Other Important Equality Based Legislation

Other relevant equality-based legislation relevant to people with disabilities includes the Equality Act 2004 and the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2015. The main theme underpinning all equality legislation is to outlaw discrimination in a wide and varied range of services and to promote the right to equal participation in society for people who have been typically marginalised. This includes PWID. The over‐arching objective of the governmental strategy at this time was to put in place the most effective combination of legislation, policies, service provision in order to support and promote equal participation for people with disabilities in mainstream society (Department of Justice 1999). The Equality Act 2004 further enhanced the rights of people with disabilities with regard to securing mainstream employment. The Act states that all employers must ‘take appropriate measures to ensure a person with a disability has access to employment, have the opportunity to advance in employment and where appropriate undergo training’ (Ireland. The Equality Act 2004). Again the ‘Act’ was making provisions so that all people with disabilities would be facilitated and supported to make a valued contribution to society.

Bartelings and Bokum (2000) claimed the Equality Act 2004 was introduced so that Ireland would meet its obligations under the Treaty of Rome and provide for the implementation of three equality based European Union (EU) Directives, one being the Directive to establish a general framework for equal treatment for all people in employment and occupation. The Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2015 sought to make amendments to both equality and disability legislation, pushed for greater protection and equal access of opportunity of vulnerable groups of people (inclusive of PWID) in the place of work.

59 2.3.5 The Disability Act 2005

Around the same time of the enactment of Equality Legislation in Ireland, a newly established Disability Legislative Consultancy Group (DLCG) had been in consultation with the Government on a new Disability Bill. In 2003, the DLCG produced the Report Equal Citizens: Proposals for Core Elements of Disability Legislation. According to Power, DeFranco and Lord (2013, p.380), ‘the trust of this report signalled a broader paradigm change based on changing values, rights and principles, with equality, participation, quality and inclusion being increasingly regarded as key values and principles underpinning Irish social policy’. In response to this the Government embarked on significant reform of disability specific legislation with the National Disability Strategy of 2004.

This Strategy was to build on existing equality and disability specific legislation identified above, and to further promote the mainstreaming of service provision to PWID. By 2005, the Disability Bill passed though the Dáil and a landmark piece of legislation, The Disability Act 2005, which had a specific focus on the rights of PWID, was enacted in Ireland. According to the NDA (2015), the Act was a positive and deliberate action designed to advance and underpin the participation and inclusion of PWID in everyday life. Fahey (2005) claimed that this Act was to be a significant part of the Irish Government’s legislative framework and plans to support social inclusion of people with disabilities in Irish society. However, according to Considine and Dukelow (2017, p.323), ‘the implementation of the Disability Act 2005 remains incomplete. An assessment of the Disability Act 2005 generally includes more concerns and disappointment about the lack of an overly rights-based approach’.

De Wispelaere and Walsh (2007, p.535) in Considine and Dukelow (2017) argued that the Act failed to meet the conditions for robust rights-based legislation in relation to disability services and ‘the failure to provide for access to public services is exacerbated by the fact there is no genuine right to challenge assessment of need or service delivery’.

60

Thus, while the Act acknowledges the rights of PWID to participation and inclusion in their communities, it appears it has not fully achieved what it set out to do.

Finlay (2016) in an interview with the Irish Times claimed that ‘the Act is the single most dishonest and fraudulent piece of legislation ever passed by the Oireachtas and that it ‘allegedly’ confers rights onto people with disabilities. The Act doesn’t compel anyone to do anything. In fact, the only thing ministers are compelled to do in the Act is to have regard to the resources available’. Some disability advocates and theorists have claimed the Act in part is tokenistic as the mainstreaming and inclusion of PWID into society in based on ‘the availability of resources’. The definition of disability in the Act has also come under criticism. Under the Act, the term ‘Disability’, in relation to a person, means

‘a substantial restriction in the capacity of the person to carry out a profession, business or occupation in the State or to participate in social or cultural life in the State by reason of an enduring physical, sensory, mental health or intellectual impairment. Substantial restriction means a restriction that is permanent (or likely to be permanent) which results in significant difficulty in communication, learning or mobility and means that the person has a need for services to be provided on a continuous basis’. (Government of Ireland 2015).

Atkinson, Lay, McAnnelly and Richardson (2014) put forward the argument that how we describe and define people with disabilities is very important as the language used can lead to different, separate and often negative treatment for this group. They claimed definitions rarely, if ever, remember the positive aspect of the person and most people do not like to be defined or stereotyped at all. So, while the Disability Act 2005 has been a welcome advancement in the fact that it is a rights-based piece of legislation it has been criticised by some as being partly ‘tokenistic’, for its use of negative language in describing people with disabilities and for its failure to ensure PWID are included in mainstream society.

61 2.3.6 The Citizens Information Act 2007

The Citizens Information Act passed in 2007 set out for the development of an advocacy service specifically for people with disabilities. This Act saw the establishment of the National Advocacy Service (NAS) in 2011. Andrews and Edwards (2004, p,481) define advocacy organisations as making ‘public interest claims either promoting or resisting social change that if implemented, would conflict with the social, cultural, political or economical interests or values of other constituents or groups’.

Although the role of the NAS is multi-faceted some of its main functions are to ensure that all people with disabilities can enjoy meaningful participation in and contribution to their local communities (National Advocacy Service 2012). According to DeFranco, Lord and Power (2013, p.407), ‘the establishment of the National Advocacy Service is a welcome development as it demonstrates the State’s willingness to provide concrete support for PWID in exercising their legal rights’. Considine and Dukelow (2017) also claimed that the NAS provide representative advocacy which is a means of empowering people by supporting them to assert their views and claim their entitlements. However, according to Inclusion Ireland (2013), the absence of statutory powers is a significant barrier and limitation faced by the NAS when providing support to PWID. Such an absence of a broad spectrum of advocacy can affect PWID’s right to effective participation and inclusion in society. Inclusion Ireland (2013) has claimed that there is evidence showing resistance and a lack of co-operation from some disability service providers towards independent advocacy supporting people with disabilities.