26 92:1
agrees 90:34
ahead 16:4 75:7
aids 8:19
aim 90:14 96:11 100:10
ain't 11:26
akin 88:2
alienate 49:6
align 41:7
all 1:16 5:6,12
6:2,28,30,33 8:8,13
10:1 11:9,33 12:2,29
13:5,13 14:2,26
15:3,28 18:23
19:6,27,29
20:6,7,9,10,27,30,33
21:1,2,6,30 22:22
23:34 24:6,29 25:32
27:16,23 32:15,18,28
36:22 38:3,8,12,18
40:17 41:26,28 46:21
47:33 48:16 49:33
50:25,26 51:19 52:1
allegation 30:28
alleged 80:12
alliance 96:11
allies 7:24
allocate 46:17
allocation 41:4,26 44:33
45:1
allocations 15:19 38:33
47:32
allow 2:14 12:6 24:20
30:4 50:22 56:17
63:5 66:10 71:12
100:30
allowances 32:17
allowed 20:4 45:11 65:31
76:29 80:7 86:4
89:16 97:10
allowing 9:27 73:19
allows 61:16 72:14 84:3
88:12 91:29
almost 81:33 86:13 88:34
90:20 93:13 98:16,17
100:29
along 27:2 72:32 94:9
99:34
alongside 73:25
already 4:7,14 10:28
27:9 32:3 33:7 44:10
50:5 51:2 61:1,20
62:1 87:2
also 3:5 5:4,19 7:32 12:6
14:12 15:31 26:20,25
28:19 30:32 34:25
36:11 37:5,20 40:6
41:30 42:24,30
44:7,25 45:14,17,24
46:21,32 47:34
48:3,4,7,9,24,25 49:1
50:16 51:1 54:24
55:22,24 56:13 57:17
58:9 59:21,27 60:28
61:19 62:3,10 64:6,9
66:30 67:1 68:4,20 7
alternate 28:28
alternative 16:21 28:26
33:1
although 24:13,18
43:4,26 56:7 60:8
88:5 94:1
always 5:11 11:27 30:11
31:9 33:25,32 34:5,6
35:31 36:1 37:31,33
66:32 69:4,11 76:26
85:30 97:9
amazing 26:27 65:29
68:25 91:34
ambiguities 71:14
amended 7:33 8:2
96:24,30 97:4 99:7
100:14
amendment 97:4
amendments 8:9
amnesty's 93:30
amnesty 12:31 13:3
87:11 91:4,11 93:30
95:8
among 8:3 18:11 47:9,13
93:5 94:13
amongst 91:18
amount 6:20 10:3,11
31:30 40:11 44:34
49:19 50:22 70:24
amounts 28:20
amplification 13:20,31
amputations 85:34
analyse 14:4 16:31 66:19
97:31
analysed 87:31
analysing 14:6
analysis 14:4,12 19:25
23:15 44:24,27,33
51:3 102:12
analytical 21:33
and
1:8,10,12,15,17,18,19
,23,24,25,28,29,30,31
,32,34
2:4,5,6,12,15,17,23,2
5,31,32,34
3:2,10,17,21,22,23,24
,29,33,34
4:3,4,7,10,12,16,17,1
8,19,20,24,25,26,28,2
9
5:2,4,12,15,16,17,19,
20,23,25,27,28,30,32
6:3,13,14,15,26,34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
7:3,7,12,13,15,22,24,
27,28,29,32,3
angle 75:26
animal 51:27,28
announcement 26:24
75:9,14
announcements 26:18
75:3
anorexia 79:10
85:13,20,23
another 9:6,19 18:23
22:32 24:24 29:5
31:3 43:22 49:1 56:9
60:13 63:19 64:27
67:8 92:33 100:6
answer 30:14 43:1
51:25,28 62:5,18
64:26 68:2 103:14
answering 14:15
answers 26:32 81:25
87:3
antecedence 2:30
anti 6:21 25:4,6,8 95:26
99:9,11,14
100:10,16,33,34
101:17 102:6,21
antiquated 3:12 87:23
anxiety 83:23
any 2:12 5:17 6:19,30 7:3
8:29 9:34 11:15
12:1,12 13:16
16:9,14,33
17:13,29,32,33
18:4,15 19:3 24:4
27:9,14 28:20 29:32
30:9,26 31:13 32:5
39:34 40:2,6 42:1,3
44:12 45:15,32 47:18
48:13 49:2,11 52:17
55:6 56:3 58:29 59:4
60:19 61:6 62:20
64:23,25 66:16,21
anybody 52:17 53:24
55:31 59:18 65:12
81:20
anyone 2:16 8:28 29:33
47:18 55:14 60:19
63:24,29 64:33
65:6,28 80:27 85:22
88:34 101:27
anything 4:12,13,32
13:12 15:33 63:22
67:9,18 71:5,12 80:27
anyway 2:20 31:29 46:14
55:5 64:23 72:3
apart 28:21 76:20 83:4
apartment 30:4 48:29
aperture 44:32
appeal 15:31
appear 11:21
appeared 56:31
applause 2:5 27:3 49:23
74:32,33
applicable 18:33,34
application 3:14 14:15
19:27 34:6 36:14
38:6 48:24 63:15
applied 6:3 13:26 29:18
53:21 55:11,14,15,16
59:4,5
applies 9:22 19:29 36:22
65:2
apply 9:11 60:34 67:26
76:34 84:27
applying 2:25 34:25
appoint 77:10 79:8 98:21
appointed 49:3 80:22,24
87:30 89:2
appointing 49:1
appreciate 53:32 58:28
approach 11:17 13:25,27
19:30,31,32
20:8,12,13,14 21:8,15
40:16 45:23 47:17
54:19
58:1,9,10,13,24,34
68:17 69:30 83:32
88:2,33 101:32
105
approached 66:25
approaches 19:30 44:7
58:25 59:3 76:14
83:33 84:10 88:1
approaching 78:25
appropriate 3:3 16:3
27:11 41:25 54:15
60:11 72:6
approved 88:13
arbitrarily 61:29
archaic 41:6,7,18
archived 4:25
are 1:5,11,22,23,34
2:1,3,21,23,28,31,32
3:2,6,22,33
4:3,5,6,16,29
5:10,12,23
6:9,10,12,23,29,33,34
7:5,7,8,11,12 8:12
9:21 10:2
11:9,14,23,32,33
12:4,5,7,8,9,15,16,18,
19,20,22,33
13:20,24,26,30
14:6,12,15,31
15:15,16,20,22,24,27
17:30 19:6,9,28,29,31
20:
area 40:12 44:34 45:34
49:18,19 51:4
54:11,15 59:2 69:25
79:19 88:5 95:25
areas 1:32 5:31 13:21
14:3 35:12 42:2
54:10 56:29,30 57:1,2
59:2 75:24 92:6
aren't 17:25 21:17 72:8
82:31 84:6
arena 42:6
arenas 23:11
argue 19:11,13 21:28
24:34 47:29 49:29
52:32 57:31 62:33
79:10
argued 49:29 59:3 69:6
arguing 3:28 41:24
argument 3:29 18:10
28:27 32:30 42:29,31
55:14 63:12 66:34
67:3 86:3
arguments 18:8,11
arise 51:3 85:12
arisen 55:19
arithmetic 19:22,24
armed 5:31
arose 24:25
around 2:14 3:7 6:18
10:17 12:7 17:21
19:9 20:17 30:21
31:22 32:19,30 33:8
34:20 35:9,24 37:7,19
39:29 42:27,30
44:20,27,33 45:4
47:15,17 49:2
50:25,29 51:1,12,22
60:19 61:23,32 66:14
67:21 68:15,33
69:13,14,21,22,23
70:5,9,25,29,33
71:25,34 73:7 77:5
78:
articles 3:14,15,17,21,33
4:1 16:13,15,32
37:5,6 68:32 69:16
articulating 4:6
ascertain 8:9
ask 2:16 10:2,17 11:18
19:6 52:31 62:15
74:14 94:11 100:1
101:25,26
asked 14:19 16:20 21:33
24:29 33:12
38:24,25,27 58:29
68:28 73:2 84:34
103:1
asking 10:19,23 14:20
24:27 43:5 55:7,12
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
64:22 68:26 76:21
90:12 94:5,15 103:24
asks 54:31 56:17
aspect 97:31
aspects 5:11 60:6 61:20
71:34
aspirational 71:18
assert 84:28 101:34
assess 7:19 16:33 19:3
30:4 83:14 86:7,8
assessed 79:30 80:2
81:22 82:2,31 83:26
assesses 21:22
assessing 5:25 65:19
86:10
assessment 19:23 21:11
78:14 81:13,23
82:1,5,16,26 83:17,22
84:14,15 89:7,24
90:13 97:25,26,27
103:6
assessments 80:16 81:12
82:1,17 84:8 86:10
assessor
82:2,5,6,7,11,12,27
assessors 84:33
assets 61:26,27 98:14
assistance 27:3
assistant 30:31 31:2
75:26
assistive 8:19
associate 1:16 75:19
assume 81:33
assumed 57:19
assuming 102:5
assumption 53:6
astonishingly 84:24
98:30
ate 32:24
attach 31:20 59:28 62:11
attaches 59:33 60:34
attained 5:10
attempt 5:6
attempting 4:4 6:20
attempts 34:16
attend 93:14 94:5
attending 94:18
attention 5:24,27 27:27
104:14
attorney 78:3 95:26
attractions 83:32
attributes 76:8
audience 74:24,25
audiences 50:32
authorities 28:31 30:14
authority 67:27 78:3,5
83:13 85:2 99:25
autism 83:3
autistic 83:22
automatically 70:3 81:33
autonomy 60:17,23,24
73:21 76:1
availability 8:18
available 7:32 8:4 11:10
14:7 27:19,22
28:10,12,24,26,28,30,
31 46:16
65:5,11,14,24 66:8
avoid 87:15 100:8
awarded 75:17
aware 27:30 49:18 65:14
101:22
awareness 6:33 12:7
37:8 46:33 47:2,9,12
85:2 91:18 93:20
away 12:17 18:10 26:8
34:18 46:20 56:8
65:14 66:23 70:19
74:9,10 96:9
awe 77:27
awful 88:6 104:16
ABCs 50:31
Advocacy 7:20 17:19,21
23:15
44:21,23,24,30,32,33
45:1 50:17 89:26
90:11 91:12 94:20
95:9,26
ADA 99:15
Africa 9:16,23 31:28
32:1 41:10 49:11
African 9:19
41:2,8,12,14
42:2,19,25,26 43:14
44:9 46:18,28 95:31
Aid 1:21
Alternatively 87:31
Alzheimer 91:13
American 4:27 18:10
21:14,22
Americas 95:31
Amsterdam 23:5,6
Anglo 69:32
Anna 40:18 50:6 56:29
57:13 58:26,31
59:5,10 60:26 61:4,31
62:29,33 64:19 73:10
74:32 76:3 83:33
86:34 87:2,6,9 90:23
94:1
Applebaum 78:28
April 93:24 94:5
Arabic 70:6
Article 3:16 5:25
6:1,3,5,6,9
7:7,15,19,27 8:12
12:2,19 16:6,14,17
17:19,21,22,29
18:4,9,11,19,27 19:27
22:14,17,20,32
23:20,24,34 25:27,28
27:8,10 28:7 29:29,32
30:18 32:12 36:32
37:5 40:27 48:21
49:27 50:3,25,31,34
51:10,11,15,23
54:8,30,31 55:6,28
56:3
Asia 95:25
Assistants 30:33
Asylum 57:13
August 69:8 90:16,18
Australia 11:33 19:17
95:9
Australian 1:29 19:30,31
20:6,9 21:8
B
babies 15:10
back 2:5,7 10:17 16:30
21:10 22:23 23:22
25:23 26:6,12,13 27:4
29:23 30:25
33:19,20,34 36:29
38:12 45:22 50:3
52:31,34 57:28 64:2
67:30 68:3,24
74:25,30 80:7 82:18
83:18 84:32 93:30
101:29 103:32
backed 41:12
background 50:33 59:14
backpacking 23:6
bad 11:26 46:29 58:15
91:1
bail 32:15
balance 41:10
ballot 10:34 27:19,24
bank 1:22 53:21,22
bankruptcy 55:3
bar 50:6
barriers 10:4 14:21 31:6
33:26 48:9,22
54:2,3,6 56:14 66:6
base 35:22
based 9:27 55:6,13,32
56:23 58:10,25 70:27
72:3 88:1,2 93:4,24
98:3,4 99:7,8,12,21
100:2,25
101:15,16,17
baseline 55:5,7 74:13
basic 39:3 76:28 96:23
99:6,17,21
basics 50:33 51:2
basis 7:3 18:12 19:4
21:20 24:22,23 25:4,6
40:27 54:29 55:11
60:6,8,32 71:34 72:3
74:19 78:9 79:16
81:19 84:15 86:18
94:5 102:9,30,31
battery 77:31
bay 24:29
bear 95:19 96:7
bearers 34:17,18
bearing 43:3
bears 86:21
beat 49:20
beautiful 47:22
became 17:22 83:2
become 1:23 33:18 67:17
76:17 83:13
becomes 40:2 46:30
49:29 64:15 65:20
becoming 62:6,7
bed 69:13
bedding 12:23
been 12:19 16:31
17:18,24 18:26,27,33
19:3,22,23,24 20:16
21:10 23:3 26:19,21
30:10,13 32:19
33:7,11,12,13,14 34:5
35:19,26,31 36:1,11
37:3,31,32,33 38:14
41:31 44:29 48:26
49:2,3,16,28
50:25,27,28 51:22
55:2,13,20 56:7,32
57:7,25,26 59:19,33
61:32 68:16
before 12:10 25:23 26:18
34:10,11 35:18 36:17
37:12 40:33 50:8
51:16,19 54:19,25
56:4 57:11,14,17
59:14,17,32
60:8,14,32
62:19,20,21,27
63:2,11 66:12 67:9
69:29,30 71:5,12,29
73:33 74:4 75:3,9,24
87:14 88:3,29 91:22
92:3 94:30
begin 32:1
beginning 3:27 6:1 43:30
84:12 91:6,17 96:4
97:1
begins 33:1
behalf 76:33 77:11 78:23
79:8
behaviour 86:22
behind 19:21 33:20
61:14 91:26 92:10
94:6,23,24 95:20
being 9:14 12:8,9 13:2,32
14:10,19 15:22,24
19:5,14 25:13 28:2,10
31:2,6 32:18
33:11,16,24 34:13
37:27 38:24,25,27
39:20,21 40:2,7
44:18,23 46:11 48:9
49:17 54:10 56:14
57:5 59:24 62:12
65:12 66:23 68:2,28
70:20 72:20,25 73:26
75:30 81:28 82:2
83:9 84:21
believe 19:20 30:11
32:28,29 37:12,13
43:18 49:9 53:26
54:9 62:3 98:23
102:14
believes 77:21
belongs 43:11,13
below 20:10 52:34 58:3
bend 72:17
benefits 65:23
besides 23:32
best 30:15 54:22
56:10,24 70:16 74:23
76:30,32,33
77:2,3,13,22,25,29,30
79:8,9 80:11 81:17
82:32 85:28 89:1
92:9
better 45:12 102:10,12
between 20:22 24:17
25:19,25,31 31:16
32:6 33:14,29 37:30
40:34 41:3,10 42:3
51:28 53:32 56:21
62:2,7,25 63:1 66:20
67:31 68:33 69:29
75:9 76:3 81:31 82:2
88:29 89:17 102:26
beyond 8:12 25:18,19
71:19
bias 54:13 59:14
big 2:5 27:32 62:11 84:13
96:23
biggest 69:28
bill 13:17 34:27 37:14
43:12 64:25,27
89:13,15 90:26 91:3
93:12,28 95:2
bills 89:30,32
binding 35:16 36:21
57:17 76:12,18
bit 3:23 4:34 16:5 18:21
21:8,12 23:1 24:34
25:11 31:16 33:8,20
36:1 40:17 42:24
44:11 47:16,17 51:29
52:24 55:8 56:27
57:23 59:14 60:5
61:19 62:1 64:21
68:33 70:23 72:17
75:9 80:26 104:7
bits 7:32 59:10 60:27
bittersweet 86:4
blind 27:19 67:5
blog 83:10,17
blows 76:20
blue 1:5
blunt 73:4
blurred 33:18,30
board 4:13 26:21 50:18
65:2 70:18
bodies 4:28 5:4 35:28
94:18,19
body 35:27 42:25 66:28
67:28 80:22,23
102:29,33
bogged 61:15
bogus 18:10
bomb 24:29
booming 80:13
both 1:11,12,28,34 2:6
4:27 5:23 8:6 17:24
36:11 37:29 49:26
55:8 69:24 71:3
73:25
box 26:20,26 40:23 74:7
79:33
brain 78:27 86:25 91:13
breach 24:21 25:6
break 1:10 2:5 25:23,24
26:6,12,16 27:5 46:4
55:1 74:30 75:1,8,9
83:3,4
breaking 12:1 47:2
breaks 2:17 16:20 95:18
breeze 72:17
bring 4:13 15:1 49:33
62:14 64:23 66:25
72:32 74:25,26 77:23
81:7 90:9 91:6,8 94:6
102:5 103:5
bringing 17:27,28 35:22
36:6 45:25 49:9 87:9
92:12 104:2
brings 36:4,5
broad 58:32 91:14
broadcasting 8:3
broaden 44:32 67:21
broadening 67:16,19
broader 19:25 44:4
103:34
broadly 49:32 59:32
broke 11:18
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
broken 81:30 82:11
brought 1:4 7:23 52:34
53:3 54:8 61:24
91:24 93:19
budge 27:11
budget 31:15,18,20
44:24,25,33 45:1
98:8,29,30,31
budgetary 15:19 30:29
38:33 44:27 47:32
budgets 46:17 50:16
build 10:26 31:25 33:11
37:6 65:34 66:5
71:19 91:4 92:3 93:4
building 9:14 11:2
14:8,10 17:23 30:4
34:30 35:1,3,6,23
37:2 65:5,17 87:11
91:24
buildings 9:12 10:18,31
12:13 14:3 15:18
built 12:8 72:20 84:8
bullet 93:32
bunches 67:20
bundled 80:7
bungalow 84:32 85:5
burden 15:25
19:13,15,21 63:8
burner 38:12
businesses 22:9
but 1:10 2:15,17,20,29
3:26 4:7,8,12,14 5:3
6:29 7:5,32 9:10
10:30 11:2,8 12:8,20
13:2,6,11,25,32
14:6,8 15:7,22,30,31
16:3 17:12 18:11
20:9,26,28
21:1,3,5,18,29,30
23:29,32 24:17,18,33
25:1,7,14,33 26:4,33
27:1,6,25 28:19,28,34
30:12,14 32:1,3,20,33
33:1
buy 32:26 41:26
Basically 9:33 14:19
25:26 34:33 62:16
70:18 71:4 72:14
89:31 92:19 93:19
95:2
Because 3:11 5:16
6:11,24 7:30 9:17
10:23 12:27 13:10
14:6,9,12,13 15:1,22
17:24 19:11 23:5
24:23,25,28 25:6,28
26:6,13,34 27:30
28:24,27 30:15
32:2,18,28 34:3
35:11,18 36:12,30
38:13,15 41:23
42:6,12,31
43:2,4,19,20,23,24
44:2,17 45:22,23
46:19,22,27,29
Beijing 29:23
Belgium's 47:29
Belgium 47:29
Berkeley 95:24
Beside 48:3
Bloom 31:3
Booth 80:34
Braille 28:20,29,30,31
29:1 43:4
British 91:24,26
Brothers 50:18
Buro 41:4,15
C
caffeine 58:31
calculate 29:32,33
calculated 29:12,26
call 58:5 79:6 80:34
90:17 91:25
called 20:28 21:21 43:20
50:6 76:33 77:10,20
79:3,13,15,26,29
80:18,29 81:5 82:14
106
85:19 86:20,25 87:24
90:16 102:31
calls 56:17 69:27 90:4
came 24:28 27:27 30:10
41:1 47:7 53:1 60:16
70:23 75:29,32
84:25,33 87:12 89:23
90:23
campaign 89:26
campaigns 22:27
can't 10:26 14:13
18:22,23 24:14
27:29,30 30:25 33:23
38:3 42:1,12 44:20
47:3 48:14,15,28,29
50:4 53:4 55:1 63:1
64:10,17 66:12 72:4
74:7 85:17 102:32
104:22
candidacy 25:7
candidate 24:24 25:7
candidates 25:1,2
cannot 9:21 12:8 14:8
39:6,7 49:6,8 58:21
72:3 99:21 101:9,10
cans 100:24
capable 80:21 89:3
capacities 35:1 71:33
capacitive 97:25
capacitors 85:17
capacity 2:10,15,24 3:6
6:6,12 9:14 12:2 15:8
17:23 19:10 23:16
24:17,18,19 34:30
35:3,6,12,15,23 37:2
40:12,22,23,24,30,31
45:4,6,8,9,16,18
46:3,14
47:3,18,20,23,34
48:1,4,5,11,24,25,26,
27,31
50:8,9,15,21,28,34
51:7
53:2,17,18,20,26,32,3
3 54:3,15,32,33 5
caps 61:2 79:6
captioners 26:24
captions 26:25,27
card 53:21,22,23,24
cards 37:12
care 1:22 11:6 22:18
28:3,4 48:26 53:23
75:19,24,25,30,31
77:22 78:1,4,13
80:7,19 83:2,10,12
84:6,16,31 85:1,2
cared 34:21
careful 22:22
carefully 7:28,32 8:7
carer 1:28
carers 11:33,34
case 7:15 9:15,16 12:4,5
15:28 18:22,31 23:28
24:25
41:5,13,14,15,33
66:20,21,28 67:30
74:30 79:2,9,10 82:14
84:23,24,34 85:19,30
86:9 96:28 97:1
102:24 104:20
cases 12:10,11 21:29
34:10,11 51:22 77:5,7
78:7 82:15 84:26
85:32,34 86:1 96:1
cast 10:34 27:24
categories 98:13,15,16
categorisation 3:20
categorised 3:22 57:25
58:10
category 43:19,20,25
60:3
caused 78:30
central 35:17 64:3
centre 1:8 50:7,13,28
75:20 94:9
centres 88:13
century 103:21
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
certain 2:32,33 14:21
15:18 18:29 21:24
26:33 31:21 35:27
37:26 39:13 46:28
50:22,23 54:16,20,33
56:33,34 58:3,6,18,19
59:1 64:10,11 88:33
91:29
certainly 10:11 13:6,11
16:23 18:28 41:30
44:31 46:10 47:26
61:24 67:34 68:9
83:26
certified 88:17
chagrin 21:3
chaining 46:20
chalet 30:2
challenge 25:5 32:23,24
65:21 79:31 88:20
90:31 92:14 94:1,28
challenges 35:15 44:32
56:2 93:10 94:26,27
101:31,32
chance 85:25
change 19:32 31:8 35:8
39:22 49:33 51:4
52:30 90:8,31,32
94:30 96:15,26 100:9
104:1,19
changed 75:13 90:6
96:25 99:8
changes 1:9
changing 68:15
characteristic 81:29,33
characteristics 14:21
charge 11:24
charged 11:19
charges 32:24
charismatic 103:25,26
charter 37:20
41:2,8,11,12
42:2,19,26,27 43:14
cheaper 33:34
check 102:25
cheeky 21:14
cheery 79:16
child 3:30 9:30 18:18
37:18 66:23 104:21
children's 82:19
children 9:27 13:21
16:10 17:4,10
18:19,20,21 37:6
66:27
chip 18:9
choice 14:10 46:21
64:3,12 77:30 80:16
81:9 82:20 84:33
85:33 86:8
choices 81:18
103:34,3,4,7
choose 43:1 79:15
chop 67:22
chose 103:1,2
chosen 103:3
circle 56:33
circumstances 15:28
29:1 67:26 86:22
cities 93:15 96:23
citizen 67:22 101:33
citizens 52:27 56:34
city 96:23
civil 3:21,22 4:18,20 8:2
11:12 12:5 13:18
15:7 16:27 23:19
33:14,18,23,30
35:18,21,22,26,28,31,
32 36:1,4,6,16,34
37:30,31 40:12
42:3,11 43:20,22
59:20,24,34 60:2
61:33
62:2,21,23,25,27,34
63:4,9,11 69:29 70:1
98:10,13 99:12,19
100:8,33 101:1,17
102:6,16,
claim 21:1 36:7 39:16
55:31
claiming 100:25
clarification 10:21 41:10
42:1,13 43:2 102:7,11
clarifies 27:6
clarify 15:29 24:34 42:3
67:4 102:6
clarity 35:1,7,12,15
class 34:13 36:22,23
48:17
classes 34:7
classification 52:32
classified 13:3
classify 52:7
clause 43:7,8,9 73:7
clear 17:27 18:22
45:23,31,33 52:25,28
53:27 67:25 68:24
83:14 85:12 92:33
103:25
clearly 4:12 6:2,15
7:4,19 16:13 18:10
31:17 41:9 46:9,32
74:25
cleverer 79:34
clients 62:14
climate 96:16
close 12:20 63:15
closed 21:4 36:24
closely 7:29 16:9
closing 31:19
coalition 7:23 87:9,11
90:23 91:4,24,25
92:3,4,18,27
code 8:2 9:24 98:10,13
102:22
coffee 1:10 2:5,17 25:11
26:12,16 75:1,6 95:18
cognitive 53:6,12 54:2,4
69:23,25 73:3 76:8
102:30
cohort 17:26 39:34
cold 1:6
colleague 32:4
colleagues 84:13
colour 10:32 40:20
coma 51:18 53:1
combine 45:11
come 1:24 2:5 11:34
12:10 25:23 26:6
32:22,27 33:3,19,20
36:29,31 41:9 42:30
43:26 44:9,16 53:2
56:26 57:24 61:32
65:24 68:24 73:28
75:4 79:4 80:16
101:15
comes 14:3 18:16 48:6,21
53:33 54:24 64:2
66:34 67:9 75:26
coming 9:15 19:14 24:30
26:11 27:30 31:17
47:4 49:24 65:15,17
92:6,7 93:12,20,26
101:24
commenced 75:24
comment 31:5 32:22
40:34 41:9 42:1
44:15 54:1 63:21
73:16,17,29
comments 68:2,25
