Disability directive swept away

WHILE the plan by the Government to merge five agencies, including the National Disability Authority, into one may seems like something decided in the editing and cutting room of the Department of Finance, it is not.

Rather the plan obediently follows the trend in Brussels and anticipates the effect of mergers at European level on national policy and initiatives, especially where they involve EU funding.

In 2006, existing EU funding programmes on gender equality, employment and social exclusion (including disability) were merged to form PROGRESS, a generic employment and social solidarity programme.

I and others have been working to achieve a specific disability directive. With years of campaigning and debate, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in place and a 1.3 million citizens’ petition demanding a disability directive, there was strengthening support for it in the European Council, the EU Commission and the European Parliament. We had reason to hope that a disability directive would soon be on the table.

Instead, last spring this hope was swept away in favour of a merged anti-discrimination directive. From the initial paperwork, it seems a least common denominator approach is introducing an alarming degree of dilution of what people with disabilities need in a directive.

Mergers do not always mean better or more efficient. For people with disabilities, these can mean loss of focus and of the specificity needed to address the challenges facing them and their families and carers. This may apply also to the other partners in a merger.

Kathy Sinnott MEP

St Joseph

Ballinabearna

Ballinhassig

Co Cork