2026-01-20

I ask the Minister of State to cast his mind back six years to 2020 and imagine a constituent of my predecessor, former Deputy, Michael Ring, walking into his office at the age of 18. The constituent needed a primary medical certificate to access the disabled driver's and disabled passenger's scheme, DDS. They were refused. They appealed and lost the appeal. This was not because they can walk unaided because they cannot. It was not because they can safely drive a standard vehicle, because they cannot. They were refused because they do not meet an exceptionally narrow and outdated set of medical criteria that prioritise amputations over functional ability. This young person would not be able to walk unaided from where I am standing to where the Minister of State is. This young person cannot reliably press the brake pedal with their disabled foot. Yet, because their limb is not amputated, they do not qualify. Six years later, they are about to turn 24 and still cannot drive. This is six years without independence and without equal access to work, education or social life. It is six years reliant on family, friends and taxis, not because the support does not exist but because the system is stuck in limbo with rigid criteria. This injustice is compounded when we look at the timeline and the movements of responsibility between Departments. Under action 104 of the National Disability Inclusion Strategy 2017 to 2022, the State committed to reviewing transport supports, including the DDS. An interdepartmental transport working group was formed in 2020 but that was, unfortunately, paused due to Covid. Two years later, in January 2022, the Minister of State with responsibility for disability reconvened that group as a matter of priority at the time. Another year later, in February 2023, the final report concluded correctly that the DDS is not fit for purpose and should be replaced with a needs-based, grant-aided vehicle adaptation scheme and that responsibility should be moved away from the Department of Finance. By that point, my constituent had already been waiting three years. In June 2003, the Taoiseach said he would convene all relevant Departments to develop proposals. That work progressed through further interdepartmental engagement, with the subgroup reporting to the Department of the Taoiseach a year and a half later, bringing us to February 2025. In May and June last year, the Department of Transport announced that it would now be the Department to develop a new needs-based vehicle adaptation scheme. We are now told the Department is beginning extensive engagement and public consultation while working towards January 2027 for the scheme to be up and running. That would mean seven years from my constituent's first application, which was made when they were aged 18, without being able to drive. I know the response I am going to receive tonight is that the Department of Finance shares my concerns, that the DDS is outdated, that a new scheme is being developed by the Department of Transport following work co-ordinated with the Department of the Taoiseach and that, in the meantime, the existing DDS remains with the Department of Finance and assessments remain with the HSE. That, however, is exactly the problem. While responsibility has been moving from Department to Department, people are being left behind. My constituent has not been failed by a lack of reports or reviews; they have been failed by a lack of common sense and discretion. If someone can demonstrate that they cannot safely operate a brake pedal, then they need a vehicle adaptation. That should not require an amputation to be believed. What immediate direction can be given to the HSE and the appeals board by the Department of Finance to apply a more functional and humane interpretation of the existing criteria? My constituent cannot wait until 2027 for independence.