commitment 15:19 90:9
98:3 104:1
committed 11:21
committee's 20:33
committee 6:15 16:22
20:28 34:10,11,12,33
42:32 49:16 56:13
61:6,31 73:13
87:30,33 90:16,17,20
92:19 93:25 95:25,27
96:19,20 99:28,31
100:1
committing 90:9
common 58:24 69:30,32
86:1
commonly 58:16 77:10
communicate 58:27
78:20 82:6 86:14
103:27
communicating 83:21
communication 11:4
81:30 82:9 103:25
communities 14:21
39:23 66:13
community 2:24
5:23,28,30 6:6
7:21,23,24 14:19
15:32 17:3,7 21:2
25:31 29:29
30:14,22,30,32
31:7,16,21 32:5,34
34:22,23 37:21
43:10,13 46:22,25,33
47:10,12,15 56:13
63:19 65:16,34
66:2,14 67:14,16,29
75:19 94:6 98:31
103:33
companies 7:8 100:19
company 7:13 100:20
compared 67:28
compel 25:18
competent 67:27
complaint 48:13,15,16
57:32
complaints 25:10 48:16
completed 58:19 75:21
completely 11:15 47:20
68:17
complex 67:17 76:2
102:23
compliance 5:24,25 7:20
9:4 15:16 20:26 21:1
35:9,10 38:30
compliant 21:25 56:22
80:23 90:12 95:7
complicit 53:13
components 2:29
composed 100:23
comprehensive 3:30 6:19
7:19 8:8 23:11 80:9
83:25 99:15
compromises 74:26
computer 26:25
conceded 17:14
concept 33:24 34:18
36:25 37:7 45:23
52:31 67:22 72:25
79:15,23,27 81:12
conception 53:13
concepts 34:20 67:4
concern 67:24 81:11
90:8
concerned 17:9 40:17
45:19 68:11 75:29
103:33
concerning 16:8 30:8
41:33
concerns 9:3 71:32
concluding 73:15
concrete 8:27 15:16
38:26,29
conditions 12:33 13:2
22:24 41:25,28
conducive 17:30
conduct
29:5,9,12,19,20,23,30
30:8,28 77:2
conference 27:27
29:22,23 69:11,13
95:8,10
conferences 90:3
93:19,24
confirm 80:22
confirmed 88:18
conflict 5:31 63:23 67:25
72:28
confliction 55:19
conform 74:1
confused 61:2,19
confuses 27:6
confusing 60:31 68:22
congress 97:3
conjunction 91:4
conjure 86:19
conjuring 86:3
connect 66:1
connected 77:22
connections 25:25
conscious 16:4
consensual 81:16
consensus 69:5,6,7 71:13
consent 80:21
consequences 58:15,28
59:7 82:11
conservative 96:15,25
100:8
consideration 7:6 67:34
considerations 104:17
considered 6:26 7:28
considering 27:5 49:7
consistency 7:33 21:22
consists 78:18
constantly 58:32 93:31
constitute 6:14
constitution 19:34
28:19,20,25 42:20
44:10
constitutional 49:12
97:22,28 100:33
constitutions 42:28
constraints 41:23,24,34
construct 62:31 76:6
86:8
constructed 69:5
construction 69:4 70:34
71:14
constructive 32:22,27
consult 16:9 17:12,13
consultation 16:14
17:3,6 20:16,17 49:28
88:27
consulted 20:8 49:27
consults 1:20
contact 79:15
contain 29:9
contained 17:31 39:25
50:15 89:14
contains 20:9 88:19
content 6:33 35:2 62:34
contentious 35:31 36:1
68:31 69:16
contest 24:12,13,26 25:1
context 2:18,24 4:5 6:12
9:14 13:21,28 15:28
19:22 22:27 24:7,10
26:3 30:7,28 32:10,21
34:28 42:19,31 44:23
46:18 51:23 52:24
55:3 60:14 65:2 74:3
103:22
contexts 8:4 19:24 79:3
95:31
contingent 18:21 82:2
continually 34:34 57:16
continue 2:12 26:7
continued 26:7
continuing 2:9
continuum 38:5 42:14
57:5
contract 98:13,14 102:17
contracts 55:26
contrary 40:27
contrasted 83:33
contravenes 21:28
contribute 5:30 67:1
contributing 85:13
contribution 28:8
control 26:33 48:30
61:28 81:26 101:18
controlling 75:31
controversial 3:10 42:27
77:5 91:1
convened 91:11
convenient 9:31 98:24
conventions 3:31 17:34
60:7
conversation 81:30
82:11 88:25
conversations 32:11
49:24
convert 31:30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
convey 13:16
convicted 55:1,2
convincing 86:9
coordinator 75:25
copies 87:13 92:15
copy 21:9 28:20 50:25,26
59:9
coram 89:26
core 6:31 13:16,26,31
14:32 37:13 39:2,7,8
40:6 70:24
corner 101:25
corporations 51:23
correct 88:22
cost 31:29,30 32:19,33
costs 32:20,27,32
could 1:22 15:22,23
21:30 29:19 30:17
32:8 39:17 41:29
43:22 47:8,31 55:14
58:5,6 59:4 61:33
66:19,25,29 67:17
70:31 71:7,17,18
72:32 76:34 78:12
79:3,15 82:32
84:19,20 87:19 89:28
91:8 92:9,13,20,28
93:30,32 94:11,21
103:25
couldn't 33:2 70:26
82:27,28,31 83:5,20
94:15,19
count 10:25
counted 54:21
countries 1:19 3:27 4:29
6:18,21,23 14:25
20:21 30:20 31:5,28
32:2,3,4,6,7,8,10,21
43:25 49:9,10,16
57:24 65:27 69:21
70:6,13,26 73:15 74:1
98:27 104:20
country 3:27 9:19
14:7,17,21,25
15:1,14,18 20:27
23:34 27:30,32
28:15,19 30:26 32:15
41:27,29 42:20 45:15
46:4,13 47:20
48:12,13,14,17 62:14
65:27,29,31
66:5,7,9,19,27 73:15
98:33
couple 10:17 11:32 21:10
27:4 60:25 77:27
101:27
course 2:15 4:28 20:33
21:2 24:26 28:33
41:1,23 44:4,24
52:19,22 54:1 58:19
61:13 64:3 65:4
77:22,25 88:22 95:5
102:16 103:16
courses 84:5
court 4:27,28 9:14,16
11:1,2,19,21,29,30
12:9 14:9 24:27,29,30
26:19,20
41:22,23,26,27 49:12
51:22 58:10 61:25
66:21,23,25 67:30
76:33,34
77:2,6,7,10,33
78:3,7,12 79:2
81:6,11 82:16 83:6
84:25,26,27 85:26
87:23,25,31,32 88:4,7
89:8,18 91:31
97:2,4,8,14,15
courthouse 9:17
courthouses 10:27
11:12,14,15,16
courtrooms 12:11
courts 10:23 12:7 15:2
42:22 46:32 55:25
89:5
covenant 13:18,19 59:20
covenants 2:34 13:18
107
cover 3:28 51:6 60:24
79:22
covered 13:6 62:3
crafted 71:25,26
crafty 71:34
create 4:12 45:19 49:33
71:13 72:13 77:16
created 18:26 26:24,25
48:22 76:33 101:34
creating 70:25,30 81:17
credit 49:21 53:21,22
61:28
cried 66:22
crime 11:21 55:1,2
criminal 8:2 11:29,30
12:4 100:33
crisis 90:1,8
criteria 76:8 78:21
101:31 102:18,22
critical 54:30 85:14,15
critique 16:22
cross 17:3
crosscutting 5:25 6:1
28:21,22
crucial 53:33
cultural 3:22,23 4:19,20
7:28 13:19 15:5
22:32 23:3,8 33:15,31
37:31,32 42:4,8,32,34
43:18,19,22,27 82:7
culturally 56:27 64:20
65:25
curious 98:12 99:25
current 87:7
currently 1:15 50:7 56:7
58:9 65:31 88:11
89:8
cuss 18:15
custom 17:34
customs 6:14
cut 18:28 19:6
32:16,17,19 73:9
cutting 32:15
Cabinet 95:27
Cairo 29:22
California 95:24
Can 2:23 8:32 9:7,22,28
11:8,18 12:27 14:9,34
15:4,23,31 18:3
19:16,30 20:17,18
21:5,11 22:12,19,29
26:25,26,27
27:23,24,25
28:10,18,20,27
30:12,13 31:8,20
32:22 33:27 36:13
37:9,24 38:12,20
41:10 42:33,34
43:1,3,17,26
44:3,7,18,21 45:14
46:19,34 47:1,23
Canada 10:19 20:16,20
49:11
Canadian 20:13,14,15,20
Canadians 21:9
CDLP 50:7 104:24
CEDAW 59:26 60:6 62:3
Charity 34:19 50:18
Cheryl 95:9
Chief 49:14
Christine 91:24,34
CHAIR 1:9 15:30 24:20
25:11,23 26:6
28:13,15 32:8,32 33:6
34:33 49:20 50:3
64:13 74:23 75:3
86:30 95:19,24 96:7
101:22 102:2 103:12
104:14
Columbia 91:24,26
Commission's 88:26,29
Commission 10:12 27:21
46:6 80:19 88:32
89:15,17,19,32
94:18,19,21
Commissioner 1:21
23:15
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
Conclusion 84:33 101:14
104:26
Consider 80:23 81:23
Constructing 86:4
Convention 1:17,29
2:1,4,29,31 3:30,31
4:24,30 8:15,21
10:20,25 13:16,20,31
16:7,25,29,32
17:29,33
18:34,9,15,18,22,29
19:5 20:21 21:15
33:21 34:16,34 35:1
36:21,29,30,31
37:18,19 42:25 44:1
49:5 51:10 57:32
59:21 60:13 61:5
64:23 69:12 70:5
71:28 72:33 8
Costa 70:4
Council 20:5,6
CPR 38:3 40:34 41:3
CRPD 2:13,14,21 3:34
4:3,4,19,23
5:2,3,6,8,15,24
6:5,15,26,34
7:1,17,20
8:23,24,27,28,29,32
9:4,25 10:15,16 11:28
13:9 14:6 16:13,18,22
17:19 18:4,8,19,28,34
19:5,27,29 20:17,34
21:23,30 28:34 33:34
34:3 35:15,26
36:24,25 37:2
39:25,26 41:11 42:31
44:32 4
D
dad 83:1,5
daily 97:10
damages 83:9
danger 30:16
dangerous 65:19
data 37:8 98:29
date 15:18 28:19 31:21
daughter 32:18 46:29
daughters 31:1
day 3:29 16:4 20:21
21:5,30 45:27 48:18
53:5 74:15,31 89:9
101:22
days 11:7 49:24 53:20
97:4 101:24 102:33
deaf 7:21,23 25:15 27:22
deal 20:16 21:29 42:1
65:22
deals 76:2
dealt 70:6 71:32 102:4
dear 19:3
death 84:5 98:14
debate 14:1 37:11
debates 37:26
decades 85:20
deceiving 87:30
decide 13:8,11 29:6
47:22 63:32 64:31
78:1 83:5 84:6 89:24
decided 26:19 77:7 82:21
83:14 88:21,25 89:27
91:4 92:23,27
decides 63:27 64:6
deciding 64:15
decision 15:28 16:8 25:5
47:21 50:9,15
55:13,30,31,32,34
56:5,8,9,12,14,16
57:26,27,33
58:1,14,15,16,18,21,2
7,28,29,30,31
61:3,10,16 63:2,34
64:1,10 66:15 67:15
68:9
70:23,25,26,28,29
71:6,33
72:15,16,21,25
73:21,25,29,30
76:7,8,16,22,32
77:1,8 78:4,17,19
decisions 24:3 56:2,19,22
57:17,29 58:5,7 59:7
64:8 65:7,31 68:13
70:16 74:17,18
76:11,12,15,18,29,33
77:10,12,16,17 78:8
79:16 81:2,17 84:5,14
85:21,31
86:2,11,18,20 88:4,7
89:2,8,9 91:30
92:4,18
102:26,27,30,31
103:9,10
declarations 3:2 21:24
declare 84:4
deep 83:22
deeper 51:1
deeply 2:14 6:7
defence 77:20,21,23 78:5
89:1
defendants 12:4
defensible 81:5
define 64:16 66:31,32
67:4,22 73:27
defined 67:1 83:7 99:8
defines 78:16 99:7
defining 56:16 64:16
definitely 28:22 40:32
68:3
definition 36:20,22 37:16
56:12 73:28 87:24
99:8
definitions 66:31,33
73:28
delay 10:15
delayed 75:7
delegate 27:28
delegation 1:29 70:4
deleted 97:5,33
deliberate 38:26,29
delve 6:6 51:1 68:33
demand 101:11
dementia 80:6
democratic 35:34
demonstrate 15:19 25:3
39:8 40:7 82:20
demonstrations 53:5
denial 14:24 28:20
53:17,18,20,26 93:5
denied 25:6 48:26
57:8,17 90:27
denies 40:31
deny 24:15 25:17 28:29
38:19 47:3 58:16
denying 24:18 46:21
102:15
departments 20:26,29
69:17 95:11
departure 57:32
depend 66:15
dependent 15:34 67:20
depending 58:30,32 66:9
depends 24:22 65:26
deprivation 57:19 79:14
87:21 88:1
deprive 57:3 70:20
deprived 61:29 83:9 97:1
depriving 65:30
deputies 77:16
deputy 77:10,11,15
78:3,11
derogation 17:32 18:14
described 60:1 73:32
84:12 87:18 88:34
90:28
describes 6:3
description 60:13
deserve 59:1
design 39:31,33 40:3
designate 91:29,30
designed 1:18 8:16 61:25
designing 27:18
desire 56:19
desperately 81:7
despite 48:30
destiny 81:26
destroy 18:4
detail 21:22 29:27 57:23
detailed 29:15 31:11
detained 41:17 88:13,19
detaining 58:21
detention 41:7,18
88:12,16,19,21
determination 43:15
56:23 101:31 102:1
103:14,28 104:2,6,7,9
determinative 85:19
determine 18:30,33
102:8
determines 79:2
determining 78:11
develop 15:10 45:12
46:16 50:17
73:16,20,25 92:27
developed 3:2 32:6,21
34:3 97:27
developing 32:2 66:14
103:21
development 6:16
8:16,17 13:10 16:7
17:2 29:22 40:11
45:32 57:32
developmental 53:7
developments 95:34
develops 37:18
device 26:28
devices 8:19
diabolical 84:31
diagnoses 78:25
diagnosis 58:3,13 64:11
dichotomy 33:13
dictate 50:22
did 2:29 3:29 4:32 7:30
10:3 12:15,16 15:32
17:12 19:32 20:4
21:15 41:26,28 47:33
49:12 66:21 70:33
73:28 87:10 90:19,25
91:24 93:18 97:15
101:30 102:9,25,31
didn't 2:20 4:11 17:13
21:9 23:32 32:33
34:13 59:13 63:22
66:22,26,27 69:11
71:12 73:24 79:11
82:26,27 84:31
85:9,10 89:33 91:5
92:21 101:33 104:2
die 85:5,26,34
difference 21:9 32:6
37:30 42:3 62:11
69:29 89:17 94:13,22
different 4:11,30 10:32
11:3,8 13:12,24,26,27
21:16 22:28,29 25:17
32:15 36:15 37:33
41:16,19 43:15 44:7
50:32
52:1,6,7,9,14,15,16,2
3,30 53:13 55:30,32
56:21,26
57:7,24,25,26
62:14,25,26 74:27
79:4 82:7 86:14
89:14,20,28 92:20,21
93:10,15 94:14 95:31
96:6
differentiation 4:19
differently 52:7 66:9
difficult 31:2,27 45:18
64:15,16 70:29,33
83:3 84:19 86:2,14
93:14,16 94:32
101:11
difficulty 42:30
dig 2:14
dignity 51:34 52:2
digression 43:1
dimensional 5:30
diplomacy 69:4
diplomatic 37:27
direct 30:33 32:19,32,33
directed 40:2
direction 6:21 24:28,29
directive 42:21
directly 17:11 26:25,27
99:21 100:25
director 48:27
disabilities 6:29
8:13,19,20 9:3
12:4,27,29 13:2,4,26
16:1,8,10,26 17:5,30
18:19,21,23
22:6,12,18,23,28
23:4,12,27 24:6 25:13
26:2 27:25
30:19,21,27,32 32:5
33:21,24,27
34:4,17,19,26,31
35:2,4,17,33
36:1,9,20,22 37:1
39:30 40:7,29,32
41:17 45:32 46:1,6 47
disability
1:8,15,16,17,19,21,27
,28,31,32 3:1,12 4:5,6
5:5,17,28,29
6:15,16,19,21,24,28,2
9 7:3,21,23,24 9:27
10:3 11:3 12:24,26,28
13:22,25,28,32 14:2
15:30,32 16:27
17:3,12,24,27 18:10
21:2,6,17 23:29
24:23,27 25:5,6
28:1,10 30:3,15,24
32:24,25,28 33:29
disabled 1:18 11:1 16:28
24:25 25:1 36:4,7
59:6 68:9
disadvantage 37:7
disadvantaged 5:28
disadvantages 101:9
disappearances 13:24
discharge 80:6
disciplines 84:18
disclaimer 62:6
discourse 17:26,28 35:19
46:1
discover 2:23
discovered 66:26
discriminate 23:3 24:14
25:21
discriminated 25:4
discriminating 26:2
discrimination 3:28 5:31
6:14,15,16,19,21,24,2
8,30,31,34 7:3,5 8:34
10:3 15:23 19:11
24:7,27 25:4,6,8 26:3
37:7,16,17 39:18
43:16 44:1 59:21
95:26 96:30 98:34
99:9,11,14,24,26,27,2
9,32
100:10,16,25,33,34
101:3,7,17
102:3,4,6,21
discriminator 102:20,23
discriminatory 10:3,5,10
23:1 78:31
discuss 21:3 32:13 50:20
92:15
discussed 92:25 95:11
discussing 59:33 64:26
discussion 2:21 4:17 21:2
43:24 49:15 50:3
51:6 53:3 54:29 61:9
69:22 70:25 83:29
91:11 96:31
discussions 20:34 53:4
61:32 68:21
disentangle 5:11 84:14
disjoint 102:26
dismal 85:27
disobedience 35:11
disorder 88:16,18
dispel 22:28
disposal 44:26
disproportionate 15:25
19:13,15,21,23,26
disproportionately 54:4
55:16 59:5
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
disquieted 86:32
dissertation 32:9
distinct 52:18
distinction 3:23 4:19
24:17 31:17 40:34
41:2,4 51:28 52:28
53:32 55:9 56:21
62:6,7 63:1,14,25
76:3
distinctions 62:12,24
distressed 83:2
disturbance 78:27
diverse 50:32 92:6
diversion 97:18,19
diversity 13:25 17:3,7
36:11 40:1 49:10
divided 26:21
division 62:2
divorce 66:20 97:10
doctor 75:17 77:28,29
78:12 80:22,25 82:21
88:18
doctors 9:27 80:23
document 3:7,10,12
13:14
documented 52:27 59:34
documenting 12:32,34
13:4
documents 2:33 3:1 4:8
13:20 23:14
does 6:25 8:33,34 14:8
15:28,30 18:1,3 19:5
22:14,18 24:20 28:29
29:18 30:18 32:13
34:17 36:21,31
38:11,25 40:5 41:8
42:17 43:24
51:25,26,29 52:17
53:1,2,17,27 54:24,26
58:5 59:18 64:33
69:5 71:22 72:14
80:27 98:27 99:19,34
100:5,20,30 103:29
doesn't 11:1 13:16 29:2
42:3,21 56:2,17
60:17,18 61:3 65:6
66:17 70:3 76:26
81:12 86:27
doing 2:20 4:13 12:8
13:12 31:1,3 33:2
41:1 50:27,29 57:24
58:1 67:19 70:15,16
75:4,6 79:27 81:7
84:13 103:7
domain 47:1
domestic 4:28 6:11
18:28,29 42:31 49:17
dominated 73:3,4
domination 75:22
don't 1:4 3:6 4:34 9:19
11:19,34 13:12,27
20:14,16 24:23 27:6
28:16 29:6 30:14
31:3 32:4,27,28,29,31
35:6,11,22 38:15
40:29 42:13 43:4,27
46:15,28 48:16
53:8,18,21,22
55:16,31 57:5 58:6
59:1,25 62:33 63:15
64:14,17,18
65:13,15,21 66:9,33
67:8 68:23 73:27
done 2:20 6:26,33 8:7
34:33 42:11,12
44:23,34 49:18
50:31,32 57:26,31
59:26 62:13 66:9
67:33 87:23 88:20
89:18 92:5 93:13,30
95:16
door 94:31
doors 12:22
double 37:7
down 17:10,11,13,14,15
19:14 29:34 31:29
32:27 36:13,17,18
61:15 63:16 65:19
108
66:34 67:4 81:30
82:11 83:3 87:4,13
draft 6:28 12:26 70:8
73:32 89:13 96:33
drafted 6:25 63:26
drafters 2:33 4:4
92:26,30 93:32
drafting 3:10,27 4:5,12
5:16,17 6:18 13:12
17:23 51:11 61:5,22
68:20,24,30 71:2
92:25 94:13
drafts 6:29,30 70:5
drag 32:27
draw 27:27
drawn 37:19 69:6
draws 102:30
dream 50:7
drive 45:15
driving 39:29
drop 26:20,26 79:33
due 81:30 90:8
during 2:17 3:10 6:7
13:11 17:23 21:2
51:11 68:32 90:24
duties 40:14 43:10,14
44:15
duty 9:7,9 37:32 38:4,7
42:15
dynamic 6:2 81:31
dynamics 82:1
Declaration 2:34 13:18
43:31 59:20
Declaring 55:3
Degener 95:10
Department 20:25,30
80:5,10 84:13 89:23
DFI 95:10
Dimassio 102:29
District 97:2
DPOs 5:16,20 6:26 8:6
16:15,16,17,23
17:2,4,5,9 44:16
DTS 1:22
Dublin 14:14 93:16
E
each 14:19 20:25,29,34
21:3 22:30 29:9
36:31 48:16 51:8
75:8 79:16
eager 90:33
ear 95:17
earlier 3:31 4:8 16:30
33:34 34:26 45:31
55:21,22 58:26 60:1
73:2 88:1 92:10
early 92:18
easier 36:32
easily 33:23 71:30 98:21
103:27
easy 5:11 12:9 55:11
63:15 71:24 101:6
102:23
eat 85:17
economic 3:21,23
4:18,20 13:19 14:25
15:4 33:15,31 34:22
37:30,32 41:3
42:4,8,20,28,32,33
43:18,19,27,29 44:10
62:2,25 90:1,8
edges 78:7
educate 27:24
educated 48:7
education 17:25 35:20
38:12,19,20
39:2,3,12,13,15,16,18
43:24 47:5,6,7,15
55:33 68:32 91:23
effect 9:22 43:3 47:27
55:8,33 85:17
effective 12:3
effectively 34:4,30 48:32
88:3
effects 75:31
effort 6:11 8:6
efforts 34:30
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
either 16:33 28:20 89:31
104:19
elaborate 4:4,19 61:33
64:20
elaborated 61:6
elaborating 99:28
elaboration 41:10
elect 24:4
elected 24:5 35:32,33,34
election 24:13,20 25:7
97:1,4,15,18,25
101:14
elections 24:26 25:1,2
27:16
electoral 9:24 25:9
27:21,25 46:6,7
element 6:31 8:34 19:12
35:17 42:4,8 46:13
70:5
elements 6:29,34 19:25
20:9 29:9 37:18
38:18,19,24 40:24,27
69:33 71:17,32
eliminate 7:3
eliminated 7:6
elimination 59:21
else's 56:23
else 40:20 45:23 51:29
54:22 70:27,28 79:20
81:20 89:30
elucidation 67:29
embed 39:33
embedded 39:30 66:16
70:13,15
emerged 56:13
emergence 56:32
emerging 4:27
emotional 102:30
emotions 86:19
emphasis 6:15 51:24
emphasising 13:30 54:18
emphatic 70:30
empirical 80:2,16,28
84:12
employed 48:29
employee 100:24,26
employer 100:24,26
employers 102:20
employment 96:29
100:13,16
empower 47:34 70:19
empowered 72:31
empowering 60:31 67:29
72:9 76:1 103:31
empty 40:23
enable 62:32 90:10,11
92:22
enabling 23:29 79:27
90:14
enact 101:17
enacted 28:18,19,32
96:24,29 99:3,6
100:9,13
encompassed 55:27
encounter 34:26
encourage 2:17 83:11
encouraging 68:27
end 16:4,5 21:4 26:5 30:5
33:9 43:23 45:27,29
64:17 66:22 74:10
86:31,34 87:5,12
88:28 95:19 102:8
ended 89:9
ending 64:32 86:4
enforce 26:3 36:21 55:26
enforced 13:24 72:10
enforcement 88:6
engage 17:26 21:3 36:1,2
44:22 72:23 104:17
engagement 16:27 20:2
35:18,26,31 36:4,16
37:1
engaging 20:6 36:18
44:31 72:27
engine 32:26
enhanced 12:7
enjoy 28:5 29:26 30:12
33:24,27 50:23 60:5
81:19
enjoyment 22:6 23:23
29:12,32,33
enough 8:8 32:4 78:25
enshrined 14:24
ensure 7:33 9:2 11:2
12:3,12 15:10 18:27
21:24 22:12,22
23:9,27 25:33 26:1
27:20,22 28:16 30:32
31:1,15,18 33:26
36:25 37:9,24
38:4,28,30 39:15,16
47:5,33 66:7 71:7
72:26
ensures 39:12
ensuring 15:3,9 24:7,31
34:16 36:7,11
enter 58:6 83:14
entered 58:17 87:14,20
entering 21:27 57:12,16
enterprise 7:4
enterprises 7:6
enthusiastic 2:34
entirely 53:16 83:14
85:19
entitled 60:21 88:23
entity 99:33
enumerated 59:26
enumerating 62:19
environment 55:33
101:31
environments 33:26
equal 16:3 18:23 23:3
25:9 50:8 51:15
52:12,19,22 54:29
55:6,11,32 56:4 59:17
60:6,8,13,32 61:28
62:18,20,26 63:11
66:12 71:4,34 72:3
73:33 74:19 81:19
91:22 103:24
equality 9:15 16:1 37:16
51:7 54:9,10,15,31
69:29,30
74:2,9,11,13,14,15
101:5
equally 48:16 52:8
equip 45:1
equipment 8:17 32:25
era 87:23
essential 104:7
establish 14:34 97:14,32
99:28 102:11
established 13:17 20:4
34:27 45:7 60:9 63:5
69:21 96:18
establishment 46:15
89:19 94:9,23
estate 98:14
estates 2:4
esteemed 50:4
etcetera 6:15 7:12 18:16
41:8,20,31
ethnic 57:15
ethnographers 80:4
ethnographic 80:4
evaluating 103:9
evaluation 15:14,24
eve 96:1
even 12:24 31:29 32:4
41:29 52:24 55:33
62:7 65:31 66:28
70:27 78:31 79:22
81:12 86:27 89:13
101:5 103:20 104:4
evening 69:8 75:14
event 23:9 28:4,11,12
eventually 73:25 90:19
ever 7:24 13:34 54:32
59:18 83:11
every 1:24 10:25 11:1
13:32 27:2 28:15
30:3 36:32 48:18,27
66:5,17 73:15 74:18
75:26 79:22 93:13
99:29 101:10
everybody 1:3 32:13
50:3 57:7 68:10
74:31 75:11 91:21
everyone's 40:17 41:13
55:31 64:28
everyone 2:7 22:12 24:6
27:23,24,26 51:34
52:6 54:22,27
55:7,11,32 56:5
60:21,24,31 63:4
64:10 65:29 68:12
74:2 90:17,18,34
93:1,14,16 103:33
everything 15:33,34
27:16 39:29 40:20
53:4 67:19 79:22
87:19
everywhere 59:32 71:29
evidence 87:26
evolved 57:27 58:25
evolving 36:24
exactly 21:8 32:34 44:20
47:26 51:12 52:3,5,17
53:15 54:1,6 59:25
63:3 64:28 66:18
87:16
examination 97:14,33
examine 98:21
examined 73:15 97:23
examines 20:5
example 5:32 6:25,34
7:20,27 8:2,6,28
9:6,8,13,15,18,19
10:34 12:14,26 13:5
14:2 16:33 17:18,20
18:18 21:20
22:14,19,20,24,25,32
23:2,21,25 24:5,10
27:18,19 28:18,30,31
29:18,20,30 30:7,8
31:8,10,23 32:16
33:29 46:4 47:4,20
49:11 52:9,12,13,25
53:20,24 54
examples 8:29 9:1 10:17
22:15,19 27:9,14 30:9
31:12 46:3,30
53:26,27 57:10 69:4
77:28 95:32
except 88:34
exceptionalism 21:14
exceptions 19:28 72:4
excited 64:28
exclude 56:34 97:22
excluded 35:19 57:8
exclusion 3:11
exclusive 38:3
excuse 41:28 46:23 80:26
81:8
exercise 8:7 9:14 14:22
15:4,9 18:30 22:6,12
23:29 33:24 40:13
47:23 48:9 54:3
56:14 60:18,22,34
61:10,17,26 62:32,34
63:30 67:33 70:21
exercised 37:24
exercising 56:18
60:12,17 68:11 72:7
exhaustive 34:7
exhibit 86:26
exist 62:25 74:3
existence 92:1
existing 4:6 6:14
10:10,28 13:9,31
17:33 18:10,15 19:4
31:29 34:3 47:14
96:5,12 98:2,7
exists 74:8 76:22 89:8
expect 101:2
expected 31:26 59:6
expects 86:9
expense 32:23
expensive 30:24,26
31:2,3 32:24,28,30
33:1
experience 1:27,30 12:6
34:14 35:24 36:5
45:11,14,17,25 49:28
61:23 83:6,27 103:22
experienced 13:2 45:15
90:24
experiences 71:24 83:10
89:20 102:4
expert 1:18,28 84:32
85:22
expertise 42:2 92:3
experts 50:21 82:17
87:26
explain 51:32 52:21
59:11 61:31 75:29
99:13 102:26 103:1
104:10
explained 50:27 84:19
89:7 102:29
explaining 103:6
explanation 86:19,21
87:7 102:10
explanations 86:22 89:14
103:1
explicit 4:14 13:13 49:16
53:6 71:28 84:5
explicitly 34:5
expressed 66:25 93:12
extended 51:23
extensive 1:27,30
21:16,21
extent 2:33 11:9,13 15:13
18:1 36:2 38:8,9
42:6,16 47:1 88:34
102:14
external 1:28
extortion 32:24
extra 16:21
extraordinary 77:27
extreme 69:27 71:2,3,11
extremely 17:4 21:6 67:3
eyes 82:27 95:3 99:2
Echolalia 83:18,19
Eilionoir 50:13,31 56:28
60:24 62:13 64:14,22
66:11 67:24 74:32
76:3 83:33 86:34
87:2 90:25 91:4,23
92:4 94:28,34
Emmet 80:3 84:18
England 75:34 77:15
87:17 88:33 90:28
English 70:5
Especially 3:15 17:24
30:20 34:5 43:29
45:18 46:19 57:12
62:13 65:7 76:33
84:15 88:6 93:30
98:3
Essentially 11:9 34:3
37:19 58:2 61:14
88:13,32 89:7
Establishing 14:31 15:8
46:31 95:25
ESTEY 10:17 16:15
20:18 25:13
Europe 23:7 30:20
European 4:27 19:22
37:20 95:31
Excellent 2:16 24:2
31:10
Expanding 95:24
F
fabulous 49:15
face 53:17,18,28 78:4
92:29 102:22
faced 53:20
faceted 37:7
facilitate 11:5,22
facilitation 3:33 37:5
48:21
facilitators 48:8
facilities 8:17 11:34
15:27 69:11,13
facility 58:17
fact 12:24 13:30 32:29
33:29 42:20 48:30
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
56:2,32 61:5,16 64:7
101:30 102:10 104:15
facto 48:25 72:12
factor 85:16
factors 58:32 82:4 97:32
101:16
fading 62:12
fail 78:29
failed 34:3
failing 9:9,31
fails 8:24,27 9:2,4,6,15
10:15
failure 9:33 47:8 48:32
81:30
fair 86:25
fairly 71:30 86:2,3
faith 4:23 102:17
fall 6:26 22:19 82:12
102:6
fallout 13:20
falls 60:2,8 62:27
familiar 22:2 87:8
families 17:10 46:19,28
48:4,6,7,8 96:11
family 32:17,34 46:20,21
64:2 65:6,32 75:25
82:20,28 83:9 98:21
far 31:8 39:13 45:18
47:23 51:23 54:25
81:28 92:22 95:29
fascinating 80:13
fast 90:26 91:5
father 83:2,17
favourite 23:20 37:5
40:20 62:1
fed 79:10,11 85:26
federal 1:28
19:27,28,29,33
20:9,23,30
21:10,12,16,17,29
federalism 21:27
federally 20:25
fee 61:2
feel 21:5 43:2 48:13
58:19 72:19 75:29
80:12
feeling 67:11 79:23
feels 79:30 81:22
82:11,30 83:25
fellow 50:7,13
felt 58:21 92:25
94:15,19,20,24
feminist 81:28
few 1:9 16:32 32:16 33:6
47:4 49:26 57:10
62:14 80:2 82:15
98:15
fewer 6:18
fiction 4:11
70:25,27,30,34 72:16
74:18 80:34
field 5:5 50:27 100:17
figure 68:27 91:9
file 26:26
fill 6:20 16:22 24:1 44:16
filled 23:1
fin 89:8
final 3:34 49:8 88:30
finalised 88:28
finally 17:14 22:11 34:30
51:15 58:24 66:30
finance 44:31
finances 78:2
financial 50:16 61:28
73:7 77:15
find 2:22 11:29
26:20,21,22 27:29
29:6 45:22,27 64:25
77:27 80:5,17
82:30,31 84:12 86:14
102:32
finding 31:27 85:13
fine 69:4 72:22 100:21
fined 47:9
finish 43:17 90:6
finished 75:28
finishing 27:5,8
fire 23:1,3,6
109
first 1:9,10 2:3,8 7:24
9:15 13:34 16:4 18:9
22:2 26:19 29:26
37:17 39:4 46:20
51:19,24,26
59:14,17,18,31
60:6,30,31 62:6
65:11,23 67:8,30
71:22 72:2 73:3
74:13 75:14 76:32
79:24 84:24 91:11,21
92:18,20,22 93:13
96:28
fit 76:28
five 47:33 48:15 61:19
73:2 84:24 101:29
fix 57:6
fixed 36:24,26 96:8
flag 27:30 28:15
flags 27:28 28:13
flat 52:23
flexible 83:4
flight 50:5
floor 12:10,22 85:5,34
101:23,25,26
flourishing 104:8
flow 70:3
flue 83:2
fluency 86:3
focus 2:9,13 4:17 6:16
34:17 39:34 60:23,24
61:5,15 74:13 79:25
95:7
focused 44:29 50:8 69:23
95:30,31
focusing 2:22 3:15 96:1
folder 26:20
folks 49:16
follow 20:13 31:7,9
100:20
followed 89:15
following 7:16 90:3
food 12:23 26:13
49:21,33 51:18 84:31
85:16
footnote 70:8,9,10
for 1:4,6,8,11,17,20,21
2:5,7,9,12,16,21
3:5,11,26,28
5:20,23,32
6:10,25,29,34
7:5,6,11,23,25,27
8:2,23,30,31
9:13,27,30,31,34
10:7,10,34 11:1,13,19
12:3,7,15,19,21,24
13:8,11,33 14:17,24
15:1,2,8,10,30
16:1,5,31 17:9,31
18:18,20,26 19:20
20:4,21 21:6,20
force 17:31 49:23 61:32
79:10,11 85:26 95:26
96:5
forced 32:18 65:12
fore 54:8 94:4
forget 20:28 43:30 76:20
101:26
form 25:16 44:21 55:6
89:31
formal 54:10 65:30
66:17 72:10 74:1,15
78:3,4 89:8
formalisation 16:26
formalise 16:26
formally 55:7 104:5
format 93:32
formation 96:2,4
formats 27:22 28:26
forms 5:30 56:26
formulated 70:1
formulation 17:11
forth 7:13,32 11:6 13:9
16:6 20:25 21:23
48:1
forward 6:23 10:24,27
18:8 21:1,5,29 39:22
61:11 75:27 90:10
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
foster 35:18
found 10:24,25 21:8
41:22 78:28 83:3
84:18 85:26,31,33
86:2 87:29 102:8,14
foundation 2:9,12
foundations 4:32
founded 83:6
four 48:15 50:28
60:30,31,33 61:4
69:6,7 70:34 72:12,14
73:3 100:33 101:29
fourth 29:23 83:29
fraction 32:32
fragmented 79:1,16
framed 36:22 83:20
framework 4:7 6:10,11
8:9 12:28 13:17
14:27 19:4
22:2,15,29,33
23:14,16,22 27:5,8
28:23 29:5 31:22
34:27 39:12 40:2,6
42:34 44:2 79:14
frameworks 57:33 67:17
freak 52:34 53:5
free 23:27 39:3 72:28
103:29
freedom 37:17,21
freedoms 4:16 17:33
18:1,4,15 19:5
freely 23:29 32:5
friend 72:22 79:8
friendly 59:3
friends 64:8 65:6
from 3:26 4:27 8:15
10:27,30,31 12:6
13:20 17:12,25,32
18:14 19:4 20:29,30
23:22,23,25 24:29,30
25:33 27:4,28 28:21
30:10 31:20 32:2,3
34:18,19 35:19 36:15
37:18,19,20 38:6
39:33 41:14,24 42:2
44:9,11 45:11,18 46:7
47:4,21 48:6
49:11,20,31 51:18,24
52:18
front 29:34 50:25 59:10
87:13
frustrating 21:6
fudge 81:11
fulfil 15:7
22:2,11,15,27,33
23:10 25:19,29
27:8,9,10,14,15
28:24,26 29:9 40:11
43:33 45:2
47:16,18,34 95:16
101:10
fulfill 33:19
fulfilled 33:18 37:9 38:5
40:7 48:23 62:31
fulfilling 25:20 48:12
fulfilment 9:7,10 15:3
full 3:6,26,29 9:8 14:7
15:16 47:26 48:27
96:22 97:2,9,10
98:10,11,12,17,19,22,
23
fully 14:3 21:25 61:9
function 28:3,9 59:5
76:28
functional 55:11
58:24,27 59:3 71:33
76:7,14,31
78:16,25,26,29,30
79:29,31 83:29,32
89:7,16 90:12
functioning 78:27
fundament 39:26
fundamental 4:16 17:33
37:2 59:24 69:17,29
70:14 71:16
fundamentally 38:14,26
69:7 70:28
funding 30:23 31:20,25
funds 31:9
furiously 74:24
further 10:27 14:30
37:18 64:24
future 86:7
fuzzy 78:7
February 90:8
Firstly 1:15 32:8 75:3
FLYNN 50:13 56:29
60:26 62:29 63:32
64:26 65:25 67:30
73:9 87:6,21 92:15
93:29 95:2 103:14
Fortunately 3:29
Forum 96:10 99:2
Founder 76:14
Friday 69:8
G
gap 6:20 44:16 80:13
88:28
gaps 16:23
garbage 43:20
gate 19:4
gateway 76:25,26 79:1
gather 99:31
gave 24:26 40:9 49:21
77:31 95:12
general 2:4,13,21,22
3:14,16 4:7,17 5:19
6:1,4,9 9:10 19:7
21:33 29:5 34:6
36:12,34 37:5 43:3
45:31 56:28 58:4
73:16,17,29 77:20,21
78:5 89:1 97:30
100:24 101:6
generally 14:30 23:16
35:10,11 42:24 58:10
59:6 87:26 88:20
gentleman 30:22 68:3
get 1:4 5:1,3 9:8 10:20
11:24 12:22 16:4
21:28 23:33 28:15
30:21,24 31:13 32:13
35:6 36:13 38:25
39:21 42:24 44:12,20
46:21 48:29 49:29,31
51:3,18,19,24 53:21
55:26 57:10 58:6
59:9 61:15 62:16
63:27 64:12,17,29
68:7,20 69:4,7,14
70:29 71:13,17,22,28
72:33
gets 14:29 21:10 63:32
getting 5:5 17:5,20 22:23
27:9 31:16 40:17
44:10 70:18 80:24
87:15 94:7
girl 11:26
give 9:8 20:18 24:13,28
25:1 32:16 35:16
40:29 42:1 47:26
49:23 52:6,7 57:23
59:14 62:18 63:23
65:16 70:13 72:2
74:32 75:17 77:27
80:21 92:28 94:34
101:1,22 102:9
givers 28:3
gives 2:32 18:22 36:16
75:16
giving 16:26 17:28
24:18,22 30:5 35:7
57:28 62:6 65:22
71:18
glad 53:3 95:20
goal 74:10 87:15 91:17
93:1,2
goals 11:16 39:7
goes 7:11 21:22 45:6
48:28 65:14 74:32
79:25
going 1:10,11,22
2:1,12,13 3:15 5:3,4
6:10,11,20,21 7:15
9:8 10:12,17 11:26
16:3 17:4 18:9 20:7
21:14 23:22 25:23,26
26:8,32 27:4,21
28:15,17,33 29:2,23
30:24,25,31 31:3
32:19,33 33:4,6,8
38:27 44:34 46:32
48:33 49:20,24
50:3,21,33 51:2,11,15
53:3 54:21,2
gone 34:10,11 45:7 69:20
70:15 84:25
good 1:3,6 2:7 3:14 4:23
6:24,25 9:13 10:1
13:15 28:13 30:30
33:29 44:17 49:21
63:3 71:30 72:13,34
80:2,7 81:13 82:31
84:13 86:3,11 92:28
93:23 94:1 95:6,13
102:9,16,17,22
103:6,7
goods 8:16
got 2:29 6:2 17:12 23:5
34:6 45:22 47:18
59:11 61:2,20 69:12
70:12,24 71:30 72:22
80:30 84:26 91:34
92:22
governing 87:25,29
government's 1:29 18:29
44:25
government 1:28
7:8,12,29 12:23 14:7
17:12,14 19:33
20:6,9,20 21:3 24:25
41:5,6,23 44:27,30
45:12 46:23 48:6
55:25 64:33 71:3
72:8 89:12,18
90:5,8,9 91:8 93:12
94:30 96:15,25
97:26,30,32 98:6
99:3,18,25,26,27,29,3
3 100:9,19,27,29
101:2,17
governmental 5:18
governments 1:18 7:5,11
17:24 20:22 34:18
35:1 42:24 45:16
62:12,13,29,30
65:21,22 71:19
grab 87:17 95:18
granted 63:24,27,29
grantee 75:11
granting 58:20
grass 65:34 91:34 103:19
grateful 1:4,24
gratification 40:33
great 2:7,12,15 8:6
9:15,18,24 12:14,26
13:5,30 16:28 17:18
20:16 21:22 27:2
30:7 31:10 44:21
46:30 48:8,9,32 63:18
71:6 75:4,6,16 79:33
80:33 84:3 89:23
91:5,14 95:29
greater 21:10 35:15,16
42:1
greatest 16:25 66:11
69:25
ground 12:10,21 44:11
80:10
grounds 102:3
group 5:29 36:12 37:6
54:16 64:15,16 68:26
91:18 92:6
groups 3:10 5:28,30
23:15 36:13 44:34
45:33 52:6,17,18
54:16 57:28,29 59:27
68:17 91:12
grown 83:23
guarantee 58:30 101:9
guaranteeing 24:6
guard 84:10
guardian 21:20 58:6
77:11 97:18
98:11,12,16,17,21
guardians 89:2 98:16
guardianship 1:31,32
40:25,26,27 58:11
61:2 62:30 63:23
68:15,16 69:21,22,24
70:13,14 71:12,20
72:12,13,32,33 73:19
87:31 88:2 89:16
90:13 92:34 94:24
96:2,22
97:2,9,10,25,26
98:3,7,10,14,19,21,22
,23,24
guess 22:2 58:1 89:17
guidance 95:13 99:34
100:20
guide 18:26 42:17 101:34
guided 72:21
guideline 99:28 100:5
101:10
guidelines 16:31,32
18:26 23:33 99:26
guiding 16:1
gut 86:18 102:31
guys 51:24
Gabor 50:3 95:8
Gabriel's 103:14
Galway 14:13 50:18
Gambia
41:4,6,15,17,23,27
Gerard's 45:2 62:24
Gerard 2:21 40:9 49:20
91:23
Gigarenza 102:31
Given 5:27 25:7 45:15
55:13 58:16,29 67:34
82:18 85:13,14,25
93:10
Glen 80:34
God 13:32
Gordon 91:24,34
Gustav 78:28
H
habilitation 37:25
had 1:3,9 6:18 11:21
12:31 14:21,26 18:11
20:25 31:8 32:19
34:3,4 41:23 43:22
46:14 47:10 58:31
61:25 65:22 66:20,29
68:34 69:11,12,13
70:16 71:19 75:6
82:18,20,21,22
83:2,3,23 84:26
85:2,19,20 88:26
89:15,17,19,23,32
90:1,19,27,31,32
91:14,25 92:6,9,19,2
hadn't 17:18
half 51:6 60:27 64:28
69:7 75:7 98:12,17,34
hammering 73:31
hand 27:2 44:17,18
63:14 64:9 71:16
98:31
handbook 27:34
handed 50:25
handover 50:21 75:26
87:3 90:23
hands 91:31 101:28
hangout 80:4
happen 11:18,22,26,28
15:2,28 35:29 40:32
46:21 47:32 59:18
63:1 66:10 79:16
90:26 91:5 95:7
happened 20:20,22
44:16 51:12 66:22
89:9,30 95:6 96:15
happening 49:9,10,11
80:10 87:19 95:30
happens 21:25
happy 45:29 66:30 67:33
94:28 95:17
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
hard 3:11 21:3 66:6
68:27 73:7 76:28
84:14
harder 49:30
hardship
19:12,17,20,24,25
harm 64:23,25 81:7
88:17 99:2
harmonise 96:12
has 1:18,23,27,30
2:20,22 3:14 13:32
14:6 15:14,18 16:31
18:27,33
19:3,11,12,22,23
20:16 23:9 25:4,20
27:33 30:13,22
33:7,13 35:26,31
36:1,25 37:5,33
38:3,32,33 39:34 41:4
42:11,12 43:2,28,34
44:15,17 45:17
47:17,28 48:12,27
49:2,28 50:14
51:22,23 54:8 55
hasn't 90:4
have 1:9,10,12,23,25
2:4,5,13,16 3:26,29
4:26 6:19 8:28,34 9:8
10:25
11:4,27,29,32,33
12:9,18,19,24 13:27
14:31,34
15:2,10,11,15,19,30
16:4,5 17:15,24
18:20,26 20:6 21:8
22:2,28 23:3
25:6,10,33
26:3,11,18,19,21,24
27:34 28:1,2,15,19,25
29:2 30:10 31:6,9,3
haven't 4:32 21:29 25:7
35:19 50:34 55:2
58:19 60:13 67:34
80:14 86:17 90:6
having 39:11,12,15 41:25
43:10 48:25 49:7
57:13 65:11,14 72:10
93:15
hazy 41:3
head 76:7,9,16,21
79:25,26 81:34 84:6
102:32 103:13
headquarters 96:18,19
heads 46:4 89:14
health 12:16 15:10
29:18,21 30:10,11
31:18,20 41:5,19
44:30 45:12,15,33,34
64:25 74:8 75:24
77:16 78:8
80:10,20,23 84:13
88:10,12,21 91:12
94:27 98:29
healthcare 12:20
31:15,16
hear 3:34 4:29
12:11,15,16 63:21
66:30 68:19,26 75:34
95:32
heard 49:10,14 50:5,34
51:2 74:4 91:27
95:2,4 104:19
hearing 10:30 12:10
66:20,27 68:23 75:27
hearings 90:20 93:25
heavily 7:24
heights 4:27
held 1:27 12:32 90:20
help 15:29 21:33 23:28
31:13 36:31 42:17
45:14,29 52:11
66:19,26,29 92:23
helpful 23:16 29:3,6
38:25 44:8 92:16,26
helping 16:31 18:26
her 1:32 9:18
32:19,32,33,34 40:20
50:5,8 75:17,21,24
110
81:2,23
82:19,20,27,28
84:19,31,32,34
85:2,4,22,28,34 92:3
96:28 97:11 101:9,18
102:21 104:24
herded 33:23
here's 16:32
here 1:23,25 2:34 5:1 9:9
25:11,23,28
27:28,30,34 28:2
29:34 31:5 32:13
41:1 45:29 48:27
50:6,13,18,28 52:5
58:16 61:14,19 64:24
67:17 74:27,31
75:11,12 78:32
87:15,18,30
heroes 82:32
hers 81:28
hierarchy 33:13
higher 11:12
19:11,13,18,20,25
86:26
highlight 33:23 68:34
87:14 104:5
highlighted 59:10 61:6
65:2 73:24
highlights 67:31 86:6
highly 34:17
him 24:22 49:21
66:26,29 77:31,33
83:4,6,21
his 24:23 30:4,5 47:23
49:14 50:4
66:20,22,23 81:2
83:1,2,3,5,7,10,17
84:19 87:25 97:11
101:9,18 102:21
historical 2:30 43:23
history 32:2 51:10 56:28
57:7,12 61:21
68:19,23 96:4,9 103:3
hitch 78:25 96:7
hitched 76:15
hoc 34:33
hoist 32:26
hoists 32:25
hold 15:22 19:34
24:17,18 33:12 35:2
37:29 38:13,16 64:24
70:3,10 86:34 87:4
holder 55:21
holding 37:33
holds 19:21,33 25:32,33
36:34
holidays 90:18
home 9:27,28 30:23,33
45:22,29 73:31
78:1,2,4 80:7
82:19,21,23,28
83:5,6,13 84:31,32
85:1,4,33 103:5,12
104:21
homeless 83:10,13
homes 1:32 48:27
homogenous 36:12
hope 1:3 2:14 23:32
79:22 95:15
104:18,19
hopefully 33:8 35:16
40:12 79:31
horizontal 43:3
horrific 12:33 22:24
horse 10:32
hospital 41:17,29 80:5
hospitalisation 98:4,8
hospitals 7:11 12:33
46:4,5 48:26 88:14
98:31
hosted 95:8
hot 1:4
hour 49:15 51:6 60:27
64:28 75:7
hours 88:18
house 10:25 74:23
how 2:23 4:34 8:31 9:6
11:22,23,24 12:22,23
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
13:5 14:4 24:10,12
27:24 30:3 32:9,30
33:18 36:26,27
38:2,27 39:8
40:7,9,16 41:10
42:17,24 44:12,17
45:6,8,9,28 46:16
47:5,12,16,18,23
48:3,4 49:2,33
51:3,7,8,15,23 53:2
54:25 56:24,33,34
58:30 59:11,26,27,28
60
however 87:4 95:4
huge 44:34 48:18 49:23