I thank the Deputy for raising this extremely important topic. She is right in part of what she said. The Department of Finance, the Tánaiste and I acknowledge that the disabled driver's and disabled passenger's scheme, as the Deputy outlined, is not fit for purpose. That has been confirmed on multiple occasions. While acknowledging that it is not fit for purpose, it is important to recognise that the scheme provides relief from VRT and VAT on the use of adapted cars. It also provides an exemption from motor tax and an annual fuel grant scheme for anyone who holds a primary medical certificate. In 2024, €150 million was spent on the scheme. That is very welcome and beneficial to those who qualify. However, the Deputy is right, and she makes a very valid point in this regard, that the scheme is very rigid and excludes many people. She gave an example of someone in her constituency and I am aware of people in my constituency who I have tried to assist in relation to this. I did not come in with a prepared script from the Department because, quite frankly, some of it is embarrassing. The Deputy has given a timeline for a commitment given to reform a scheme or multiple schemes that all of us, including me and my predecessors, acknowledge are not fit for purpose. The timeline for implementation is embarrassing. I say that with regret. In 2022, a report was published based on the national disability inclusion strategy, having established a transport working group as part of the review of all Government-funded transport and mobility schemes. I am not going to outline the findings of the report. Suffice to say that they are not at all positive. If we roll on four years, despite the fact that my Department has made a significant contribution to the national disability inclusion strategy to develop a proposal that would be fit for purpose and would mirror international best practice, we do not seem to be any further along. It is fair to say, however, that the new Government, on assuming office, prioritised disability services. Disability and supporting people with a disability into work, education and independent living are a priority. The delay in implementing this reform further reinforces the decision the Taoiseach made to establish a disability unit within the Department of Taoiseach to ensure that schemes such as this one are pushed ahead at speed. As Government Ministers, we have to take responsibility for ensuring the decisions we take are implemented in a timely fashion by the officials working for us in our respective Departments. I cannot give a definitive timeline tonight, but what I can say is that the Deputy's amplification of this problem further reinforces an issue that needs to be prioritised. I will talk directly to the Taoiseach to ensure the unit within his Department prioritises a speedy decision in relation to the new scheme. I will talk to my colleague, the Tánaiste, as I am sure the Deputy will, to ensure this process moves ahead at pace. We cannot afford to wait any longer for the new scheme to be implemented. The consultation has already happened. There should not be any need for further consultation.

I thank the Minister of State and I respect his decision to move away from the prepared script. My concern is that in 2020, nobody saw Covid coming down the line and this led to the working group being paused. We have had different reports over the years from different Departments. We now know the Department of Transport is putting the scheme out for public consultation. I am pleased to hear that the Minister of State is going to talk with others about the fact that we do not need a consultation. I am not confident, however, that the consultation will not be pushed ahead. We do not know what will happen in the world in the next year, so the scheme could be pushed further down the line. I know a 94-year-old man with carpal tunnel syndrome who cannot feel his hands. I know a lady in her 80s whose daughter cannot bring her to the doctor five minutes down the road because she cannot get her into the car. They have been asked to go to Dún Laoghaire. People from Mayo have to go to Dún Laoghaire for the appeals process. There is no point in their going to the appeals process because in the appeals process they are working off the current criteria, six criteria that we all know they will not meet. There is no point in travelling across the country to Dún Laoghaire to be told you will not get your appeal. The HSE is carrying out the assessments and the appeals, but this is still with the Department of Finance. My request tonight is as follows. Will the Department of Finance issue interim guidelines to the HSE and the appeals board? We have the two reports. We know the system is failing. We know there is a new system on the way. We hope to have that up and running by January 2027, but the Minister of State and I both know that could roll on until the summer of 2027. God knows what will happen in the world. It could roll on to 2028, and I have constituents who will probably pass away in that time. These are the last years of their lives. Some of them cannot go to the doctor or go down the road. Their children are caring for them. We have to act now. This has been going on almost seven years. Can we please have an interim guideline issued to the appeals board and the HSE in order that they can do something now for the people who have been waiting for years and years?

When the Government took office this year, we committed to a step change in the delivery of supports and services for people with a disability and their families. That is a priority for the whole of Government. Budget 2026 is the first step in the delivery of this ambition, providing €3.83 billion to specialist disability services next year. That is an unprecedented increase of €618 million a year, or 20%. That reinforces and demonstrates our commitment to disability services. I will take back what the Deputy said about an interim measure and I will talk to the Tánaiste when we meet next week about seeing whether that is feasible in the Department. I am told that it is not and that that is the reason a whole new scheme was to be devised. However, none of us as public representatives, be it as TDs, Senators or people who are fortunate enough to serve in executive positions, should accept that decisions that are meant to be implemented at a specific time are just allowed to roll on. We have to hold officials to account such that when a policy decision is taken it is implemented in a timely fashion. I always give the example of planning permissions with local authorities. It is legislatively prescribed that a decision must be taken within two months and a decision is taken within two months. I have said internally in my party that even if we have to bring in legislation that states when a decision is to be taken, the date is not a target but, rather, the decision has to be taken by that time. We are unfortunately allowing too many things slide on by weeks and weeks, which become months, and the only people who are affected are the people whom we are here to represent. That is not good enough.