53:33 55:17 63:8
74:31 79:3 104:23
human 1:21,31,32
3:24,26,29 4:3,4,7,16
5:5,17 8:13
12:21,27,28,31
13:3,5,9,10,17,18,25,
26,31,32 14:12,14,32
17:32 18:14,20 19:4,6
20:31 21:34
22:5,11,12 23:15,23
33:25
34:3,4,5,8,10,11,25,2
7,30,31 35:17,26
37:13,14,20 40:1
41:15,16,28 42:25
43:12,31 44:24
humanity 59:27
hundreds 80:11
hung 80:5
husband 57:13
hybrid 60:22
hypnotized 49:14
hypothesized 76:6,24
hypothetically 24:14
Harvard 1:16
Hazel 81:23
Helga 31:3
High 1:21 24:29,30 58:29
87:31
Hmm 82:27
Honour 81:23
Hungarian
7:16,21,22,23,32
16:30,33
I
idea 2:33 32:2,23 54:15
58:28 59:34 61:10
81:25 83:34 93:4
ideas 9:1 27:14 29:32
31:14
identified 14:20 35:12
37:13 56:13
identify 40:13 64:33
82:18,21 103:20
identifying 65:13 103:21
identity 7:28
ideology 73:11
idiots 45:19
ignore 49:30 64:8
ignored 13:3
ill 46:28,29 50:4
illegal 14:30 102:21
illness 3:7
images 53:34
imagine 48:13
immediate 9:7,10
10:31,33 11:7 14:1
33:32 37:29,33 42:8
60:1 61:34
62:7,10,26,27,31
63:8,15
immediately 5:11,12
10:16 11:5,9,12
14:16,26 33:15,30
38:8,14,21,28
40:24,32,33 42:14
46:12 47:29 60:1,2
62:10,11,30
immigrants 52:25,26,28
57:14
imminent 95:3
immune 77:24
impact 14:25 15:1 20:5,8
21:11 89:24
impaired 31:1
impairment 36:14,15
46:20 66:20,28
78:26,29,30 88:17
impairments 86:14,25
impartial 67:27
impediments
14:20,22,31 15:14
24:2 33:25 45:7
imperative 81:6,13
implement 10:15 16:7
35:3 38:27 45:28
implementation 3:33
4:18 5:19 10:20
12:25 16:7,18,31,32
18:27 19:7,34 20:2
29:19 34:30 35:34
37:23,24 39:25 44:12
45:4
implemented 1:19 5:11
38:2 47:6
implementing 4:30 5:15
51:15
implicated 26:5
implication 14:17 33:26
38:15 41:11 47:28
implications 15:11
38:16,21 41:4,8 42:13
51:1 65:7 69:23
81:24
implicit 13:13
implicitly 4:14 5:32
implied 6:3
importance 104:6
important 3:5,20,24 4:12
5:7,15 6:5 7:4,6
16:15,17 17:4,7 18:18
19:9 26:9 44:1 47:2
49:31 54:18 57:25
59:10,17 60:16,22,27
61:22
63:25,29,30,32,33
64:2,6 65:34 66:7,11
67:4,11 68:10,14,19
73:6,24,32 75:17
78:13 82:14 84:23
86:13 88:28 92:4
93:8,33 95:30,3
importantly 59:21 63:14
impose 24:4 66:2
imposes 16:14 25:28
imposing 23:28
imposition 18:5
impressed 71:25
improve 5:27
inaccessible 10:27
inaction 10:7,9,11
incapable 87:25,29
incapacity 79:27 80:34
81:9 85:13 87:7
incarcerated 11:32
include 1:32 6:25 22:17
28:11 36:21,34 40:10
45:31 50:15 58:27
94:26
included 27:33 28:14
39:34 95:3
includes 18:33 88:16
including 1:20,31 16:10
22:12 41:19 43:25
44:9 46:34 50:10
59:20 75:25 89:20
inclusive 17:3
39:13,16,22 47:5
66:13
incompetence 81:29
incompetent 97:9,22,23
inconsistent 8:15 21:30
incorporate 95:12
increase 31:19
increases 37:16
increasing 31:15,18
increasingly 15:7 33:18
incredibly 1:34 37:3
68:31 83:3,6
indeed 2:25 53:26 86:7
independence 50:16
independent 2:10,15 7:7
23:17 29:33
30:6,17,18
31:30,33,34
32:3,6,10,12 50:15
65:7 67:27 88:23
89:3,20 95:24
independently 6:6 29:29
30:12 31:31 32:34
37:20
indicates 83:19
indicators 42:13
indigenous 5:33
indirect 102:23
individual's 64:12 81:1
individual 14:8,12 15:22
32:20 43:10,14,15
48:16 50:16 56:9
58:31 59:33 60:18
72:21 74:18 81:29,34
82:12 91:29,31
101:9,10 104:12
individualised 31:20
34:20 101:11
individuals 14:34 15:14
18:5 22:9 31:31
32:17 41:30 43:10,13
46:7 54:20 57:19,23
59:29 65:27 66:1
94:2
indivisible 4:16
inexpensive 101:6
influence 35:12 67:26
82:4,8 86:23 92:33
influenced 96:16,26
informal 35:27 46:22
78:9
informally 47:3 104:5
information 8:18 16:21
22:27 27:20
28:11,25,26,27,33
48:1 55:13,14
58:26,27 64:29
78:19,20 99:31
informed 1:11 21:4
infringe 54:25 93:27
infringes 55:5 102:20
inherent 13:25
inherited 55:33 61:28
inhibitions 101:26
initially 91:17 93:11,28
initiated 49:2
initiative 7:16,20 28:30
initiatives 4:29 41:12
65:34
injury 91:13
innocence 9:20
innovation 16:28
innovations 16:25 37:2
inpatients 98:26
inquiry 77:2
inside 79:25 81:34
insight 84:19 86:23
103:4
insightful 83:11
insignificant 27:32
inspire 104:19
instance 26:1 32:1,24
43:28 44:1 48:12
102:1
instances 3:1 7:9 18:28
21:17
instead 9:30 54:22 56:18
58:13 65:17 88:34
91:31 92:27
instigated 93:25
instinct 86:18 87:16
instincts 102:31
institution 12:21
30:12,15 31:7
32:18,33 48:14,28
57:16 63:16
institutional 12:21 75:22
institutionalisation
31:22 32:11 63:19
65:28 67:28 98:7
institutionalise 65:28
institutionalised 98:33
institutions 7:7,11
22:9,25
30:21,25,27,29
31:6,19,20,24,25,28
32:3,4,9,10 35:20
46:4,5,10 48:26,33
63:16
instruct 79:6,7,8
instructed 50:17
instrument 3:1 35:16
59:19
instruments 2:32 3:1
13:24 34:3,5,6 59:19
insuring 7:5
integral 4:3
integrity 37:19 68:34
intellectual 30:32 36:15
52:33 53:7,16,27 54:5
58:3 91:12 94:3,4,10
intellectually 31:1
intelligence 52:32
intelligent 11:17
intended 18:4
intensive 63:12
intention 14:7 43:30
inter 4:27
interact 51:7 55:25 66:2
interaction 67:31
interactions 65:32 66:8
interactive 5:3
interacts 89:34
interdependence 60:24
62:5 64:9
interdependent 4:16
32:12
interest 20:5 56:24 72:29
75:19 76:33 79:8
89:1
interested 12:19 61:19
62:12 67:20 86:18
87:10 91:15
interesting 4:29 5:20
7:29 24:28
41:15,22,26,33 43:4
44:7,23 47:4,14 59:24
64:32 65:3 67:25
74:27 78:27,30 80:17
84:28 92:18 94:29
95:17 102:7 104:15
interests 54:22 56:10
59:9 70:16 76:30,32
77:2,3,13,22,25,29,30
79:9 81:17 85:28
92:6 94:25
interfere 22:5
interference 23:25 37:32
38:4,6,18,28 40:13
42:15 45:7
interfering 23:22,23
interim 15:31
internal 20:22 21:1,4
81:29
international 1:15,18,20
4:3 5:23 12:28,31
13:4,17,18,19 14:32
17:31 18:33 19:33
20:1,7 21:28 29:22
34:8,27 35:9,10
37:14,17,25 39:6,7
41:7 42:6,26 43:12
44:16 59:20 60:7
69:3 93:19 104:11
interns 50:26
interpret 5:7
interpretation 5:6 7:32
8:4 23:8 25:16 28:12
36:31 42:26 51:11
66:22 73:32
interpreted 4:23 18:3
71:17 99:13 103:27
interpreter 66:26,29
interpretive 2:25
intervene 27:2 46:27
81:4,12
intervention 81:8
interview 80:4
interviews 80:11
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
into 2:14 4:24 5:1,4,7 6:6
7:16 10:20 11:18
13:21 14:29 15:4
17:6 20:22 21:28
26:21 30:24,25,29
31:20,26 32:18 33:23
34:14 37:16 38:3
45:27 48:21
51:1,3,12,19,26 53:2
57:12,16,17,25
58:6,17 61:24,32
62:14,27 65:16 67:3
68:33 69:10 73:2
74:26 76:31 78:1,4,
intro 75:16
introduce 1:11,12 32:33
50:5,6 59:13 75:8
87:2 95:21
introduced 33:19 69:20
87:2 89:31
introducing 63:2
introduction 2:7
intrude 81:1
invasive 90:28
investment 71:20
invisible 34:17
invite 1:34
invited 28:2,10
involuntarily 58:20
involuntary 88:12,13
98:3,26
involve 16:10 29:19
30:28
involved 9:16 17:2,5,18
20:11 41:16 84:4
91:14,34 94:9,18
involves 45:24 80:11
ironically 87:24
island 47:30
isn't 14:14 32:10 36:6
62:20 79:1 81:4
82:26 83:14,25 91:19
104:4
isolated 17:24 35:19
isolation 60:17,18 79:17
issue 12:7 14:3,6 17:6
21:27 23:6 25:28
26:7 32:21 39:6
41:4,33 42:18,27
44:33 45:18,27
48:5,18 50:29 53:28
54:24 56:29 57:7
59:14 61:24 64:3,6,15
68:12 70:12 90:3
94:21 101:34 103:33
issues 1:28 3:6 12:28
16:8 32:8 41:33
43:29 44:24 46:21
47:5 51:2 68:27 73:6
84:29 90:24 95:11,23
103:16
ist 51:29
it's 1:5,10 2:20 3:24,26
4:11 5:11,12 6:2 7:29
13:8,13,15,31 14:30
15:7,13 16:25,28
19:21,22,24 20:8,28
21:10 24:23 25:28,29
26:11,26 27:6 29:6
30:5,24 31:2,3,30,33
32:1,15,30 33:2,18,31
34:19,26,30 35:1,6,7
36:6,11,22,23,25 37:3
38:5,13 39:25 40:1,20
42:
items 97:10
its 19:12 26:3 38:3 39:34
41:11 43:34 51:10
55:27 56:3 96:11
101:15
itself 24:4 36:12 104:3
I'd 74:30 84:3 85:5 98:34
104:16
I'll 4:34 26:30 27:2
28:13,15 29:6 33:8
49:33 50:21 63:18
69:14 71:22 73:3
74:21 75:8 76:2,31
111
77:27 81:28 86:29
101:27
I'm 1:8,9,11,22 11:24
12:19 13:15 14:13
16:3,4 26:8,32 28:15
30:31 31:16,27,28
33:4 40:17 45:22
52:32 53:3 54:13
63:14,21 67:33 68:33
72:16 73:28 76:24
86:30 87:2,8 88:10
90:23 95:15,33,34
96:1 101:22,29 102:5
104:14
I've 26:25 44:9 45:22
73:24 76:28
ICCPR 14:16
IDPs 5:32
IKEHARA 95:34 102:16
Inclusion 39:26,28 40:2
75:25 91:13 94:9
India 20:13 28:19 50:10
Ireland 1:5 14:2,6
30:20,25 31:23,34
32:15 50:10 58:10
61:25 73:10
87:15,16,22,24 88:11
89:12,25 90:5,10
91:4,11 92:14 93:15
94:9
Irish 16:1 64:23,27 68:21
87:6 88:26 91:12
94:19
J
jam 103:2,3
jams 103:4
job 9:18 11:1 26:33
joint 48:14
journey 87:20 88:25
judge 12:10 47:22 81:23
84:34 85:4,8
judged 81:24
judges 47:25,26,28,31,33
48:3,34
49:1,2,3,8,12,17
81:6,11
judgment 81:29
judgments 84:4
judicable 42:22,33
judicial 15:27 27:11 48:6
67:28 101:12
judiciary 49:10 84:4
98:6
jump 33:8 102:13
jurisdiction 19:34
20:8,29,34 24:25 40:2
52:27
jurisdictional 19:24
jurisdictions 9:22 50:10
57:15,16 70:1 77:12
88:2 95:32
jurisprudence 4:28
19:21 34:7 37:19
38:2
just 3:26 4:14 7:4 9:19
11:24 12:17 13:13,27
14:13 16:4,32
25:17,26,27,30
27:2,5,16 28:8,18,33
30:22,26 31:5,12
32:8,22 33:5,11,20,34
34:13 36:6,29,34
37:12,13,14 38:3,12
41:13 42:18
43:17,26,29
45:2,3,22,34 46:27,29
48:11,24 49:20
51:19,24 52:31 53:20
54
justice 1:31,32 9:13
10:23 11:5,13,29,30
12:3,6,12 20:26,29,30
27:28 37:25 43:28
46:31 48:21,22
49:12,14 67:32,33
69:17 79:6 84:28
89:23 90:16,19 92:19
93:25
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
justiciable 42:34
justifiable 32:25
justification 102:12
justifications 102:9
justify 86:11
justifying 86:11 103:6
Jacob 49:12
Janet's 37:5
Janet 1:10,12,15,23,34
2:6 10:17 17:23
26:31,32 27:1,3 33:19
36:17,29 40:20 45:30
49:20,23,26
Japan 96:2,10,14,28
97:30 98:2,22,26,33
99:2 100:3 101:18
Japanese 96:4,9 97:1
98:10 99:24 100:34
102:4
Jerome 2:20 13:33 20:14
Jorge 52:22 70:8
June 1:1
K
keep 1:22 19:14 25:26
26:12,33 27:34 49:24
50:21,23 52:25 95:7
keeping 31:6 61:9 67:20
key 6:29,34 85:16
92:4,18,33
kicked 23:5
kids 47:8,10,13
kind 4:10,11 6:19 12:33
24:5 27:32 30:17
43:3,33 45:1 46:11
53:5 56:30 60:23
62:5,12 63:34 64:7,15
65:8,11,13 66:34
67:24 74:25 76:7
77:11,24 78:2 79:19
80:25 86:4,15,19
87:14,16,19 90:33
97:5 99:11,17,31
100:15 102:5,18
kinds 46:9 74:2 96:23
103:3
knew 88:29
know 1:5 3:6 4:34
11:18,19 20:14,16
23:6 28:29 31:34
36:31 41:14 44:19
46:6 49:16 52:22
59:18 62:15
64:14,22,24,28 66:26
67:8 68:27 71:23
73:13,19 81:24 95:3,4
96:14 98:16 101:23
102:25 104:3,9
knowledge 35:22,23 36:5
50:33 80:12 94:6
known 23:3
knows 61:21 63:4 65:8
82:22
KAYESS 3:9 4:34 9:34
10:9 11:7,21,26,28
12:17 13:15 14:15
16:25 17:22
19:11,17,31 20:14
21:8 23:5
24:2,15,22,33
25:3,19,25,31 28:9,24
31:18 32:30 33:4,7
40:26,31 42:1,29,32
43:8,15 45:2,30 46:12
47:1,16,28 48:8,21
66:11 68:31 104:9,11
Kenya 47:4
Kenyan 47:7
KEANE 26:18 104:23
KERSLAKE 50:27
51:28,32
52:2,9,14,17,21,25
53:3 54:1 59:13 62:1
63:3,18 64:27 66:18
68:25 73:31 87:14
90:25 93:11 94:25
104:2,10,13
KK's 85:2
L
label 58:13 64:11
labelled 13:5 54:20
lack 17:9 35:11,20 76:30
77:21,29
78:21,22,26,30 79:7
80:12 82:5,12,16
84:15 85:23,31 97:31
lacked 77:25 83:5
84:15,19,33 85:26
lacks 77:1
laid 5:25 8:20 103:4
land 10:24,25
landlord 30:1,2
landscape 52:23
language 7:22,25,30,31
8:3 23:8 25:16 27:23
51:12 61:14
66:26,28,29 70:29
78:21 93:26
languages 65:3
large 27:1 78:28
largely 55:16 89:15
lashed 83:4
last 10:19 19:17 25:23
28:17 32:9,16 50:9,28
60:25,28 69:8 77:8
80:3,27 82:25 86:13
94:28 95:20,21
96:5,7,10 97:4 98:23
103:20
lasting 78:3 85:21
latched 90:10
late 26:11
later 3:34 16:24 23:17
26:13 33:20 55:8
62:33 67:33 74:21
83:9 90:21 92:15
99:13
law 1:8,16,19 3:24
4:4,24,29
6:11,20,21,24,30 7:22
8:12 12:28 13:10
14:32 17:19,31,34
18:10,23,28,29,33
20:7
21:18,20,22,28,30
23:34 24:6,14 25:4,8
26:3 28:29 34:8
35:9,10 37:17
45:12,20 46:27 48:25
50:8,9,13,29 51:16
52:2 53:11 54:9,19,21
55:1,22 56:4,30
lawmakers 100:8
laws 6:14,16 9:2,4 10:2
18:15 21:17 25:6
28:18,19,20,30,31
30:14 40:29 62:14
67:9 73:19,20
74:1,3,8 104:20
lawsuit 96:22,28 98:14
99:21 100:2,25
102:23,24
lawyer 1:15 9:16,18 11:1
50:6 85:22 95:23
lawyers 66:6 67:17 68:5
72:15 98:22
lay 2:12 89:20
lays 3:16 6:9
lead 26:31 31:2 93:5
leaders 91:26 103:25,26
lean 98:22
leans 98:7,19
learn 95:33 102:13,15
103:19,22
learned 45:12 87:11
104:16
learning 49:11 75:22
102:14,33
least 14:12 46:18 52:24
74:9 77:15 83:27
94:18 98:34
leave 48:28 58:18,20
63:18 79:23 97:11
leaves 48:13
led 7:21 17:5,13 80:33
left 2:32 3:5 71:8 94:15
legal 1:17 2:10,15,24 3:6
6:4,6,10,11,12 8:8
9:14 12:2 14:17,19,21
15:7,8,14 16:1 19:4,9
23:16,28 24:2 33:25
34:18
40:12,22,23,24,31
43:26 44:2
45:4,6,7,8,9,15,18
46:3,14,22
47:3,18,20,23,34
48:3,5,6,11,24,25,26,
27 49:6,14
50:8,9,15,21,27,34
51:19,25 52:2
legalistic 101:32
legality 102:18,22
legally 48:30 57:17 70:30
74:18 76:12,18 88:4,7
legislation 6:19,25,28
7:30,33 8:7,34
9:20,26 10:5 14:20,24
16:7,9 17:2 20:25
30:8 39:11,15,34
40:25,26,28,31
41:7,18 45:28,32,33
47:14,27 49:17 63:26
64:18 66:16,32 76:26
87:23 90:10,11,17,33
91:29,32,33 92:5,25
legislative 6:13 7:19 8:6
14:26 18:27,30 27:11
38:19 39:11,12
40:2,10 41:11 64:17
92:26,30 93:31
legitimacy 92:29
legitimate 65:21 81:8
legitimately 81:1
less 52:32 53:13 56:3
62:6,8 68:16
lesser 18:1,24
lessons 49:11 87:11
let's 8:23,27 9:10,19 10:1
45:6 79:6 96:4,9
98:33 103:2
let 10:17 26:32 27:1 29:6
50:22 67:6 71:22
73:10 101:23
letting 65:24
level 20:9,23 21:3,12
28:23 35:9,10,33
36:7,11,13 37:29 38:6
40:11 42:16 46:21,22
48:17,18 58:3
64:10,11 74:15
levels 14:4,12 22:29
29:22 37:33 40:14
liability 77:24
liberty 79:14 83:7
lie 53:2 54:25
life 15:9 22:14,32
23:3,10,20,21,24,30
24:7,11 27:29,34
28:1,2,8 30:6,12
34:22,23 59:2 60:6
61:20 65:29 71:24,34
74:17 77:6 82:7 84:5
88:5,7 101:19
light 5:6 16:1 41:11
61:4,15
like 2:33,34 3:1,27,30,31
10:25 12:31 22:14,15
23:27 25:17 26:25
27:6,10,14,18
28:11,29 29:29
30:2,22 31:12,15,28
32:4,24,25,26 41:10
42:18,21 47:28
48:5,34 49:9
53:1,22,30 57:5,19,27
58:6 60:33 61:1,3
63:34 64:1 65:7,23
66:17 67:14
68:5,12,19 73:8,30
74:
likely 6:26
limbs 69:32
limit 68:16 81:1
limitations 18:5 19:28
limited 77:12 100:2
103:5
limiting 57:29 65:20
limits 43:34 98:11,13,15
line 54:26,27 59:31
90:4,9
linguistic 7:27
link 26:27 44:13 63:16
linked 31:23 64:19 67:34
89:26
list 28:15 34:7 79:33
85:14 102:32
listed 86:17
listen 1:34 45:16,17
99:27
lists 46:5
literally 69:7 80:12
literature 80:13 82:31
85:14,15
litigating 77:31
litigation 49:6 50:10,29
77:23 79:8 100:10
little 4:34 8:27 14:30
15:1,30 16:5,21 18:21
20:17 21:12,14 23:1
25:11 31:29
33:8,20,34 41:2 43:17
47:16 51:29,32 52:24
61:19 62:1 64:21
68:33 72:17 73:9
75:8 86:23 93:11
live 14:13 22:23 23:5
30:6,13,24,27,32
31:31 32:21 54:33
82:19,28
lived 34:14 35:24 36:5
82:19
lives 22:28 48:30 56:30
66:1 68:14 72:10
74:15 77:17 83:1
86:1 90:29 93:7
living 2:10,15,24 5:27,31
6:6 7:7 22:28 23:17
29:29,33
30:11,12,17,18,21,24
31:21,30,33,34
32:3,5,6,10,12,34
37:20 50:15 63:19
66:14 95:24 98:31
load 84:28
lobbied 3:11 7:24
local 24:25 50:18 83:13
85:1 99:18
locating 44:10
locking 46:20
long 10:7,10 16:4 17:29
21:20 30:4 49:33
75:8 77:24 88:17
89:27 90:33 101:22
longer 59:1 64:1 78:2
88:3
longevity 36:25
look 5:3,28 8:23 11:13,28
12:23 13:32 18:18
21:33 22:14,15
26:7,22 27:10,14,18
28:23 29:29 31:12,15
32:25 33:18 34:10
40:9 42:21 45:3
47:16 48:22 49:1
51:12 53:11 54:31
55:15 60:28 71:22
73:30 75:27 79:29
81:17 87:13 90:17
92:21 96:4 98:10
103:3
looked 21:20 37:14 48:19
80:6 90:25,26 91:3
93:28
looking 2:8,10 5:2 8:8
18:26 19:9 21:17
31:27 37:13 47:5,12
51:3 58:13 67:14,21
72:8 90:27 102:31
looks 4:10,11 7:15 13:11
35:9 42:26 47:22
71:22 73:8 78:16
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
lose 55:3 66:13
loss 79:1
lost 53:23
lot 3:34 4:10 6:10,20,33
10:19 11:8 15:4
19:21,34 30:10 31:5
32:11 33:25,30 36:32
49:18,24,28 51:22
54:3 55:8 57:2
59:4,25 64:29 67:32
69:16 76:24 85:8,14
86:13 91:19 92:19
93:26 102:30
103:10,19 104:16
lots 3:14 4:26 12:33
69:21 70:12 79:4,32
80:5 98:22 103:15
lower 12:9 18:21 19:15
luck 11:26 72:13,34
luckily 73:27
lucky 1:23 90:9
lunacy 87:24 90:31,34
lunatic's 41:18
lunatics 41:7 45:19
lunch 2:17 26:34 46:4
49:15,24 51:19
Lagos 27:34
LGBT 57:15
LORD 1:10 2:7 3:10 5:2
8:31,34
9:4,13,24,30,33
10:1,5,8,12,33 11:23
12:2,14,26 13:34
16:6,30 17:29 19:27
20:12,16 21:14 23:8
24:6,31 25:9,22 26:1
27:4,18,32
28:17,22,33
30:7,17,28 31:10
41:13 43:5,14 44:20
45:9 46:2,30 47:4,26
48:32 49:15
Lucy 75:16,24,27 86:31
87:16,18 88:34 89:7
90:28 102:7 104:7,21
Luncheon 50:1
Lynch 95:2
M
machinery 79:6
mad 91:12
made 11:2,5 15:14
21:23,24 26:9 28:3
30:11 31:6 45:17
52:28 71:7 72:25
76:16 78:9 83:10,12
84:1,15 85:21 86:22
87:22,24,32 88:4,7
89:8 90:20 92:18,34
100:10 101:11
102:9,31 103:9
104:15
magistrate 12:11
mail 102:32
main 47:25 61:14 91:17
mainly 101:16
mainstream 12:28,31
17:25 35:19 43:25
91:13
major 37:2 94:27
majority 78:8 96:20
100:10
make 7:31 8:3,7,27,32,33
9:12,33 10:25,31
11:14,15 14:7 15:27
20:26 21:11 23:11
26:12 27:16,25
28:4,18,31 30:3 32:22
33:8 36:17 38:27
43:24 44:22 45:9,22
48:2,12,14,16,27
49:32 50:23 53:30
55:13 57:28
58:14,16,34 64:8
66:31 67:13 68:13
70:16 72:4,22 74:17
maker 77:8 91:32
makers 35:21 76:32
93:31
112
makes 18:22 41:2 54:13
56:9 67:6 68:22 84:9
87:32 104:13
making 4:14 9:30
10:18,34 12:20 13:13
15:18 16:8 18:20
24:17 26:34 27:19,20
28:11,24,26 30:5
34:13 40:17 47:21
49:31 50:5,9,15
55:30,31,32,34
56:2,5,8,12,14,16,19
57:26,27,29,33
58:1,31 61:3,10,16
63:2 65:6,14,23 66:15
67:15 68:9
70:23,25,26,28,29
71:6,33
mall 33:5
man 66:20,21,26 67:5
83:1
manage 79:13 84:27
97:11
managed 1:19
mandate 9:29 45:22
94:21
manipulate 86:20
manipulated 102:34
mantra 4:5,13 13:11
manufacture 15:30
many 2:16 4:28 6:23
7:7,8 9:22 17:19
18:11 22:19 25:25
37:26 43:25 49:2
54:14 56:26
57:16,24,31 59:19
62:4 74:4 83:23,27
90:4,32,33 91:6,7
103:22
marginalised 5:29,30
marks 61:26
marriage 57:12,16 103:4
married 46:21 55:27
marry 79:14 97:10
marvellous 101:14
massive 80:13
master 91:5
matching 74:3
material 49:5
materials 27:16,17,18
maternal 15:10 29:20,21
maternity 52:13
matter 12:21
matters 79:3
maximum 11:9 15:13
38:7,9 42:16
may 17:31 18:28,31
30:23 31:5 41:14
42:18 43:1 45:11
46:15 47:30 52:32
53:22,24,31 60:12
63:24,25,30 71:16
72:7 79:9,10 81:1,25
82:5,7,8,9 86:14
88:13 97:21,32
maybe 16:5 25:12
26:11,13 44:7,30
50:34 51:2,29 52:32
59:25 68:5 85:20
86:34 89:9 91:26
101:29
mean 2:23 11:1 14:8 18:3
22:5,11 28:29 29:18
38:11 39:20,28 40:5
51:25,26,29 53:18,27
54:24 56:2 58:5,6
60:17,18 64:11 65:25
66:1,31 71:26 76:26
77:11 79:1 88:30
103:28
meaning 4:25 6:2
meaningful 17:6 62:6,8
74:9
meaningless 49:28
means 11:4 18:3 22:8
44:18 51:20 52:23
55:26 58:2,4 59:26
61:31 72:4 73:13
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
76:26,29 77:21
78:11,21 86:15 89:13
102:21
meant 72:8 75:13 77:6
82:21 84:10 93:7
102:14
measurable 38:33
measure 39:34 42:17
46:34 47:26,34
measured 11:16 15:16
42:17,34 76:31
measures 3:33 5:27 6:13
7:3,4 8:16 11:2,4
12:12 22:22 23:27
27:12,20,22
37:8,23,24 39:11,16
40:6 41:30 42:33
44:4 46:30,33
60:11,34 61:7 72:6
mechanism 15:2,31
25:10
mechanisms 15:2,8,23
45:8 46:13,32 51:16
65:17
med 82:9
mediation 99:31,34
100:1,23,30
medical 4:33 11:6 22:18
32:26 34:19 77:17
87:26 88:18 98:3,4,30
99:8 101:15
meet 3:17 11:17 20:30
35:11 38:32 39:6,7,8
55:17 59:4 82:16
meeting 10:18 11:17
34:33 35:7,13,16
75:11,12 92:18,20,22
93:13,31
meetings 34:34 91:25
93:14,15
meets 72:13,27,34
member 50:16,18 95:26
104:24
members 34:22 64:2
65:32 84:4 89:30,32
96:20
men 52:10,14 88:33
mental 3:7 12:16 13:2
30:10,11,15,19,32
31:15,18,19 41:5,16
45:15,33,34
46:5,19,24 48:4
55:19,30 59:1 64:24
65:20 68:10,34 74:8
75:21,28,34
76:3,6,8,14,15,16,17,
18,21,22,24,25,28,29,
31 77:1,30
78:8,11,16,17,18,22,2
8,29,34
79:3,6,7,13,14,19,22,
23,24,26,30
mentally 46:28
mention 3:11 16:15 32:5
45:13 61:23 101:30
mentioned 32:4 55:21,22
57:14 59:34 65:25
89:25 90:25 91:4
93:11 97:14 104:7,21
merely 55:30 84:9
merged 56:12
merit 53:8
mess 64:17
message 24:30
messaging 27:21,22
met 54:10 82:22 84:34
91:17 95:10
mic 12:17
microphone 20:18
mid 95:24
middle 63:20 90:18
might 2:23 8:9 9:6
16:3,20,22,33
22:15,17 23:16
27:10,14,18,19
29:21,29,30
31:12,13,15,29 40:23
45:2 46:14,15 47:16
52:19,24 56:2 57:2
58:15,18 59:4 61:3
62:30 64:8 65:2,29,30
66:6,32,33 67:1 71:13
77:23,28,29 78:1
79:6,10 82:5,6 83:13
85:4 92:26 93:1 103
migrant 13:24
migrate 42:2
million 98:26
mimic 83:18 92:9
mimicking 92:9
mind 9:22 24:5 25:18
45:19 51:26 58:4
72:17 78:27 86:25
87:4,25,26,29
minds 71:25
mine 43:25 82:32
minimum 38:7 39:2,7,8
minor 96:7
minorities 14:25 57:15
103:24
minute 5:3,19 10:12 69:8
74:30 79:24 86:13
minutes 26:11,12,13 33:6
64:28 74:33 95:20
101:27
misconceptions 97:30
missed 84:31
misses 67:3
missing 6:29 44:13
mistake 102:14,15
misused 53:22,24
mix 3:21,26
mixed 31:16
mobilising 103:33
mobility 8:19 32:16
37:21
mode 14:34
model 4:32,33 34:20
56:17 66:5 94:16
98:3,4,6 99:7,8
100:34 101:15 103:21
modern 11:7 38:2 58:24
modes 11:4
modification 30:3
modified 9:27 38:20
modify 9:2,4 14:20
modifying 6:13
moment's 75:6
moment 26:34 31:29
70:10 75:20 96:7
97:33 101:23
momentum 93:25
money 31:7
monitor 46:19 48:33
monitoring 3:33,34
5:18,24 7:11 12:32
16:17,18,23 22:22
42:25 80:19,22
month 93:13 96:33 97:4
monthly 46:5
months 47:5 80:20
moot 26:19,20
moral 53:4
more 1:19 3:23,30,34
4:19 5:3,5,10,17 6:6
8:27,32 10:27 14:29
15:4 16:3,23 17:30
19:32 25:11 28:28
30:23,24,26 31:2,3
32:22,27 33:1,25,30
35:2 39:22 41:9
42:19 43:29 46:22
47:16,17 50:29 51:32
52:19,21,33 54:2 55:8
56:27 57:12,23,28
58:24 59:3 60:16
61:5,
morning's 2:21
morning 1:3 2:7,8,18,28
3:15 4:17 11:8 49:24
50:5
mortality 29:20,21
most 11:17 35:9 36:13
44:9,23 48:5 50:32
53:11,31 56:24
57:20,32 58:1,19,24
63:14 65:34 66:7
69:16,21 71:24 73:32
80:9 81:5 83:11
86:18 95:32 98:33
101:14 103:10
mostly 54:16 56:31
57:19,25 90:4
mother 53:23 85:22
mothers 15:10
move 10:1 12:9,17 16:3,5
21:5,31 27:1 30:17
31:24,26 38:24 45:18
47:16,21 51:10 64:13
70:19 71:11,19 78:1,4
moved 21:1
movement 37:21 91:34
101:34
103:20,24,26,31
movements 68:15
103:19,23 104:6
moves 12:11
moving 5:2 6:23 14:29
15:4 26:34 28:17
29:5 31:10 34:19
39:22 44:11 45:23
56:8 62:3
much 1:4 2:7 4:32,34
12:14,15 15:33
19:11,22,24,31 20:8
21:2 26:8 32:21,27
35:1,26 42:19,26,30
45:13 46:22,27 48:11
49:29 54:2,5 55:30
58:30 61:1 64:7
66:33 67:16 68:23
69:22,23 71:16 72:16
73:2 74:22 77:10
79:33 85:9 87:21
88:10,30 89:30 90:3
92:13,26 94
multi 5:30 37:7
municipal 99:29
museum 23:9
must 8:29 22:5,8,11
24:29 39:3 40:6
58:28 61:7 67:5
73:19,25 80:21 88:20
90:12
mutually 38:3
myself 49:6 53:20,23
63:21
myth 22:28
Maastricht 23:33
March 97:2
Mark 53:24 82:33
83:1,10
Markus 82:17
Marshall 81:23
McKay 34:33
MCA 87:16
Mics 9:8
Minister 10:23 95:2
96:19
Ministers 20:10 44:31
Ministries 44:31
Ministry 1:27 27:28
44:30
Monday 99:2
Morgan 86:6
Mrs 84:31,34 85:5,33
N
nab 101:24
naked 46:29
name 1:8 3:6 20:28
26:20,21 31:3 52:22
named 41:18
nameless 9:20
namely 18:9
narrative 86:3,4
narrow 3:28 90:19
narrowly 44:29
national 6:16 7:22,25,31
8:6 9:2 15:33 16:17
18:27 20:5 21:11
23:10 42:22,28 50:16
94:4,10 96:10
98:8,29,30,31 99:18
nations 14:19 25:31
47:30
naturally 16:6
nature 4:3 5:2 6:4 17:6
25:32 39:26 48:18
58:28 59:7 67:21
naught 68:23
necessarily 11:1 72:10
necessary 28:5 30:3 82:6
86:1 88:22 92:26
103:12
need 3:16 4:17 5:11,24
6:3 7:20 11:2,5,15,19
17:23 24:27 25:30
26:13,34 31:31 35:6
36:15 37:8
38:24,26,29,32
39:6,8,33 45:22,34
46:7,16 48:4,7 49:23
53:32 57:21 60:22
62:30,33 64:34 66:6,8
67:18,21,25,32
68:6,14 70:6 71:7
72:26,31 74:13 77:33
78:2 80:27 8
needed 12:26 20:1 46:13
54:22 64:11 70:19
72:31 75:6 89:25,27
93:7,33 102:7
needs 4:23 10:5 11:2
19:29 26:3 30:23
35:7,9 36:14 38:32,33
42:13,17 47:15
48:7,18,19 49:18
63:1,24,29
64:12,15,31 65:13
66:12 72:21 84:16
85:2
negative 14:16 33:14,24
negatively 65:4 96:26
negatives 82:18,19,21
negotiable 71:28,30
negotiate 70:33 74:26
92:7
negotiated 18:19 61:13
69:3 71:13
negotiation 16:15 68:32
negotiations 1:17,29
20:7 35:28 69:11
70:8 71:2
neoliberal 60:23
nervousness 10:20
network 50:8 91:12
networks 73:4
neuro 102:30
neuroscientist 102:29
neutral 79:32 83:33
neutrality 83:29
never 44:17 48:28 64:32
65:12,28 95:16
new 4:5,6,11,12,13 8:18
10:24,25 11:15,32
12:8,15,19
13:8,11,12,16,27,30
17:9,18,22 31:25
34:33 37:11 45:12
47:27,31 49:28
50:7,10,11 56:30
60:12 63:22,26 65:21
69:6 74:5 83:13
89:19 95:12 97:27,32
98:33
newer 44:33
next 4:34 16:30 25:25
26:18,30 28:13,15
33:6 45:23 47:32
51:6 71:32 76:32
86:30 96:14 98:33
nice 1:5,6
nicely 4:25
night 1:3
nodding 74:24
nomination 25:15
non 3:28 5:18 6:28,31,34
8:34 22:8 24:7 26:3
34:6,21 35:10
37:16,32 38:4,6,18
39:17 40:13 42:15
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
43:15 45:7 50:17
59:6 70:5 71:3,30
none 18:3 88:3
nonetheless 41:28 65:30
nonsense 67:3
nor 84:5
norm 39:28,29
normal 67:19
normative 35:2
norms 41:7
north 37:23
nosey 82:7
not 2:34 3:3,22,28,29
4:5,6,8,13 5:11,12
6:25,26 7:4,7,30
8:33,34 9:17,18,31
10:3,26 11:20
12:15,19,29
13:3,4,6,12,26,27
14:6,10 15:32 18:1,28
19:5,21 21:6
22:5,18,28 23:28
24:4,15,17,22,28
25:21,29 26:2,8
27:21,25,32 28:19,29
29:2 30:12,25
31:2,6,7,17,30
notaries 8:3
note 3:20 49:33 50:21
88:28 104:14
noted 27:31 70:4,8
nothing 17:29 43:28 49:5
81:24
notice 26:21
notion 32:12 41:2 70:26
72:16 79:31
now 4:10 6:23 9:26 12:8
18:8 24:12 25:11
26:11,13,30,31 27:2
32:8 33:4,7 34:17
35:9,26 36:26 39:20
40:9 42:11,12 44:11
46:9 47:21 50:31
51:18,32 54:8
56:12,24,28 57:3
59:11,13,26 62:31
63:1 64:24 68:30
70:4 71:16 73:15,26
74:3,8,21 75:7,16
76:24 77:5,11,2
nuance 70:29
nuisance 79:23
nullified 38:20
nullify 14:20
number 5:5 7:7,33 8:15
16:31 26:22
41:16,18,22 78:12
98:12 99:3,4
numbers 34:11 78:28
98:26
nursing 1:31
Neary 82:33
NGO 7:13
NGOs 5:15,20 16:20
44:16 69:27
Nicholson 95:9
Nigeria 27:28,29,33
Norway 63:21
Norwegian 63:22,25
Nova 11:14
November 93:24
NUIG 1:1
O
object 4:24
objections 78:4
objectives 7:34
objects 34:19,21
obligate 25:16
obligation 6:31 9:10
10:31 11:8,17
14:26,29 15:3,8 16:14
19:33
22:5,8,11,17,19,27,29
23:21,24 24:9
25:20,21,27,28,29,33
26:1,4,5 27:10,14,15
28:31,33,34
29:9,10,12,15,19,20,2
113
1,30 30:1,2,8,18,28
31:8,10,13 36:23
37:33
38:13,27,29,30,32
39:3,7 42:14 45:2,30
obligations
2:1,3,4,14,21,22,25
3:16,17 4:3,17,20
5:2,20,25 6:1,3,4,9,34
7:31 8:12 11:23,28
13:9,10 14:32 15:20
16:6 19:7 20:1
21:23,25,30,33 22:30
25:32 26:7
29:5,6,9,23 33:11,15
35:2,3,7,11,13,16
36:34 37:29 39:2,25
43:3,33 44:20 45:31
47:1 51:1 52:24 5
observance 43:11
observation 28:7
observations 73:16
observing 35:28
obstacle 9:9 10:7,11
obstacles 9:7 10:3 14:17
obvious 8:25 17:22 57:11
79:25
obviously 17:5 18:34
54:13 66:30 69:12
74:32 90:34 98:26
occasion 75:17
occur 51:4 69:25 88:16
occurred 65:28
odd 12:21
off 11:25 12:10 102:32
offences 8:2
offers 81:9
offices 20:11
official 7:25,31 73:13
89:13
officials 12:9 95:10
often 9:28 23:3 31:7
42:19 44:29 61:24
62:29 68:15 81:30
82:16 86:21,23 87:31
95:4
okay 5:2 7:15 8:31,34
9:4,13,30,33 12:18
13:13 14:6 20:12,31
21:5 24:9,34 27:18
28:11 30:7,17
38:12,25 40:20,22
50:26,27 51:29
54:10,19 61:3 62:30
67:1 68:24,31 70:12
71:22,28 72:2,7 75:3
78:34 80:27 87:5,6
89:27 101:32
old 12:8 30:25 42:29
74:9,10 99:7 100:14
older 91:13
ombudsman 15:31
omission 10:13
once 20:34 21:10 63:17
66:13 69:34 79:2
87:29 88:4
one's 54:32 84:16 97:11
one 3:20 7:20 9:26 10:2
12:8,21 13:15 14:32
16:13,20,25 18:8,11
20:29 22:2,3,20,24
23:19,26 24:23 25:14
26:4,21 28:27,34
31:6,8,19,34 32:9,17
33:5,31,32 35:15,17
37:1 40:1,34 41:1,2,3
42:2,25 43:25,29
44:17 45:6
46:3,4,19,20
47:6,22,25,26 48:34
49:12 50:3
ones 52:26 66:33 67:19
oneself 97:11
only 7:30 21:9 25:28
27:25 35:27 38:4
40:13 46:31 48:6
53:24 55:24 56:3
60:18,21 61:10,16,24
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
62:10 66:31 67:6
69:20 74:15 76:17
77:6,15 81:4 83:22
84:27 85:25 86:19
87:22 89:16 91:33
96:23 97:31 98:31
101:25 103:6
onto 26:19
open 23:9 36:24 44:25
87:3 90:17 101:22,26
opened 20:21
operated 7:12,13 22:23
operation 37:25 39:6,8
87:10
opinion 80:22,24 88:18
94:13,22
opinions 74:27 99:27
opponents 18:8
opportunities 17:25 48:9
65:26
opportunity 2:12,16
15:10,15 36:16 71:19
81:9 82:18 94:29
oppose 56:23
opposed 19:12 26:12
34:22 36:14 93:27
104:12
opposite 56:17
options 9:34
order 3:17 7:19,33
9:10,13,24 11:5 18:30
21:21,24 30:18 44:22
45:1 46:31 47:26
63:4 74:8 77:3 78:3
79:29 81:12 82:20
89:25 100:21,30
ordered 85:28
ordinary 4:25 86:22
organic 66:12,16,17
organisation 7:4,21
17:13,18 21:6 94:4,11
organisational 94:5
organisations 1:20
5:4,18 7:8,23 12:31
16:11,28 17:12 22:9
35:22,34
36:4,7,8,9,18 37:1
44:26,29 87:10
90:4,20,32 91:7,14
92:21,28 93:15 96:11
organise 93:18,24 103:20
organised 56:32
96:10,19
organiser 27:27
organisers 28:4
organising 103:21
organs 5:24
orientated 20:8
orientation 101:33
oriented 19:31 84:8
original 30:5
originally 99:6 100:14
other 2:25 3:34,21 4:6,28
5:4,17,28,30 6:2,13
7:23,24,32
8:4,9,12,15 9:1
11:4,16 12:12
13:24,27 14:19
16:8,13,14,16,33
18:15,21 19:1,5,23
20:21 21:6 22:9,19
24:24 25:7 26:2
27:11,20
30:9,20,22,26 32:7
33:32 34:5 37:24,27
39:16 42:11 43:10,12
44:16,18 45:1
others 5:11 8:3 34:6
44:20 52:20 53:8
54:29 57:15 60:6,32
65:32 66:8 71:34
72:3 78:22 83:26
88:17 103:27
our 2:9,24 3:5,26 4:17
7:6 19:11,33 20:1
21:2,6 22:24 23:22
24:25 28:18 32:9
44:10,32 45:11 46:28
48:5 49:31 50:21
51:26 52:28 53:12
54:33 55:1 56:30
64:8,10 66:25,27
68:11,14 73:28 74:14
79:25
86:11,18,19,21,22
87:15 88:12 89:26,33
90:6,16 91:11,17,25
92
ourselves 91:11
out 2:28,31,32 3:5,16
5:25 6:9 7:15 8:20
9:8,15 16:31 21:4
23:1,5 26:4,22 27:6,8
28:2 30:21,29
31:17,24 32:13,15
40:27 41:9 42:24
45:22 51:18 52:26
53:1 63:1 64:17,25
65:16,22 66:5,27 67:3
68:27 69:34 70:4
73:9,28 80:5 82:9
83:4,23 89:16,23
90:33 91:9 92:
outcome
58:9,13,14,21,25
76:12,21 82:1,4,26
83:22,33 84:8,10
85:12,15,19
outcomes 86:23
outdated 58:1
outline 2:20
outmoded 3:2,12
outright 53:11
outside 11:33 26:21
48:29 64:1
over 10:28 20:33
25:11,23 26:30 27:2
32:15 36:29 37:27
44:15,20 47:31,32,33
48:30 49:24 61:26
67:24 69:6 73:14
74:21 92:3 96:4,5,10
101:24
overall 38:32
overcome 34:16 101:32
overlook 59:25 96:9
overnight 11:2
own 3:27 5:23 26:25,27
30:33 33:1 43:26
64:10 70:19 74:3,17
80:7 81:2,26 84:16
85:5 92:25 95:30
101:34
owned 7:12
Obama 21:15
Office 1:20 23:15 27:34
28:34 95:9,26,27
Osaka 96:23
OSF 75:11
Otherwise 21:22 66:33
67:19 93:6 101:18
P
pack 102:33
package 21:21
page 41:14
paid 31:2
painful 86:2
panel 50:4
panicked 87:18 90:18
panicking 90:25
paper 44:11 47:22 53:31
80:7,34 88:27
papers 32:16 41:1 79:33
paradigm 56:21,27 74:4
101:16
paragraph
60:21,30,31,33
61:3,4,19,27 63:22,23
68:28
paragraphs 60:25,28
62:19 73:3
parcel 4:7
parent 87:31 88:6
parents 9:28 47:8,9
parking 9:31,34
part 4:3,7,12 6:1 9:26
10:7,31 13:25 18:9
20:4,33 25:12 26:31
27:1 28:7,24 30:5
35:19 40:1,3,6 43:14
48:32 49:29 57:5
62:34 78:20 81:4
83:9 88:32
partial 77:11 98:8,14,16
partially 66:32
participants 22:24 23:12
28:15 34:22
participate 22:32
23:10,21,30 24:7
27:17 28:11 49:27,32
63:4 67:5 104:15
participated 1:16
participating 24:2
participation 8:6
16:16,34 23:3,20,24
24:10,32 26:4,9
27:16,29,33 28:1,8,21
35:28 41:19 51:18
63:9 66:21 104:15
particular 3:12,15
5:16,20,27 7:21,27
8:9 15:28 18:20,22,34
28:2,4 29:13,26 32:19
42:20 44:3,22 47:8
49:27 52:26 58:3
59:10 71:23 77:22
78:22 88:22 90:31
94:4 103:1,31
particularly 5:29 6:12
51:22 53:6 54:20
61:22 74:31 82:14
parties 2:4 3:16 5:23 6:4
16:9
24:2,10,28,29,31,32,3
4 25:27,29,34 26:2,5
45:10 46:3,28,31
55:25 59:31 60:5,11
65:9 72:6 76:29
partly 93:25
parts 4:30 7:7 19:27,29
23:34 87:9 88:7
pass 26:30 58:30 74:21
89:33 92:3 96:33
passage 82:25
passed 92:1
passing 81:25
passive 34:21,22
past 17:19 26:11,13 56:7
70:15 86:7 104:5
pat 82:27
paternalism 70:15,19
paternalistic 54:19 101:2
pathology 34:20
patient 84:19,20
patients 41:5 88:13
patterns 86:21
pay 5:24 100:21
payment 30:33
payments 32:17,19,32,33
peace 72:17
penalise 86:15
pension 48:28
penumbra 60:8
people's 38:18 42:25
47:3 66:1 67:10
71:32 72:31 75:31
79:25 80:17 81:4
84:5 93:7 104:11
people 1:5,31 5:23 9:12
11:32 12:20,22
13:15,22,26 15:4,9
16:1,26,27
17:11,13,14,15,24,26,
27 20:28 21:11 24:26
25:13,33 26:34
28:4,9,10,25 29:6
30:11,15,21,24,26,29,
32 31:6,20,24,25 32:4
33:24,26
34:12,14,17,18,20
35:18,20,21,22,33,34
36:6,14,18,20,23 38:
per 12:19 37:23
perceived 27:28 46:19
perfect 51:28 54:6 66:2
91:32
perform 9:18
performed 20:27
perhaps 4:11 30:7,28
32:22 44:30 52:33
53:1 57:2,12 77:23
80:18 81:5 82:31
period 10:28 20:34 47:33
69:6,7
permissible 57:2,20
88:22
permissive 18:5
permit 9:7,10
perpetuate 10:3
perpetuates 10:2 12:21
perpetuating 10:10
54:15
persecution 12:29
person's 38:29 40:23
56:10,23 58:2,4,13
63:34 64:2 73:21
80:28 82:9 85:12,15
87:26
person 7:3 10:34 11:3
13:5 20:29,30
23:28,29 24:16
25:15,17 30:3 31:8,9
36:7 37:19,26 45:29
46:20,21 47:23
51:20,25,26,29,30
53:8 54:24 56:9,22
57:11 58:2,3,4,20,21
60:32 61:7 65:30
66:17 67:1,5,8,10,11
68:4,5 70:19,28
72:9,26 76:32 77:17
81:2 82:2,6,7,8,
personal 14:21 30:31,33
36:5 37:21 68:34
94:5
personality 55:24
personhood 50:20
51:7,19,22,23,24,30
52:3,31 53:2,13
54:25,26,31 57:13
59:33 66:31 67:9
70:20,21 103:16
persons 1:18 5:31,33
6:29 8:13,18,20
9:3,32 12:3,27,29
13:2,4,6 16:8,10,28
17:10,30 18:23
22:6,12,18,22,28
23:2,4,11,27 24:6
26:2 27:22,25 30:19
33:21 34:4,16,26,31
35:2,3,17
36:4,9,22,23 37:1
39:30 40:29,31
41:16,29 45:32
46:5,24 47:13
49:1,2,6,7,17 52:6
perspective 3:12 49:31
64:23
perspectives 92:20
persuasive 86:15
pertain 2:13 34:12
phase 61:6
philosophical 51:25
philosophy 53:4
photography 52:34 53:5
phrase 49:20 54:30,31
76:24
physical 24:34 54:5
physically 9:17
physicians 58:19
pick 47:2 49:26
picked 70:33 78:29
103:13
picks 37:17
picture 82:33
piece 7:29 41:1,18 45:28
47:14 86:31 91:29,32
piecemeal 78:9
pieces 91:33
pile 38:3
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
pity 43:23
placating 72:19
place 4:30 6:19 7:16
10:5,27 19:9 21:5
23:27 25:10 30:15
32:16 39:12,15
41:25,30 46:11,13
50:4,20 70:16 71:8
72:20,26
places 31:26 62:4 91:31
plain 27:23
plaintiff 12:5 96:28
102:24
plan 2:20 15:18 23:11
29:19 30:29 38:27,32
46:16 47:32 91:5,22
planning 39:31,33
40:3,11 44:31
plans 45:28
platform 94:10
play 5:15 16:15,17,20
48:21 101:2
pleased 1:6,25,34 95:33
pleasure 75:16 95:29
plenary 40:27 58:6,11
88:2
plenty 48:26 104:6
point 1:24 10:2 17:14,20
18:23 19:16,17 28:18
30:10 32:32,34 33:5
36:16 40:33 42:7
43:2,29 44:21 46:23
47:2 48:32,34 49:15
53:30 54:16 58:18,34
61:33 63:30 64:6
66:11,18 67:13,28
68:14 69:12 75:12
80:11 82:11 86:7
92:25 93:32 100:6
103:5,15,32
pointed 2:31 70:4
pointing 26:4
points 26:33 32:8 34:1
49:26,31 50:23 63:32
79:4 93:20
policies 8:13 16:7 20:25
33:1 73:20 104:20
policy 1:9,19,27 16:9
17:2,11,15,19,26,28
35:19,21 36:5,13
39:30,33 40:3,11
46:1,12 50:13,17
75:20 93:31 95:27
96:4,5,10,12,18,20
99:3,14,18
political 3:21,22 4:18,20
11:12 12:32,34
13:3,5,19 15:7
23:19,20,21,24
24:1,2,3,7,11,13,20,2
2,26,28,29,31,32,34
25:4,14,16,20,27,29
26:2,3 27:12,29,34
28:1,2,8,9,21,24
33:14,18,23,31
37:30,31 40:12
41:19,30 42:3,11
43:18,21,22 46:11
59:21,24,34 60:2
61:33
politicians 10:18,23
92:30 93:31
politics 51:13 61:14
poor 5:28 31:33 32:3
41:27,29
pop 79:20
popped 51:26
popular 59:19 75:34
population 27:32 29:22
36:12 37:6 98:26
position 11:14 77:28
positions 71:3,11 94:14
positive 22:11 33:15
42:15 71:18 95:15
positively 65:4 67:6
96:16
possible 10:34 11:34
12:20 14:15 38:8,9
114
42:16 49:32 61:34
67:6,27 88:8 96:7
97:14
possibly 83:20 85:33
92:13
post 11:30 24:1
potentially 18:29 90:27
poverty 5:31
power 35:32 38:15 57:28
77:27 78:3 81:30
88:5 91:31 100:9
101:18
powerful 86:31,32 91:7
98:24
powers 77:12
practical 66:1 67:28
practically 66:8
practice 4:26 13:6
30:11,14 35:27 48:3
51:3 65:31 93:21
practiced 7:6
practices 6:14 8:15 53:11
practitioners 80:11 93:6
pre 11:29
preamble 2:29,32 3:14
5:29,32,33 43:2,6,7,8
predictable 80:17
preference 56:22,23
70:28
preferences 61:7 72:28
73:22
premise 97:18
premised 58:34
preparatory 4:25
prepare 21:21
prepared 23:14 71:11
85:9
prescribed 74:7
prescriptive 66:9 73:27
presence 83:19
present 17:29,33,34 95:9
103:23
presentation 50:31
presented 49:32
presenter 12:15
presenters 101:30
104:16
presenting 104:23
press 17:19
pressed 82:5
pressure 93:18,23
presume 27:30 64:10
presumes 103:9
presumption 9:20
pretext 17:34
pretty 3:5 7:20 8:24
13:11 42:26,30 64:7
93:24
prevent 22:8 24:9,31
45:9 46:2,23,31 57:29
prevented 41:24 65:32
previous 27:4 59:3 64:14
103:23
price 32:26
pride 91:12
primarily 69:24
primary 39:3
principle 39:26,28,29
42:21 69:32 71:4
92:28 104:11
principles 2:25 3:5,7,11
5:25 7:33 37:5
39:13,15 68:21 87:12
92:27,29 93:2
94:20,22 95:6,17
99:13,18
prior 18:19
priority 35:12,16
prism 13:32 37:14 45:7
prison 11:34
prisoner 13:5
prisoners 12:32,34 13:3
prisons 11:32
privacy 46:24,28
private 7:4,6,8,13 22:9
23:9 47:1 89:30,32
95:11 100:5,19
privately 22:23 46:10
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
privileged 2:33
probably 11:17 21:9
23:26 50:32 72:23
86:26 93:23 95:3
104:18
problem 32:23,27 34:16
42:19 44:9 46:27
48:19 53:17,18,20,28
54:1 55:15,17 57:6
65:13,15 66:34 68:5
83:20,21 91:3 97:34
99:11,22 100:2
problematic 12:25 30:13
41:12 56:14 85:33
97:8
problems 30:11 34:26
47:22 51:3 53:34
55:19 68:33 69:28
97:6 98:2
procedure 48:3 101:12
procedures 11:6 35:27
proceedings 8:2
process 4:5,12,13 5:17
6:26 7:29 13:12
15:19 16:30,33,34
17:23 19:31,33
20:1,2,4,8,17,22,27
21:4,10,11,12,16,21
27:25 31:21,22
35:26,34 36:2 37:2
39:21 40:3,10
49:6,28,29,33 71:2
72:20,23,27 73:16
78:14,20 85:27
87:6,9,11,12,15 88:21
92:10,33 93:1 94:15 9
processes 16:8 20:7 80:6
produced 27:34 73:15
94:23
producing 16:21
professions 89:20
profound 52:33
programme 1:21 10:28
50:14
programmes 8:13
progress 1:19 44:22 90:3
progressing 27:1
progressive 13:10 14:1
33:12,13,32 37:29,34
38:11 40:5,16 41:8,33
42:4,16,18,24 45:3
47:17 57:31
62:7,26,32 96:15,25
progressively 5:10,12
33:16,30 38:12,13,24
42:7 47:31
prohibited 57:16
prohibition 39:18
prohibitions 49:17
project 1:16 101:31
projected 86:7
projects 1:30
promised 94:30
promote 35:8 45:20
99:25,26
promotes 76:1
promoting 5:15
8:16,17,18,19 16:34
35:8
prompted 64:14
promptly 9:6,9
properly 84:20 97:15,27
property 61:21,24,28,29
77:16 79:13 81:2
87:25,29 97:11
proportion 77:7
proportional 67:26
72:21
proposed 84:5 85:25
89:7,18,32 90:13
proposition 19:17,24
prospect 85:27
protect 14:31,34 15:33
22:2,8,15,22,33 23:8
24:9 25:3,19,29 27:8
29:9 33:19 34:4
41:30 43:33 45:8
46:18 54:21 98:23
100:10 101:2
protected 12:27 15:15
25:33 34:7,13 36:23
38:5 40:7 43:16
48:23 72:31 77:31
81:19
protecting 15:34 25:20
37:18 45:6 93:26
protection 4:18 6:29
7:28 8:12 15:2
18:23,24 40:10 70:14
76:34 81:5,6,11,13
84:16
protections 18:10,34
19:6 72:19
protective 18:5
provide 2:9 6:28 9:31,34
16:21
25:9,14,16,18,22 28:4
35:15 50:33 51:12
52:12 60:11 63:5
64:33 65:3,8 72:6,7
74:9,14 77:28 91:23
99:19,26,34 100:30
101:6
provided 10:16 15:24
22:24 23:8 28:12
31:16 44:11,18 98:13
providers 93:6
provides 2:30 18:24
98:11
99:9,17,18,25,32,33
100:14,23 102:17
providing 8:18 27:18
30:7 39:17 46:5 65:8
province 10:19,24 20:30
provinces 20:27
provincial 20:22
provision 8:30,31,33
9:30 17:29
18:20,22,23 28:2,3
39:17 47:7,12 56:18
99:9,11,12,14 100:25
102:18,22
provisions 3:34 5:7 6:2
9:33 16:16 17:30
18:3,29 43:15 46:12
67:25 71:12 97:3,5,33
99:15 100:16,19,20
prying 82:7
pseudo 76:8
psychiatric 12:32 22:24
41:17,29 46:1,4 48:26
58:17 88:14
psychiatrists 45:14,34
psychologist 75:26
102:30,34
psychologists 75:30
86:20,26 102:8,34
psychology 103:10
psychosocial 53:7,16,26
73:4 94:3
pub 14:9
public 8:3 9:12 10:17,31
14:3 15:18 21:11
23:9,10,20,21,24,30
24:7,11 27:29,34
28:1,8 35:21 95:9
97:30 100:5,24
103:34
publication 88:26 95:2
publicise 92:29
publicly 22:23 46:10
published 80:3 84:24
85:32 88:29 89:12
95:4,5
pull 65:16
purchase 97:10
pure 78:25
purely 24:23 37:12 43:24
61:33
purple's 40:20
purple 40:20
purpose 4:24 55:8 90:11
97:25,31 101:23
purposefully 2:32
purposes 3:26
pursuant 17:34
push 49:31 50:23 75:7
101:17
pushed 73:6 90:27
pushing 90:32 92:12
94:31
put 7:16 10:27 13:21
16:31 18:8 21:29
23:26 30:23 32:18
37:12 38:12 40:23
41:30 43:20,21 46:13
52:19 53:24 54:3
57:10 63:16 67:6
69:13 73:2 82:17
86:17 87:31 92:29
puts 43:23
putting 31:19,21
41:11,25 93:32
Pacific 47:30 95:25
Parliament 21:11
89:31,33 90:16
Party 7:31 8:23,27
17:31,33 18:15
24:13,20,26
25:4,14,16,20 64:1
65:7 73:19 96:15,25
PAs 30:22,31 31:34
PhD
75:17,21,24,28,29,32
Pictographs 27:24
Please 11:18 19:16 50:6
75:20 98:10
Plus 94:21
President 21:15
Prime 96:19
Professionals 8:20
45:13,16,17,18,24
68:13 84:18
Promotion 4:18 8:13
43:11 96:29,30 99:24
100:13
PWD 9:32 28:2 30:1,2,5
PWDs 12:7,10 48:1
Q
qualifications 41:9
qualities 51:30
quality 80:19 97:15
quantity 19:22
quarters 34:34
question 10:17 11:18,20
14:1 21:25 24:20
25:23 31:27,33 41:11
43:5 44:21 46:30
47:25 51:25 52:5,31
54:8 61:24,26 62:5,20
63:18,20
64:14,19,22,31,32
67:30 73:2 74:14
78:31
79:3,7,13,15,19,26,29
80:18,29,30 82:22
86:25,30 87:4 95:5
101:30 102:3,16,25
103:14
questions 2:13,16,17
16:4,5,13 17:6 19:6
25:11,12 26:7,32,33
50:22 62:15 64:13,31
68:26,28 78:31 79:33
86:34 87:3,4 95:19
101:23,25,26,27,28,2
9 102:2
quick 26:18 31:5,8 64:19
74:30 87:7 94:34
97:4
quickly 6:23,25 7:16
64:27 65:20 68:25
73:26 76:3
93:12,18,24
quiet 40:17
quite 2:31 3:2,23,29
33:29 36:15 38:15
42:3,9 45:30 49:34
56:17,21 62:12 64:3
68:34 70:30 74:3
75:8,34 76:28 77:27
83:26 89:27,30 93:7
103:5
quota 100:14
quotas 24:27
quote 81:28 82:14,17
86:6 104:18,20
quoted 80:33 82:15,25
quotes 84:23 104:19
QUINLIVAN 1:3,8
26:31
R
race 3:31 13:21
radical 57:32 76:20
radio 8:3 27:21 48:29
raise 2:16 6:33 42:7
44:21 47:9,12 81:11
91:17 93:19 99:21
100:1,24 101:5
102:22,24
raised 2:16 32:8 61:26
66:11 96:22
103:16,32
raises 44:21 84:28
raising 37:8 46:33 47:2
63:19
ramps 12:8,9
range 3:26,29 46:34
58:32 76:32 77:12
78:13 79:3 82:4
84:18 89:20 91:14
rapporteurs 5:5,6 23:14
rare 77:18,20
rarely 78:8
rather 1:12 15:34 18:5
19:14 23:29 25:20
30:23 32:20 36:24
67:18,22,29 85:5,10
102:11
ratification 9:24 10:32
18:8 20:17,20
21:5,13,21,25 60:1
62:11 94:30,31 96:1
ratified 6:24 12:24 14:6
19:1 21:29 90:5
ratify 10:24 66:5 89:25
90:5,6,10,11,14 92:22
ratifying 19:28
ratio 98:10
rational 86:19
rationale 33:20
rationalistic 103:9
reach 15:16 65:16
74:1,13
reaches 86:9
reaction 74:25
reactions 74:28
read 4:10 12:18 18:20
24:29 28:27 60:30
61:4,9,15,16 68:22
80:10 81:28
83:11,12,17
reading 18:11 28:28 29:2
79:33 85:14
readings 86:17
reads 82:17 84:9
ready 24:13,28
reaffirm 59:31
real 86:6
realisable 11:9,13 14:16
33:15,16,30
38:8,21,22 40:24,32
42:7,14 46:12 47:29
realisation 11:7 14:1
17:30 27:12 30:18
33:12,13,32 37:30,34
38:11 40:5,16 41:34
42:4,8,16,18,24 45:3
47:17 60:2 62:7,10,32
realisations 41:8
realise 9:13 14:26
29:12,32,33 52:11,16
60:2 62:11,23,27
74:23 82:1 94:32
101:15
realised 5:12 10:34
38:12,14,24 43:24
47:1 59:27 60:14
63:6 74:15
realising 43:10 63:12
realistic 66:1
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
reality 12:28 48:28,29
56:32 59:5 74:18
really 2:10 3:2 4:29
5:7,20,30 6:24,25
7:4,6,29 12:11 13:12
15:24,34 16:25,28
17:22 18:18 19:9
26:9 27:23 29:18
30:13 31:27,30,33
32:1 34:17,19 35:6
36:15,31 40:17
41:9,15,33 42:4,6,21
44:17,32 47:29 49:26
51:12 52:25,28
54:26,31 55:6 56:31
57:32 58:29 60
realm 52:26
reason 24:24 33:23 42:22
58:16 76:20 77:20
81:4,5,8 83:13
reasonable 6:30 8:30,31
12:12 19:12,20 25:22
28:34 29:1 37:16
43:26 44:1 97:8,21
99:9,12 100:16,25
101:6,11
reasonably
29:12,26,32,33 77:21
reasoning 97:8
reasons 25:7 64:18 82:27
86:19 87:18 103:12
104:19
receive 15:32 22:23
recent 57:12,15 59:2
79:10 87:17
recently 24:25 47:21
50:29 51:22 85:19
recognise 18:1 19:5
43:12 56:4 60:5 62:4
65:9 71:6 76:12 88:5
98:6
recognised 5:10 17:33
18:15 19:4 34:5,12
38:3 43:14 55:24
57:11,12,14 59:24
65:8,32 66:8,12 67:10
71:29 74:18 88:3,4
recognises 7:30 9:20
12:2 18:1 60:17 63:8
68:4
recognising 64:9
recognition 7:22,25 50:8
51:16,33,34 52:2 56:4
57:17 59:17,32
60:8,14
62:19,20,21,27 63:11
66:12 67:10 71:5
73:33 91:22
recommend 9:27 84:3
recommendation 92:27
recommendations 21:23
recommended 9:28
88:32 89:19 94:23
recruitment 47:31
red 40:20
redress 14:9,34 15:15,23
46:14,32
reduce 29:20
reduction 29:21
referee 97:15
reference 3:5 6:30
referenced 5:32 8:12
16:16 31:12
references 5:29,32 7:27
referencing 12:33 21:14
referred 3:14 34:34
37:31 41:13 49:26,27
58:26
referring 41:14 59:32
refers 16:30 55:30
reflect 13:9 88:33 94:13
reflected 3:12,27 93:26
reflects 43:3 69:6 95:6
reform 2:3 4:29 6:11,20
8:6,12 9:24 40:10
50:10,29 62:14 65:26
68:15 74:8
87:6,8,10,14,17,20
115
88:11,25,26,29,32
89:15,17,19,31
94:18,21,26 95:7
reformation 96:5,9,18,19
101:14
reforms 19:9
refrain 23:22,23
refreshing 68:25
refugees 5:32
refuse 77:29 81:19
85:16,17,26
refused 24:20 25:13,14
43:27 47:20 85:34
refusing 85:21
regard 16:3 25:27 97:27
98:22
regarded 3:2 58:18
regarding 23:1 25:27
27:16 56:19 67:13
regardless 56:5 76:22
regards 28:7
regime 10:10
72:10,13,33 73:30
90:13
regimes 69:21,22 73:20
region 31:28 48:5 95:31
regional 4:27 41:15
regions 95:30,32
registered 9:21
registration 9:21
regular 61:1 67:27
regulated 56:7
regulates 9:21
regulation 17:34 87:24
regulations 6:14 23:1,3
regulatory 80:28 89:24
rehabilitation 37:25
reinforce 34:1 72:2
reinstate 32:20
related 12:2 14:1 17:11
46:2 56:19 61:7
63:12 68:3 74:21
101:30
relates 16:17 18:9 71:5
104:11
relating 16:8 60:34 99:31
relation 2:1 6:5 10:33
19:7 21:17 50:20
78:21
relational 82:4
relationship 6:2 16:13
33:29 68:33 82:2
relationships 66:14
relative 78:19
relatively 87:17
relevance 43:5,7
relevant 4:26 20:10
45:33 46:16 72:23
88:11 103:16
relief 96:30 99:24,26,27
reluctance 71:6
reluctant 70:13
rely 45:12 82:17 102:10
relying 27:21 45:13
remain 9:20
remedies 41:12
remedy 14:31 39:17
80:14
remember 23:27 27:10
60:30 69:3 102:33
remind 76:3 78:34
remit 94:20
removal 46:12 56:18
remove 9:6,7,9,10
14:19,26 23:34 34:18
61:2 66:7 70:23 71:5
72:3
removed 10:6 41:20,31
45:7 46:14 54:26
56:9 57:23 58:5
81:26
renovated 12:8
repeal 14:20 41:6
repealed 15:14 38:20
repealing 40:28,29,32
repeals 23:1
repeat 19:16 80:27 90:4
repeated 73:14
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
repeatedly 81:11 84:12
replace 73:20,24,26,29
90:34
replaced 92:34
report 16:22 88:26,29
94:23,24 95:34
reporting 16:21,22
reports 5:6 16:21 35:28
80:28 93:25
represent 93:2
representation 17:4,10
36:6,8,11 88:23 91:26
92:1 94:3
representative 13:10
16:10,27 23:28
36:8,18 37:1
representatives 20:29
35:32,33 100:23
represented 17:25 94:2
representing 17:4,7,14
request 40:9 45:3
require 23:34 29:21
30:18 46:15 47:17
52:12 60:12 63:24,30
64:10 70:24 72:7
78:2 97:8,21
required 8:9,24,28,29
10:16 11:14 12:9
25:9,15 30:22 64:1
66:10 87:27
requirement 40:13 46:2
62:10 67:9
requirements 6:9,13
40:16 60:25
72:13,27,34 74:4
95:16
requires 7:19 12:3 18:30
23:8 27:11
29:12,15,26 31:11
44:24,25 51:18 63:33
74:4,5 99:28
research 1:16,30,32
8:16,17 50:8,13,14,27
78:27 80:12 82:30
83:25 86:17 94:24
102:26,29,31,33
103:4,7,10 104:6
researcher 75:19
researchers 80:33
researching 41:1
resemblance 86:21
reservation 21:27,28,29
reservations 21:24
reserve 74:32
residual 70:24
resolve 70:34
resort 77:8 98:23
resource 14:17,25
15:1,11,33
38:15,16,20
41:4,8,11,23,24,26,27
,29,34 42:12 44:23,33
47:28 63:12
resources 11:9,13
15:13,27,33,34
30:22,23,29 38:8,9
39:9 41:12 44:10
46:15 47:30 69:21
70:12 73:7 92:9
respect 4:20,30 8:9 14:30
16:14 20:12 21:27
22:2,5,15,17,19,33
23:10,21,24,26,34
24:12,15,21,32,34
25:29 27:8,10 28:7
29:9,20 33:19 40:22
43:33 46:24,28
61:7,27 76:21
respected 38:5 40:7
51:34 55:7
respecting 23:21,30
24:16 38:18 40:22
respects 72:28 73:21
respite 83:2
respond 34:31 76:11,15
responded 82:22 85:5
response 17:12 23:26
90:5
responsibilities
52:5,7,9,14,18,27
53:9,12 54:25 55:2
62:16
responsibility 8:23 12:23
23:9 43:11,12 50:14
99:25
responsible 7:5,11 53:23
80:19
rest 43:21 61:3,15 68:22
85:10 86:27
restrict 19:3 22:18
restricted 54:32,33 55:1
restricting 23:2
restriction 17:32 24:4
restrictions 18:14
restrictive 74:3
restricts 53:12
result 29:5,10,15,21,24
31:10,13 41:3 44:15
47:8 81:25
retain 73:25 78:19
retained 57:27
retaining 58:20
retrofit 10:28
retrofitting 11:16
return 82:19,21 85:4
returning 85:33
returns 30:4
reverse 103:29
review 7:19 17:15
18:27,30,33 19:3
20:30 21:4,16,21 61:1
67:27 73:19 82:31
reviewed 20:25 88:20
89:3
reviewing 2:28
rid 30:21 68:7
right 3:7 7:28 9:7,10,26
10:1,15,33 11:13
13:33 14:30,31
15:1,3,7,9,22
19:27,31
22:14,25,30,32
23:10,19,21,29,30
24:4,15,16,17,18,21,3
2 25:7,14,29 26:1,4
27:31,33 28:26,29
29:13,18,21,33 30:1,7
38:19,29 39:12,15,16
40:12,23
42:3,9,11,12,21,22
43:12 45:6,8
rightly 2:31
rights 1:15,21,31,32
3:17,20,22,23,24,26,2
9,30
4:4,6,7,16,19,20,21
5:5,10,12,18 8:13,20
11:9
12:15,16,18,19,21,27,
28,31
13:3,5,8,9,10,16,17,1
8,19,26,27,30,31
14:2,9,10,12,14,16,22
,24,32 15:4,5,7,15,22
17:30,32
18:1,4,5,14,18,19,20,
21 19:4,5,6 20:31
21:34
rigmarole 11:34
rise 39:6
risk 37:25 81:17 88:17
90:27
risks 85:1,9
risky 58:14,18 81:18
85:4
road 65:19
roads 34:13
role 5:15,16,20
16:15,17,20,23 20:6
31:2 35:32 36:1 69:1
72:27 101:2
roles 1:27 5:18
roll 95:3
rolls 46:7
room 4:27 37:27 50:34
51:2 67:17 69:11,13
74:26 75:12 93:30
rooted 62:23
roots 65:34 91:34 103:19
round 2:5 27:2 49:23
74:31,33 91:11 92:15
routine 83:3,4
ruled 97:2
rules 2:33 3:8
run 7:8 24:20,22
25:14,15 27:1 46:10
72:8 79:9 99:31
running 26:11 31:29
95:19
rush 93:10
rushed 67:24
rushing 93:12
Rannveig 53:5
Refraining 8:15 23:25
Removing 14:17,30 24:2
33:25,26 40:25,26
Requiring 11:3 23:22
24:5,9,31 29:32
Rica 70:4
Rosemarie
1:10,12,23,27,29,34
2:6,30 3:23 4:19 5:10
19:30 26:31,32 27:1,3
49:23,26 50:5 51:11
59:11 60:1,16
61:5,13,21 68:20,30
73:32 74:25,31 92:10
94:13 104:10
Russia 9:26
S
safe 78:2
safeguard 61:6 84:8
safeguarded 71:8
safeguards 60:33 61:1,9
68:20 72:20,23,26
88:19 89:2
safety 23:1
said 2:30 4:16,23
10:23,24,26 13:32
17:15 21:4 30:22
32:15 33:8 34:26
35:18 36:4,17 41:26
44:2 53:23,31 54:18
56:13,29 57:19 58:31
60:7 61:4,31 62:12
64:19,20 65:23
71:4,12 74:23,25
78:22 81:23
82:12,16,30 83:18,25
84:14 85:2,4,16,22
90:9 94:1,13,30 97:8
sake 72:17
same 1:12 3:7 13:2,27
20:26 21:8 30:31
41:13 48:13,17 51:34
52:6,27 53:8 54:21,27
55:2,7 76:17 84:18
100:29 103:23,28
satisfied 63:13 76:30
77:25,29
satisfy 29:15 31:11,13
save 26:7 86:1
saw 10:30 23:28,32 36:26
43:20 66:22 70:14,27
say 1:22 4:32 9:19,22
10:30,33 11:8
12:15,18,27 13:15
15:20,31 17:23 24:4
25:15 28:20,27,33
30:13,31 31:15
32:2,6,30 33:7,31
38:19 39:12 40:27
41:23 42:12
43:3,17,24 45:14
47:30,31,33 48:11,27
49:7,14 53:11 54:13
55:11 57:1 58:9
62:24,29,30 63:22
64:27 66
saying 1:5 4:14 11:14
13:16,25 25:5 28:9
31:23 46:29 52:33
62:33 63:14 65:29
75:28,34 79:24 82:9
84:25 92:11
says 9:21 14:2 24:14 28:2
35:10 53:21 54:20
59:5 60:21,33 61:20
63:23 68:5,12 72:6
76:20 81:28 84:3
97:19 104:18,22
scale 80:4
scary 77:27
scenario 23:28
scheme 89:12,17,23,32
scholar 81:28
scholarship 75:11
school 1:1,8,16,24 9:30
39:3 43:27 44:4
47:8,10,13 62:2 64:4
66:27,28 101:23
schools 43:26
science 102:30
scope 4:3 5:2 94:26
scoping 8:7 18:30 36:22
screen 28:28 29:2
searching 54:9
seat 74:23
second 2:5 26:6,24 29:26
43:33 44:15 52:5,26
53:30 60:5 70:12
80:22,24 88:18
secondary 15:24
secondly 18:14
section 1:17 28:17 61:21
72:2
sections 89:14
sector 12:16 30:10 45:16
71:3 100:5
secure 104:4
security 11:33
see 1:3,5 4:10 5:17,19,29
6:20,28,30 12:22 13:9
19:14,15 21:34 23:14
26:13 27:30 32:6
34:20 36:26 43:27,28
44:7 45:28 49:2
53:4,12 62:3,4 70:18
71:12 72:15 74:25
81:7 95:15,32,33
101:24
seeing 12:20 30:10
seek 14:34 15:15,23
22:27
seekers 57:13
seeking 35:1
seem 32:28 34:13 41:9
seems 10:32 25:17 32:23
58:15 97:5 99:11
seen 15:7,32 28:19
33:14,16 35:31
37:2,8,30,32,33 38:8
39:3,28 40:1,6,12
42:14 44:9 59:18
60:13 79:7 80:9
85:16 92:26 95:16
sees 19:17
seewritenow 26:24
segregated 52:23
selected 98:15
self 88:17 94:3,10 101:30
102:1 103:14,28
104:2,6,7,9
send 47:8,10,13
senior 1:15 50:13 95:25
sense 33:9 40:17 43:24
51:29 53:30 68:22
75:26 104:13
sensory 69:24 73:6
sent 32:13
sentence 73:14 82:25
separate 2:3 26:26 52:18
57:13 63:1 74:33
89:19 93:19
separated 69:34
separately 61:27
separation 43:30
serious 42:12 75:6
seriously 81:13
serves 1:17
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
service 35:21 48:17
50:17 93:6
services 8:17 12:20 14:3
15:11 22:23 32:15
48:12
session 1:9 2:3,5,8 4:34
5:3 16:4 25:25
26:9,18,30,31 27:1,5
55:20 75:7 86:30
95:11
sessions 1:11 2:18
set 6:9 13:9 16:5,6 21:23
27:28 31:7 38:33
46:16 47:31 67:14
72:14 75:8 76:7 82:7
88:19 89:16
sets 40:27 86:30
setting 48:3 67:18,19
settings 22:22 75:30,31
seven 73:15
several 1:18 3:10 20:9
34:10 37:5 47:32
50:10,31 70:26
severe 52:33 85:22
severely 55:15
sex 23:5 79:15
shadow 16:21 35:28
shall 9:20 16:9 17:29,32
60:5,11 72:6 93:10
shame 83:21
share 7:15 12:6 82:30
83:26 94:6,25
shared 46:3 49:16
sharing 49:15 54:6
shattered 101:28
she's 50:6 104:24
she
1:13,15,16,17,18,20,2
3,27,28 2:31 9:18
32:11 43:11
50:6,7,9,14,16 51:11
61:4
75:16,19,20,21,24,26,
27 82:19,20,21
84:31,33
85:9,10,21,26 86:9
91:24,25 95:10,12
102:5 104:21
shed 5:6
shift 68:10 69:17,27 74:5
101:16
shifting 44:20
ship 21:20 58:6 73:20
77:15 78:3 97:18
98:11
shoes 103:12
shop 11:19
shops 12:1
short 6:26
shortest 60:34 67:26
should 5:27 9:26
10:7,11,27 14:3,9
15:23,31 18:14 21:24
23:26,34 25:5
28:3,14,23,26 30:32
32:6 36:1,2 37:24
38:7,21 39:28,29,30
41:31 42:13 43:18,30
44:3 46:30 47:29
50:25,26 55:6
56:22,27 58:9 59:9,15
60:34 63:33 65:12
73:29 75:29 77:17
78:7 80:18 81:19
shouldn't 83:34 103:28
show 14:7 23:5 68:21
77:24 79:19 80:16,28
98:33
showing 32:17
shown 86:21
shows 61:23 98:10,26,29
99:17 104:7
shut 31:29
shy 101:24
shyness 101:26,28
sick 64:22
side 37:27 42:11 91:8
102:12
116
sides 17:24 25:32 71:3
sigh 95:3
sight 66:13
sign 7:22,25,30,31 8:3
23:8 25:15 28:12
42:12 53:21 55:26
66:26,28,29 78:21
83:18,19,22 92:28
94:20
signature 20:21
signed 20:20 89:12 96:14
significant 19:32 31:30
34:11 40:11,14 69:27
70:24 72:25,27
significantly 34:7
signing 21:15
silent 72:33
silly 18:11
silo 62:24
similar 20:27 21:16
58:10 76:6
simple 33:25,31 99:14
simplistic 85:32
simply 21:4 43:19 44:18
84:20 97:33
since 6:19 56:32 60:27
61:32 84:24 97:25
99:3
sincere 41:3 58:34
single 11:1 44:30 78:11
79:1 92:5 99:14
singular 48:18
sister 69:34
sit 74:27
sitting 71:23
situated 93:15
situation 9:11 25:13
32:17,18 44:3 48:17
66:9 72:14 84:20
85:8,15 95:34
96:16,26
situations 33:7 37:25
48:25 81:17 85:12
104:20
skies 1:5
skill 86:3
skills 55:30,31,32,34
58:31 82:5,31
slavery 101:33
slaves 57:10
sleep 1:3
sleeping 12:22
slide 16:30 23:32 28:17
54:18 57:10 76:32
78:34 79:4 80:27,28
81:28 82:14,17,33
84:23 86:13,17
slides 27:4 76:28 79:4
86:29
slight 1:9 42:18 71:16
slightly 35:31 72:12 75:7
slower 80:26
small 28:18 45:14
53:20,24 68:17 70:24
77:7 80:3
smaller 57:28
social 1:30 3:21,23
4:18,20,32 13:19 15:5
28:1,3 33:15,31 34:23
35:8 37:31,32 39:22
41:3 42:3,8,20,32,33
43:18,19,27,29
44:11,30 47:2 54:3
62:2,25 64:1 66:32
75:24,25 78:1,12
79:26 82:8 83:10,12
97:32 98:22 99:7
100:15,33,34 101:16
103:21
socially 35:19
societies 53:13 56:32
57:20,31
society 16:27 30:16
35:18,22,26,28,31,33
36:1,4,6,16 37:34
48:7 51:26 52:22
57:1 59:27 66:30,32
67:1,5
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
socioeconomic 42:27
software 28:28
solely 27:21 40:27
solicitor 79:6,7,8
solution 33:3 101:7
solutions 45:27
some 1:5 2:5,16
3:1,27,30 4:29 5:10
10:18 12:19 13:9,11
16:16 17:9 18:8,20,26
19:28 21:17,28,33
24:24 27:6 29:6
34:1,25 36:25 37:11
38:4,14 41:22,25,26
42:15 43:20,25 44:23
49:16 50:14 51:1,12
52:19,34 54:9,19 55:3
57:15 58:27 59:2
60:33 61:14 62:26,30
64
somebody's 76:21
somebody 32:15 48:12
53:1,22 70:27,28
72:25 77:10,12,21
84:25 95:29
somehow 53:8
someone 9:8 29:2 36:14
43:13 55:12 56:2,23
58:17 63:27,32 65:6
72:21 81:7 84:15
91:30 102:10
something 4:11 11:19
13:33 23:32 30:12
34:21 36:17,20 42:21
43:34 48:14 54:15,26
56:29,30,31 57:6
58:4,6 61:22
64:14,24,25 65:23
66:1,16 77:20 78:25
81:7,8,34 87:23 89:9
91:18 92:7 93:7
94:21 95:5 102:7
103:7
sometimes 32:30 43:34
48:9 52:11 53:6
55:33 60:30 64:16,17
66:6 71:13 81:18
103:26
somewhere 26:34 47:28
49:10 79:20
son 46:29
soon 67:3 73:26 95:5,15
sop 48:1 61:31 95:20
sort 2:30 22:29 23:16
25:17 57:26 66:2
77:2
sorted 100:34
sorts 6:28,30 15:11 46:12
sound 24:5 42:18 45:19
52:24 54:13 61:1,3
sounded 85:8
sounds 8:24 61:3 85:8
98:12 99:24
source 73:13
south 9:16,19 11:32
49:11 95:9
sovereign 35:32
space 9:31
spanner 69:14
spans 54:2
spare 86:29
speak 1:10,12,25 2:1
20:17 43:27 95:21,33
speakers 75:8,9 93:19
104:16
speaking 70:6 88:7
speaks 12:11
special 5:4,6 13:27 23:14
96:5
specialist 67:18
speciality 103:34
species 51:29
specific 2:9 3:1,17 5:5,18
6:9,11,12,21 8:28,32
9:8,11 12:26 15:18
27:14 28:33 29:15
31:11,13 34:25 36:16
37:6 38:34 49:18
51:24 55:15 56:27
61:21,22 64:20 65:25
68:12 73:7 76:1
103:31
specifically 16:27 17:13
27:14 33:12 36:17
37:1 50:28 59:26
60:7,14 67:15 73:2
104:3
specified 4:8
spectators 23:12
spectrum 94:1
speed 91:21
speedy 101:6
spend 6:10 44:13 68:23
87:21 88:10
spent 50:9 98:30
spoke 5:15 53:5
spoken 54:29 62:13
sponsored 80:10 84:14
sport 22:32
sporting 23:11
spot 51:32
staff 8:20 104:24
stakeholders 91:6
94:1,13
stand 94:23,24
standard 2:33 3:8 14:29
15:13 29:16 31:11
86:9 101:5,10
standards 3:17 5:27
81:24 86:26
standing 92:28
start 2:3,28 12:10 14:29
15:4 19:9 26:33
31:27,33 33:6 37:6
39:33 40:25 45:6
47:16 51:6
65:5,14,15,17,19
67:21 75:3 88:25
100:1
started 6:18 27:9 49:24
56:8,33 69:10 89:26
95:23
starting 64:6
starts 15:1 27:29 33:23
state's 19:4 71:32
statement 64:20 66:30
69:33 71:4,29
states 2:4 4:13 5:20,23
6:4 12:3 13:13 14:20
16:9 19:28,29,34
20:4,5,6 21:17
22:5,11 23:22 24:9,31
27:11 29:15 31:11,33
33:12,16
35:2,11,12,31 36:23
37:24,29
38:7,13,15,24,26
42:11,15,17 44:3,9
45:9,31,34 46:2,9,30
48:32 59:31 60:5
71:7,11 72:6,19,32
statistics 37:8
status 16:3 34:6 53:8
58:1,2,6,10,25 88:2
statute 66:5
statutes 7:33 8:2,10
statutory 94:18,19
stay 28:5 75:12
stayed 70:8 104:18
stays 104:19
steal 49:20
step 8:24,28 15:3 20:10
25:18,19 39:13
65:11,23
steps 15:16 38:7,25,26,29
40:6 47:17 52:11,12
60:2 62:10
stereotypes 47:2
sterilization 77:6
stick 4:13
still 1:5 32:21 42:6,7
57:1,20 62:12,15,25
63:27 67:4,5 71:12
81:13 88:21 91:19
93:16 101:15 102:10
stirring 94:31
stood 104:17
stop 33:2 76:21 79:24
81:8,22,34 87:19
story 54:6 82:32 83:26
straight 96:9
straightforward 5:13
85:30 90:12
strange 21:27 33:8
strategic 50:10,29
strategies 81:16
strategy 23:11 80:25
strawberry 103:3
strengthen 48:15
stress 48:24,34
stretch 81:4
stricken 46:7
strike 41:10
striking 82:25
stripped 46:11
strive 43:11
striving 52:30
strong 5:16 6:15,16
17:22 44:2
stronger 18:28,29,33
66:33
strongly 98:3
structural 2:28 33:26
71:14
structure 3:20
36:29,30,31 63:5
66:3,10 72:8 99:17,32
100:29
structured 47:17 66:16
structures 12:8 54:14
65:5,11,12,13 67:14
structuring 54:13
struggle 72:16
struggling 74:2
student 75:11
students 23:6 32:9 47:6
studied 95:23
studies 74:30
80:2,9,16,28 84:12
study 7:15 9:27,28
49:2,18 80:4,9
84:14,18
stuff 3:14 13:13 51:19
sub 73:7
subject 55:24 61:1 67:27
subjected 46:24
subjects 56:33
submissions 21:12
90:16,19,20 92:19
subordinate 75:31
subparagraph 72:12
subset 79:4
substantive 16:14
29:15,27 31:11 74:1
substitute 47:21 56:12
57:26,27,33 58:1
61:3,10 63:2
73:20,25,27,29 77:8
89:2 91:32
substituted 56:8,16
70:23 73:29 81:17
succeeded 17:20
success 85:25,27 101:14
successful 37:3
successfully 31:21 84:25
succession 98:14
such 13:24 15:8 18:1,3
19:5 22:8 24:9 30:22
31:29,33 35:20 41:9
42:21,28 45:28 67:11
68:4 69:16 85:23,27
94:18 98:13
sudden 69:13
sue 102:23
sufficient 30:29 67:34
suggest 30:14 42:32
83:26 85:30 86:30
suggested 89:15,18
suggestion 31:23
suggestions 47:18
suggests 86:18 102:26
103:4,7,10
sum 94:34
summarise 41:13 80:27
summary 86:29
summer 1:1,24 62:2
101:23
summers 90:18
super 13:12 17:20
superficial 85:2
support 11:34 15:8,32
31:30 32:1,5,20 51:16
56:17,18,26 59:4
60:12,19,22,23,33
61:10,17 62:32,34
63:2,16,17,24,27,29,3
0,33,34
64:1,7,11,12,15,20,31
,33,34
65:3,5,6,8,9,12,13,16,
17,19,23 66:10,15,25
67:13,14,15,16,18,29,
32 68:16 70:20,24,31
72:7 75:25 81:16
supported 31:24 47:21
48:29 50:9,15 58:22
61:16 66:15 67:15
68:9 70:25,26
72:15,16,25
73:21,25,27 91:33
93:34,21 97:16 98:6
supporting 31:33 94:9
supportive 31:7 88:6
supports 28:10 66:7
67:18 68:13 71:7,8
72:9,10 74:14
suppose 10:2 24:12
30:20 33:20 51:33
52:24 88:27
supposed 6:28 83:32
sure 8:3,7 11:15 15:14
20:26 26:8 27:20
36:17 45:9 48:27
49:32 50:23 62:1
71:7 73:28 74:17
92:10,12,30 93:7
95:15
surely 43:23
surprising 21:9
surrounded 84:32
suspect 83:21
sustaining 77:6
sweep 74:9,10
swim 102:13
symptom 83:18
system 11:30 16:1 41:15
46:11,19,22 48:6
58:10 61:2,25 62:32
63:2,17 64:20 65:26
67:33 69:32 83:11,12
88:11 89:16,18 93:4
94:24 97:15,27,31,33
98:3,4,7 99:31
100:14,23
systematic 46:23
systems 4:27 41:25 52:28
56:24 58:19,25 63:17
67:13,16 98:2
Sabatino 80:33
Scotia 11:14
Senate 21:22
September 91:11
SERIES 75:16,28 80:27
102:25
Shivaun 1:8 26:30 75:28
104:23
Similarly 63:11
Siobhan 50:27
Skype 91:25
Soros 75:11
Sorry 34:21 38:28 39:13
42:33 45:13 96:5,7
Southern 31:28 32:1
Spanish 70:6
SPEAKER 8:30,33
9:2,12,19,26,31
10:2,7,10
11:18,22,24,27
12:6,15,18 14:1 19:16
20:13 23:26,34
24:4,12,17,25,34
25:27 27:16,27,33
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
28:14,18,23,27
30:1,10,20,31
31:5,15,23,27 32:2,22
33:5 40:25,29,34
42:18,30
43:1,7,9,10,17 44:9
45:11 46:18 47:20,34
48:3,11,
State 1:28 3:16 7:31
8:23,27,29,31,33
9:2,4,6,9,15
10:2,7,15,31 14:32
15:3,34 16:22
17:31,32,33
18:6,15,23,34 20:2
21:18,20,30
22:8,17,22,27
23:1,8,9,10,26
25:9,10,28,30,31,32
26:1,3,4,5,7 27:34
29:27 30:5,17,20,26
31:25 32:20 33:1
35:32 37:29,32,33
38:4,
Stefan 81:28
Stephen's 83:9,14
Stephen 82:33
83:1,3,6,12,20
Steve 5:15 10:33 16:15
20:14,17 25:12
Susan 81:28
Syndrome
17:10,11,13,14,15
36:17,18
T
table 17:16,20,28 27:28
33:19 36:5 37:12
49:29,30,31 71:23,25
91:11 92:15 98:10,26
99:17
tables 98:33
tackle 65:23
tactile 27:19
tailor 101:11
tailored 67:26
tailoring 34:25,28 47:15
take 2:4 5:4,7 8:24,28,29
9:28 12:23 14:2
22:11,32 23:19 25:12
27:11 28:4 29:29
31:12 32:28 33:6,16
37:24 38:7,25,29
40:11 44:3 46:30
48:15,16 50:4 52:11
53:23 59:15 60:2,11
62:10 63:15 64:13
65:31 72:6 73:20
74:30 79:6 81:1,13
101:33 102:2
taken 11:2 19:3 34:13
37:9,20 40:6 44:3
46:34 52:12 63:24,26
66:23 79:16
takes 16:6 22:22 54:19
62:31 63:17
taking 4:24,30 15:16
19:9 22:14 27:19,22
29:18 34:26 44:15
63:29 70:18 72:27
81:24
talk 3:23 5:10 6:12 10:12
15:8,9 20:33 21:30
23:32,33 33:12,29
39:20 51:3,10,15 55:8
56:27,28 60:16,25,26
61:4,13 62:13 63:18
64:8,9 67:33
68:19,20,28,30 73:10
75:13 76:1,2 79:22
80:3 81:33 84:12
87:6,8,9 90:23 91:24
92:4,14 94:28 95:17
103:15
talked 4:32 5:24
16:16,30 32:11 33:34
36:20,34 60:30 62:1
68:3 76:3 83:33
117
87:16 88:1 92:10
104:21
talking 6:10 7:4 12:16,18
13:8 16:23 25:13
27:29,33 33:11 39:22
40:22,23,34
45:30,33,34 49:9
51:33 53:15 54:30
55:20 61:27 65:26
74:21 76:24 78:21
84:6 93:27
talks 19:27 60:33 88:12
tall 88:33
tap 103:6
tape 58:27
target 49:8
targeted 11:16 38:26,29
targets 29:15 31:11,13
38:33
task 95:26 96:5
tasked 2:22
taxing 71:24
tea 47:10 99:29
team 26:22 93:30
teams 26:19,21 66:6
technical 1:18 25:28 96:7
technologies 8:18,19
technology 29:2
teleologically 97:23
tell 19:30 23:5 28:13
61:5,13 66:5 78:34
80:34 86:17 87:12,20
102:32
telling 56:3
tellingly 41:18
temporal 36:25
ten 11:8 26:11 31:22
38:13 45:23 96:5,10
103:12
tenancy 30:5,8 83:15
tenant 30:2,3,4 83:13
tenants 30:1
tend 39:20 56:30 80:30
86:2 94:5 95:30
tent 32:26
term 14:30 19:25 47:31
49:33 55:27 62:24
104:2
terminology 43:18
terms 2:8 3:22 11:12
13:8,20 19:34 20:7,20
21:12 26:5 27:17
33:11,13,19,30
40:5,16 46:18 48:8
50:33 61:22 64:23
71:6 73:29 76:11
87:21 88:1,27
93:29,32 95:6 103:19
terrible 54:14
territories 20:27
territory 20:30
test 55:11 58:29 59:3,5
65:20 76:31
78:16,25,29 81:24
89:16
tests 58:27 86:7,15
text 5:3 29:1 43:4
59:11,12,15 61:13
71:13 74:26 82:15
texts 69:3
than 1:12,19 3:30 5:17
6:18 15:34
18:5,21,29,34
19:14,26 25:18,20
30:23 32:20 36:24
42:19 52:9,19 54:2
55:30 59:3 66:33
67:17,18,22 68:6
71:16 73:4 79:34
86:27 102:11
thank 2:7 12:14,15 21:14
23:33 26:13 27:3
28:8 30:6 31:9,10
40:18 54:1 63:19
67:7 68:31 74:22
75:27,28 86:31,32
101:21 102:1,12,16
104:13,14,16,23,24
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
that's 2:21 3:5 4:26
6:20,24 9:18 10:26,30
12:26 13:13,17
14:10,14 15:4 17:4
18:10 19:34 21:8
22:20 23:30 24:23,24
25:5,19 26:33
27:21,23,31 28:11
29:2 30:25 31:28
32:32,34 38:25
42:9,16,24,27,29,30,3
1 43:14,29 45:30
46:29,32 48:21,32
51:28 52:1,3,28 53:3
that 1:11
2:13,17,20,23,29,31,3
2
3:1,12,16,20,23,28,29
4:7,10,11,13,29,34
5:6,7,10,12,30
6:2,11,14,18,20,23,25
,28 7:5,15,16,21,30
8:3,7,27,32
9:2,14,15,20,21,22,26
,28
10:5,19,25,26,27,30,3
2,33
11:1,3,13,14,15,16,19
,26,27,33
12:2,8,11,15,16,18,21
,23,33 13:
the
1:4,8,10,12,16,17,20,
21,23,24,28,29
2:1,3,4,5,7,9,12,13,14
,15,17,21,24,26,28,29
,30,32,33,34
3:1,2,5,6,7,10,11,14,1
6,17,20,26,27,28,29,3
0,31,34
4:4,5,7,8,10,12,13,19,
23,24,26,27,28,29,30
5:2,3,4,5,6,7,15,16,17
,18,19,20,23,24,27,28
,29,32,33 6:1,2,3,4,5,
theatres 23:2
their 5:23 9:2,27 10:34
11:1 14:21,22
15:4,9,15,20 16:10,27
17:19 20:8,25 22:12
23:29 24:16 26:27
27:3,24 28:5,25
30:12,32 32:18
33:1,24,27
35:3,11,13,31,34 39:9
41:30 43:26 44:26,29
46:14 47:8,10,13
48:9,22,26,27,28,30
49:23 54:22 56:2
57:13 58:19,20,21
them 1:12,25 2:24
10:18,23 11:34
13:21,28,32 17:28
18:1 20:33 24:26
27:2 28:4,13
31:13,17,29 33:6
34:28 41:24 42:26
43:20 45:32
50:20,22,23 52:7
58:16 62:13,14
64:8,9,17 65:16 66:15
67:20 70:18,20 71:19
72:9,19,34 73:9
74:26,32 78:26,31
79:9 80:3,21 81:8
thematic 2:9 13:20,21,24
theme 64:3 75:32 98:33
themselves 45:1,10 48:1
84:28 103:20
then 1:10 3:34 7:3 10:25
12:2,10 14:31
15:3,13,16,19,25
18:14 20:10,21
21:1,11,21,23
24:17,27 25:12
28:23,28 29:2
31:1,10,12,13
37:5,7,11,23 38:29
39:15,33 40:6,11
42:11 44:4,16,18,27
46:29 51:10,15 52:5
55:13 58:24 59:11
60:25,33 61:4,19
62:24,26,31 63:1
theory 12:27 13:5
55:5,6,14 59:4
there's 70:12 72:12
there 2:3,23,31 3:20,21
4:8,10,14,25 5:31
6:16,18,33 7:21
10:19,30 11:12,15
12:22,33 13:16,30
14:3,6,12,15,17,25,34
15:13,23,25,27 16:31
17:23,26,32
18:14,28,33
19:3,13,29,32
20:1,5,7,16,27,34
21:1,11,12,17,18,29
22:25 23:32 24:27
25:3,25,32
26:8,20,21,26
thereafter 21:15
therefore 4:17 9:17
19:29 44:16 49:7
53:8,26 61:34 84:20
these 2:18,22 3:6 4:5
6:12,29 7:11 8:4
10:20 11:7
12:15,16,18 19:6 22:3
31:31 32:31 33:7
37:8,11,12,14 38:2
41:28,30 44:15,18,32
46:21 54:20 55:27
57:25 58:31,34
62:5,24 68:27 71:19
72:13,27 76:20
78:7,21 79:16,32 83:3
86:1,2,15 92:29
93:13,14 98:15,33 10
they're 55:32
they've 6:24
they 1:10,11,24 2:1,22,23
3:7,22 4:3,6
7:8,12,22,24,27,28,30
8:2,7 9:2,28 10:19
11:5,22,23,24,28,33
12:4,5,19,24 13:3,21
14:16,26
15:2,16,19,20
17:12,13,19,20,25,26
20:1,4,7,9,26,33 21:1
23:30 24:14,23,27,34
25:5,6,7,10,15,33
26:3,7 28:10,27,31
30:12,15 3
thing 2:20 3:20
6:23,24,25 10:19
17:22 21:27 24:23,24
25:14,17 28:21 31:34
43:17,33 44:17 48:34
53:30 56:16 59:17
60:16 61:15 65:3,34
66:7,12 67:31 68:12
69:3 70:15,16 71:30
76:17,25,31 81:5
84:18 89:18,23 92:11
103:1,2 104:17
things 2:31
10:18,20,26,28 21:5
23:26 25:17 28:11
32:25,31 38:14,15
41:22,26 46:9 47:7,16
51:7 52:16 55:27,33
56:21 58:31 60:33
62:25 64:7,18
66:11,31 71:2 72:22
73:32 74:13,21,23
77:5 79:25 83:11,19
84:20,32 86:23,32
93:13 95:1,6,15
103:21,23
think 1:24 2:8 6:5 7:20
9:26 10:21 12:11,26
13:8,15,16,30
16:25,28 19:6,25
20:16 22:19 25:28,30
26:5 27:5,8,9
30:8,15,20,26,31
31:3,12,16,17 33:2
37:3 38:13 39:33
41:7 42:2 43:23,30,34
44:7,9,12,13,21,23,29
,32 45:11
48:4,7,17,24
49:5,23,27 51:19
52:17,25
thinking 2:24,25 3:5
10:21 27:9 29:5 33:2
38:2 40:22,29 45:6
46:2 57:10 74:5,10
79:24 81:16 101:15
103:21
third 1:24 15:3 24:10,31
25:34 26:1,5 45:10
46:3,31 55:25 60:11
65:9 76:29
this 1:6,9,15,22,24
2:8,12,15,18,20,21,28
3:6,15 4:17 5:17 6:10
7:30 9:10,19 10:10,24
11:8 12:7,23
13:13,15,30
14:2,4,7,15,30
16:4,24,25,26,28
17:15,27 18:3,9,21,22
21:2,4 22:14,27,29
23:2,32,34 24:5,30
25:12,23,25,30
26:1,6,7,9,18,31,34
27:3,5,10,15,27 2
those 2:25 4:20 6:6 11:34
12:34 13:9,20,21
15:11,27 16:32 18:34
31:26 34:1 36:8
38:6,18 39:7,17 40:24
44:12 46:5,9,10,12
48:33 49:31 51:7
52:5 54:6 55:5 57:19
59:27 60:27 61:27
62:12,28 64:13
65:11,13,16,17 68:25
70:18 71:7,8 72:15,22
73:28 74:3 81:29 85:
though 39:21 65:31
83:21 97:33 104:4
thought 2:28 7:15 17:20
23:19 33:13 49:8
60:28,30 61:2
69:10,12 70:15 82:32
85:1,4 86:1 88:30
91:5,6,8 92:11,25
93:11,18,23 94:1
thousand 65:8
threads 86:1
threat 92:26
three 13:20 20:34 26:22
34:33 35:12 50:20,21
51:7 57:25 58:34
60:26,31 64:13 66:20
68:31 71:22 74:30
80:20 83:1,9 84:32
86:30 98:11 99:3,4
threshold 11:12,17
15:13,25
19:11,13,14,15,18,20,
26 24:12,14,15 42:16
55:17
thrive 15:10
through 2:29
3:15,18,21,22,26,33
4:1,10 7:28,32 8:8
11:8,33 13:32 16:10
20:6 21:10 22:3,29
23:6,16,19 25:4 28:12
35:6,16,27 37:14 38:6
39:17 40:10,13 45:7
46:32 51:16 57:27
59:11 70:9,12 71:30
72:10,21 79:32 86:1
87:7 88:20 89:18
90:27 93:10 103:13
throughout 2:15 4:5
26:32 57:7 70:8 80:3
throw 7:15
thrown 28:27 69:14
tick 80:5
ticket 24:13,22,26,28
tickets 25:1
tied 12:22
till 28:19
time 1:12 3:7 6:10
7:24,29
10:7,10,24,27,28
12:19 13:34 16:5
20:26 22:2 23:14,33
25:11 26:8,12,32
36:26,30 37:17 38:13
42:7 43:1 48:5
49:15,28 50:22,23
57:27 59:9,18
60:30,34 63:17 67:26
68:23 73:9 74:33
78:1 79:31,32 82:5
84:27 87:11,21 88:10
90:33 93:10
timeframe 31:19,24,26
38:34 87:8 90:19
timekeeping 75:4,6
times 30:25 50:31 54:3
57:15 59:2,25 74:4
timewise 15:30
timing 88:27
tips 44:12
title 59:17 62:18,19
today 1:5,9 2:1 14:10
46:24 53:15 75:13
76:24 87:2 92:10
95:33 101:27
104:16,23
toe 74:31 79:6
together 1:11 7:22,23
43:20,22 45:25,27,28
48:15 87:10 91:6,8
92:7,12
told 53:22
tolerate 85:9
tomorrow 63:18
75:12,13 92:15 95:17
too 39:13 68:23 85:32
87:21 88:10 92:26
96:23 98:7 100:23
103:26
took 83:5 89:31 92:30
tool 44:2 90:11
tools 2:23,25 21:33
44:26,33
top 27:2 47:10 73:10
102:1,32
topic 26:6 50:20 64:28
83:29
topics 2:3
tort 102:17,18
torts 77:23
torture 37:20
total 98:11,12,16,17
totally 98:12
touched 90:3
touches 56:29
tough 52:24
toward 98:7,8,19,22
towards 11:16 15:20
27:12 30:5,17 31:30
39:22 85:13 100:19
tower 49:23
track 68:26
traditional 14:15
34:25,26 102:3
traditionally 33:13,14
35:18 37:30 40:12
44:29
train 48:4,34
trained 47:33
training 8:19 45:17
46:33 47:25,26,28,32
48:3,11 50:7
transcripts 26:26
transformative
39:20,21,26 71:17,18
transit 31:20
transition 30:29
translated 37:12,13
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
translation 13:31 37:21
transparency 21:9,12
transparent 21:6 44:25
transplant 87:18
traumatic 83:6,27
travelled 95:29
treat 10:7 52:8 76:17
treated 10:11 12:22
34:21 84:9
treaties 4:24 19:1,33
20:1,5,31 21:10,34
25:31 69:3
treating 58:21
treatment 41:5 58:17,19
77:6,17,23,28,29,30,3
1 80:21
85:16,21,25,27
88:12,22 98:30
treaty 2:26 3:10,17,28,30
4:28 5:16,17,18,19,21
6:2,3,15,18,24,31 9:6
12:2,26 13:13 16:16
20:2 21:25,29
22:30,32 25:32
35:27,28 42:25
tree 27:11
tremendous 6:20 41:24
49:19
trend 62:3
trespass 77:24
tribunals 15:2 88:21
tricky 2:20 14:29 40:9
44:11 70:23
tried 21:3 63:21 76:28
82:22 83:2 91:23
92:19 94:3
tries 34:18
trigger 83:22
triumph 97:5
trouble 62:16 80:24
troubling 6:23
true 30:13 53:4,17 54:2
67:13,19 102:13
truly 62:25
trust 1:5 64:8 68:14
trusted 72:22
trustee 73:20
trusting 66:14
try 23:16 26:12 50:21,33
51:18 55:31 57:31
65:34 66:2 70:34
74:1,26 87:7,8,19
91:9,17 92:3,7,30
93:10,20 100:8
103:14
trying 1:22 5:7 12:18
27:24 30:13 36:25
39:21 45:11,22,28
46:27 47:9 62:14
65:16 66:5 67:22
68:16 83:4 92:9
93:13 94:22 95:7
103:5 104:4
turn 32:30 65:6 66:34
67:3
turning 6:1
turnover 68:30
two 1:23 2:3,18,34 3:1,2
13:18 14:12,15 23:26
24:25 25:11,12,32
26:18,22,31 31:16
32:8 37:6 45:11
50:9,28 52:32 53:20
60:26,28 63:32 64:7
69:32,33 75:3
76:20,28 81:31 82:32
84:23 85:20,21 86:29
87:15,26 90:3 93:18
94:25 98:12 99:3
type 3:28 10:20 56:26
88:16 90:32 100:34
103:31
types 11:4 12:34 22:29
46:34 57:17,25 58:7
68:16 98:11 100:33
typical 33:7 83:22
typically 85:13
118
Thanks 10:33 26:8 30:27
54:5 64:25 95:18
104:2
Theresa 95:10
Thumbs 40:17
Tokyo 95:26,34 96:23
97:2
Tribunal 46:15,17 88:23
89:3,20 95:25
U
ultimately 15:31 64:10
92:22 93:2 94:15
unable 84:9
unanswered 42:4,6
unbearable 85:27
unconstitutional 97:3,19
under 2:4 8:20 9:7,9
12:23,28,33
18:10,15,28 19:6,33
22:19 23:2 25:8
26:20,26 27:15 28:25
34:6 41:17 42:28
43:11 46:9 52:2
54:9,21,33 55:21
59:28 60:2,8
76:6,16,25,33 77:23
78:5,8,16,34 79:14
80:20 82:15 83:7
84:23 87:23 89:1
93:18,23 95:27
96:1,18,22,30
undergo 58:17,29 85:28
underline 63:22
underlying 53:6
underpin 76:8 86:27
underpins 104:3
understand 21:33 24:30
36:6,15,30 39:28 42:2
43:5,33 55:12 57:26
58:26 59:6,25
66:22,29 68:15 69:28
78:13,18
82:8,9,23,26,27 85:9
93:32 103:26,27
104:22
understanding 6:5 10:26
11:7 17:27 21:24
28:25 35:7 63:33
69:28 84:16 103:9
understandings 82:8
understood 69:17 71:33
91:19 102:25
undertake 38:28 44:27
45:1
undertaken 6:4 7:5
18:27 21:16
undertakes 22:27
undertaking 8:16,17
46:33
undocumented 52:26
57:14
undress 67:25
undue 15:25 19:13 67:25
unfair 57:20
unfortunately 50:3
unique 57:1,6
universally 8:16
university 14:8,13 23:6
unjust 57:20
unjustifiable
19:12,17,20,24,25
unknown 19:22
unlawfully 83:7,9
unless 13:4 39:7 71:28
78:2 86:34
unlikely 89:33
unpick 84:19
unreasonable 97:19
unsettled 79:23
unsound 9:22 58:4
87:25,29
unsoundness 87:26
until 14:9 35:26 66:22
75:6 87:5 103:34
unusually 84:34
unwise 58:18
84:10,14,21
updates 64:24,25
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
uploaded 26:19
upon 17:32 18:14 55:5
57:12 60:1 62:11
86:20,26
upper 12:11
upside 66:34
urge 80:10
use 2:23 8:18 9:28 16:33
22:29 23:16 27:19
58:15,26 59:15 62:24
64:7 68:13 76:24
78:19 87:18 98:21
103:21
used 9:31 17:19
19:6,22,23 21:34
23:15 31:25 55:28
57:2 65:4 66:28
75:30 77:15 90:11
92:3
useful 23:14 27:23,24
29:7 43:33,34 65:27
86:6
usefully 44:22
user 9:16
using 11:3 23:2 27:23
28:28 44:24 45:24
47:14 78:21 102:22
usually 58:5 60:26 77:15
83:20 87:30
utilise 47:12
Uganda 12:6
Ugandan 12:7
Uncomfortable 86:31
Undressing 67:28
Universal 2:34 13:18
39:28,29 43:31 59:20
UNCRPD 24:30
43:2,9,23
UNDP 1:21
V
vacated 31:26
vaguely 58:4
valid 57:3 88:19
valuable 51:12 104:17
value 13:16,30 79:32
83:29,32 84:4
values 82:8
van 69:20
variables 86:20 102:34
variations 70:9
variety 1:20,30 27:25
46:31 55:32 75:24
various 5:29 7:31 8:2
16:32 19:29 21:17
27:22 37:23 70:9
81:14 92:25 95:10,31
96:23
vary 57:24 58:32 74:23
vast 78:8
vegetable 53:1
vehicles 9:31
verbal 86:3
version 89:32
versions 70:5
versus 41:4,15
vertically 52:23
very 1:4,6 2:9 3:10,11,28
4:12 5:16,18
6:5,11,23 7:16,28 8:7
9:11 10:19,32
12:14,15 13:2 15:33
16:5 17:7,9,18,22
19:22,31 20:8,22
21:1,3,16,20 22:2
24:28 26:8 29:2
31:17 32:21 35:26
36:15,16 38:7,25
39:3,33 40:9 41:27
43:4 44:1,2,29
45:13,17,23 46:22
47:2
vested 53:31 56:9 67:20
vesteds 56:21
veterans 1:23
victim 49:6
victory 98:34 99:11
view 16:9 25:30
26:12,25,27 30:10
35:33 36:16 47:34
67:8 86:10
viewed 36:24
views 74:27
violated 15:15,22 39:17
violation 8:23,27,31 9:6
10:15 12:22 14:10,14
15:1 24:31 41:5
46:23 47:8 48:5
violations 8:23 10:12
12:34 13:4 22:8 24:9
41:16,19,22,28 45:9
46:2,31 69:25
violence 37:17
vision 36:14
voice 6:26 16:26 17:28
35:20,23,34 49:30
50:20 92:5,13
void 17:27 35:20
volumes 4:25
voluntary 88:13
vote 23:29,30 27:17
55:27 63:3,6
97:2,9,12,21,22,23,33
voter 9:21 27:24
voters 9:21 27:19
voting 23:27 69:11,13
96:1,22 97:1,26,27
vulnerable 43:29 48:14
71:9 88:26
Veitch 84:3 86:6
Victorian 87:23
Vienna 4:24
W
wait 14:9 86:34
waiting 63:2
walks 46:29
want 4:32 5:1 9:19 10:2
11:18 15:30 21:31
24:12,23 25:1,11
27:27 32:33
33:11,20,34 36:21
40:9 42:1 43:1,5,17
45:12,16,17,19,29
51:1,6,10,18,19,24,32
52:30 54:8 58:14,34
59:9,13 62:5,15 63:15
64:16 65:14,15
66:9,31 68:20,23
73:31 76:1,2
79:9,11,23,29,30,31
wanted 24:4,26 25:15
33:7 46:13 48:11
49:26 59:14 63:21
67:8,13 71:4 72:2
82:19,30 84:32 86:32
87:14,19 91:3,21
92:20,33 94:2,6,26
wanting 82:28
wants 58:18 67:5
ward 58:10 61:25
87:22,30,32,33 88:4
98:12,13,15,23
wards 88:7
wary 67:14
was 1:28 3:5,27 4:5,7,12
7:16,20,21 8:6,8
9:16,17,18
10:18,19,23,24,30
12:18,29 13:12
14:16,17,19,25,26
15:32
17:2,6,12,18,20,23,26
18:11,18 19:32,33
20:2,4,34
21:1,2,5,6,16,29 23:2
24:20,29 25:5 28:33
32:17,19,33,34
34:3,13
35:2,15,17,23,27,28
37:2,27 39
wasn't 15:32 34:12 85:8
89:13 90:3 91:18
92:11 94:4
watch 12:31 13:3 74:27
watched 74:24
water 102:13
way 2:20 10:30 11:29
15:33 16:26,33 17:27
18:3 30:5 31:3,4
32:22,25,27 35:23
45:14 46:11 47:14
53:11 54:13,32 56:4,7
57:32 58:1,20 59:6
60:23 61:9,10,16
65:17,30 66:17
67:9,21,34 68:22
69:5,17,27,29
71:8,18,22 72:32
74:5,9 75:30 76:11
77:7 87:22 89:27 92:
ways 11:8 14:15 42:33
54:33 55:5
57:23,24,26 62:23
67:14 76:2 81:14
84:27 103:27
we'd 2:28 7:15 60:28
we've 2:29 36:34 45:6,7
58:31 59:10,18,33
61:21 62:3 74:4 80:9
95:16
weak 88:6 100:6,10
weakness 75:6
wealth 55:33 61:26
wear 70:26
weather 1:4,6
website 4:26 26:24,27
28:28
weed 79:19
week 2:9,15 3:6,34 6:7
16:24 23:17
weeks 32:16
weigh 55:12 58:26 78:19
84:20
welcome 41:10 50:3
95:29
welfare 34:19,21 44:31
77:16 78:8 98:29
100:15,34 101:34
well 1:5,12 2:18
4:18,26,28 5:33 7:24
8:7 11:28,30 16:13
17:12 18:9 24:15,22
25:3,31 27:17
28:14,21,24 31:18
32:6,21 36:34
38:5,14,25 40:5 41:19
42:6 44:1 45:14
47:31 48:7 50:16,20
51:13 58:9 59:34
60:9 62:4,32 63:5
64:3,19 68:21,31
70:33 75:25 81:25
82:7
went 7:28,32 20:22 24:27
33:1 39:13 41:6
69:10 83:1 103:13
were 2:32,34 3:1,7 4:4
6:18 7:27 8:7 10:19
11:15 12:27,32
13:2,3,4,6
14:16,20,24
17:2,4,5,9 18:11
20:26,34 21:4,33
27:5,8,9,29 29:29
32:18,20,32 33:2
34:13
41:14,17,20,22,24,29
46:11 47:5,9 51:33
58:29 61:26 63:15
68:25
70:13,14,16,29,30
71:8,25,28,29 72:
weren't 34:12 71:8 72:8
90:1
western 43:21
what's 4:14 21:21 48:33
54:22 56:23 59:24
76:7,16,21 79:25,27
80:9,17 83:18 84:6
85:1,13 95:5,30
what 1:9,22
2:3,8,21,22,23,28
3:6,16 4:4 5:11,12
6:9,12,33,34 7:11,19
8:9,12 10:23,30,33
11:4,13,15,18,22,23,2
8 12:7,20 13:21,25,26
14:19 15:22 16:13,21
18:3 19:14,32
20:4,20,21,28
22:14,15 23:20,23
24:9,10,12,14,22
25:5,13,14 27:10,14
28:9,23,25,30 29:18
whatever 14:9 25:9 44:2
51:26 67:4
whatsoever 48:30
wheelchair 9:16,28 11:3
wheelchairs 9:12 11:32
23:2
when 5:7 6:18 10:20
14:29,31 15:8,9 19:9
20:7 21:24 23:5,6
27:27 28:2,9 29:18
31:27 36:13 38:24
39:20 41:7 42:14,15
48:4 53:33
54:13,30,31 56:8,19
57:2 60:26 63:18
64:34 65:5 66:22,34
68:21 69:10 71:23,25
73:10 74:9 76:7
77:31 78:14 79:26,29
80:2,16,18,29
whenever 65:22
where 2:22 5:31 7:6
10:24 14:29,34
15:4,23,31 16:16
17:26 18:28 19:22,23
21:30 22:22 23:30
26:7 30:11
31:27,28,33
32:1,10,16,17 38:25
44:9 45:24 46:13
47:4 48:21,25,27
49:12,27,29 53:1,3
54:24,26 57:11 58:16
61:24 63:16 65:27,30
68:6 69:12 71:19,23
72:15
whereas 19:23,24 89:19
whereby 46:11
whether 2:24 7:12 11:3
12:4 13:8 15:14,16,24
18:30,33 19:3 21:23
22:23 25:30 27:6
28:30 29:6 36:1
37:11 42:28,31
46:10,33 49:1 51:23
59:1 61:26 63:34
65:31 68:4 76:11
77:3 78:31 79:2 80:6
83:34 84:19,20 85:16
86:8 87:32 88:21,22
95:5 102:1
which 1:4 2:3,9,14,30,33
3:2 4:7,25 8:24,28,29
9:7,9,20,21,28
10:2,3,5,15 12:3
14:32 15:3 16:8,17
17:30,31 19:17 20:1
21:15,21 25:18 27:5
28:27 29:1,6 30:13
31:10 32:25 33:14,15
34:27 36:34 40:10,11
41:1,2,13,14,15
42:25,33
43:8,11,13,21,34
44:4,24 45:14,
while 12:27 41:34 70:9
89:30 90:1 101:10
104:2
whilst 71:18 85:26
who 1:13 2:13 9:16,17
11:32 12:10,32 13:2
17:9 25:2,32 30:2,3
31:31 36:7 41:17,29
45:12 46:14 51:2
55:15 56:9,33 57:15
61:25 63:32
64:6,15,26,31 65:13
66:17 67:6,8,17 68:3
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
70:33 74:31 75:11
77:12 78:28 79:15
80:4,12 82:12,27,28
83:1 84:3 85:20
86:20 87:8,
whole 27:25 39:34 46:34
59:27 61:4 67:14
68:2,26 78:13 82:4
84:28 89:18,26 92:6
103:34
wholeheartedly 45:2
wholesome 64:4
why 3:24 12:26 33:23,34
43:27 57:21
61:6,19,21,22,27
64:18 71:22 73:7
74:26 82:23 84:34
86:3,9,22 87:31 90:4
102:11 103:1,2,12
104:9,10,21
wife 66:21,23
wilful 35:11
will 2:14 3:23 4:19 5:10
8:23,27 10:15 14:2
16:5 18:28 22:19
23:33 25:2,3,25
26:6,8,27,31,32,33
27:1 28:4,34 30:4,26
32:12 33:8 37:3 39:8
40:10,11 41:13 44:13
45:20,29 47:22 48:27
50:22,23 53:21,23
55:33 56:22,23 58:5
59:11 60:16,24
61:5,7,13,31 63:16
64:
willing 32:20 72:17
104:15
willingly 58:17
willingness 104:17
wills 72:28
win 3:29 25:2 102:24
winnable 25:1
wish 58:20
with 1:4,8,16,25,27
2:22,28,30
4:4,13,23,30 6:2,29
7:16,20,23,29,31,33
8:13,15,19,20 9:3,4
10:18 11:3
12:3,7,8,10,19,27,29
13:2,4,22,26 14:2
15:24
16:1,8,9,10,26,27
17:4,5,9,10,11,12,13,
14,15,24,27,30
18:19,20,23 19:15
20:2,6,12,21
21:2,5,23,25,27,29,30
2
withdrawal 77:6
within 5:28,29
11:9,29,34 13:28
14:21,25 15:7 17:24
30:20 31:16,24,26
33:26 34:5,22,23
35:1,21,34
36:11,12,21
38:8,9,15,34
39:2,9,15,18,25,34
42:8 48:6 56:33
62:19 70:1,8 74:2,7
88:16,18 91:33
94:20,21
without 6:30 10:15 12:23
15:23 19:28 31:2
32:5,9 49:5,7 54:5
55:16 60:19 64:16
66:21,23 67:18 68:23
78:4 93:30
witnesses 12:4
woman 9:16 32:32 85:20
102:4
women's 3:31
women 13:21 14:24 17:5
29:23 37:6 52:9,12,14
57:11 59:22 103:24
119
won't 21:28 23:5 50:4
78:11,12,29,31 82:16
87:21 95:15 103:34
won 96:28
wonder 1:13 49:1 64:20
wondered 11:27 62:29
wondering 11:24
word 43:17 87:25 104:4
wording 88:30
words 3:21 4:6 9:22 19:5
26:2 48:15 53:1
66:23
work 1:11 2:24 4:25 5:4
6:10,33 9:26 22:3
23:19 44:23,34 46:32
49:18,19 50:5,15
56:24 72:16 79:26
102:4 104:3
worked 7:22 17:9 31:6
75:24 99:2
worker 64:2 75:25
78:1,13
workers 13:24 32:1
98:22
working 1:30 7:21,27,29
8:20 15:20 31:28
50:7,9,17,28 74:31
75:20 90:6 95:23
workplace 52:12
works 69:14
world 1:22 4:30 6:18 7:7
29:23 30:21,26 43:21
49:2 54:14 61:23
69:21
worldwide 1:20
worried 90:1
worry 13:12 28:16 62:33
80:30 81:6
worth 22:28 32:30
worthy 61:22
would 3:28 8:4,31
9:15,24 10:8,10
11:12,13,16,17,18,19,
22,23,24,28,29
15:20,27,28 16:9
19:3,11,13,14
21:8,20,28
22:14,18,25
23:4,19,20,24,26
24:10,34 25:3,9,16
26:1 28:11,24,29
29:1,20 30:8,28
31:22,24,25
32:18,23,26 37:26
40:10,25,32 41:30
44:7 46:6,9,10
wouldn't 16:1 17:23 25:8
31:25 47:29 53:11
65:32 71:11 72:23
92:26 93:6
wow 45:30 69:20
wrap 25:12 26:6,33 27:4
73:10,31 101:27
wrapping 94:25
write 86:6
writer 41:2 84:3
writers 80:33
writes 83:10
writing 35:9 87:4 92:31
written 71:24 79:33
wrong 68:17 85:1
wrote 32:9 83:17
www 26:24
Wales 11:32 77:15 87:17
88:33 90:28
We'll 2:3,4 3:33 4:29 5:2
11:8 14:29 16:23
22:2 23:19 25:12
26:5,6,7,11,13 32:13
33:6,19 35:6 38:12
40:12 45:28 46:18
47:16,30 50:22 55:8
60:25 62:32 64:13,27
67:3 68:21,24,28,30
69:14 70:10 73:9
74:21 75:7,13 86:30
87:12 90:6 92:14
95:15,19 102:2
NUI Galway Summer School – 18 June 2013
We're 1:4,6,24,25
2:8,12,13 3:15
4:13,14 5:3,5,7 6:11
7:4,15 9:8 10:12
13:12,13,25,26 25:23
26:11,31 27:4 28:17
33:6 40:22,23 50:5,33
51:15 53:15 54:10,20
55:1 56:16,27
64:26,27 68:11 72:32
74:30 75:6,7,20 84:12
86:10 87:7,20 90:6
95:19 101:28 103:14
We’ve 1:9
Williams 80:9 84:13
Wood 80:33
X
Y
yeah 4:34 10:12,33 11:22
24:33 28:22 35:6
40:26,33 43:15 52:22
68:19
year 1:24,25 10:19 20:34
28:13,15 31:22,24
32:9,20 47:33 50:6
69:6,7 80:3,22 83:5
90:20 93:13
96:14,28,29 97:3
100:14
years 36:26 38:13 45:23
47:32 50:9,28 62:31
66:20 70:15 83:1,9,23
84:24 87:15 90:3,32
96:5,10
yes 8:33 10:8,9 15:19
19:31 24:3 30:14
40:28,31 42:30,32
45:22,24 47:20 51:32
52:9,17 63:21 68:6
69:23 72:2 86:31
yesterday 2:29,30,31
3:15 4:16,23 5:24
16:15,20 23:28 36:20
46:3 53:5 54:29
69:20 95:2
yet 19:34 21:29 64:18
73:16 80:14
you'd 26:25
you'll 4:10 5:19,29 21:34
23:14 26:20,21,22
64:28
you're 20:14 24:16 26:4
42:3 45:30 51:32
54:30 65:26 68:4
74:9 86:18
you've 50:5 61:20
you 1:3,4,13,25,34
2:7,12,16,17 4:10,32
5:28 7:16 8:32 9:21
10:3,17,20,26,27,30
11:4,13,15,21,23,28,2
9 12:14,15,22,33
13:4,8,9,11
14:20,29,31,34
15:8,9,19,22,23,24,31
16:20 17:23 18:18,22
19:16,31 20:17,18,25
21:14 22:29
23:5,6,32,33
24:15,17,18,20,23 25:
young 1:31 83:1 85:20
your 10:21 11:14 14:30
15:22,28 25:30
26:7,8,19,20,21,22,25
,27 36:31 41:9 43:1
45:29 51:18,26
53:22,24 54:25
55:25,26 58:6,27,28
59:2 62:5 63:21
67:11 74:17
76:7,9,11,12,14,15,16
,17,30,33
77:3,11,13,22,25,28,2
9,30
78:2,4,11,12,13,23
79:3,6,7,8,9,13,14,30
yours 49:9
Premier Captioning & Realtime Ltd.
www.pcr.ie
yourself 78:17,18 87:29
York 17:22 50:7,10,11
69:6
Yoshi 95:23,33,34 102:3
Z
Zambia 12:24 28:14
Zealand 17:9 34:33
49:28
... 11:27 12:16 20:12
23:4,7 24:33 25:26,30
26:5 28:17 33:4
44:19
000 32:20 66:27
100 70:25,26 72:15,16,25
14th 97:2
18th 1:1
1960 96:30 99:6 100:14
1970 96:24
1970s 3:2
1991 3:9
1994 29:22
120
1995 29:23
1996 19:32
2001 88:12
2003 88:27
2004 70:9 96:10
2005 14:2 75:21
2006 6:19 7:17 19:32
36:27 69:6,8
88:26,27,28 94:23
96:14 99:3
2007 89:12
2008 20:21 89:12,32
90:13 96:14,18
2009 21:15
2010 96:22
2011 90:8,16 91:11 93:24
96:23 99:7,8
2012 93:24 96:24 100:9
2013 1:1 96:28,29 97:3
2022 14:3,8,9
90s 95:24