I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I want to speak about the transition from wardship to supported decision-making, drawing on the recent research from the National Disability Authority, NDA, the analysis my colleagues mentioned from the Centre for Disability Law and Policy at University of Galway and conversations I have had with concerned families, committees and wards themselves. I want to focus on two of the five points my colleagues mentioned from the Centre for Disability Law and Policy in Galway. One stated that there are no plans in place to tackle root causes that have led to court backlog. That should be of significant note for the Minister of State. The other point was that, importantly, there has been a lack of meaningful engagement with those most impacted, namely, wards and families. That has come up consistently from wards, committees, families, from University of Galway and from the NDA research itself. The new system is not just legal reform; it is a rights-based shift. Supported decision-making is supposed to be supporting with, not doing for. However, we all know the transition has been very slow. The Minister of State's figures show 391 people have been discharged, while over 1,000 remain. The barriers are very real. They include a fear of losing financial protection, confusion, a lack of information and anxiety about managing large funds without court support. There are a couple of important areas that I hear consistently from families, committees and wards themselves. One is assessments and investments. On assessments, there is the question of how a single day of assessment can be deemed sufficient. Families need clarity, consistency and a process that respects the complexity of individual capacity. I ask that the Minister of State engage on this. Investments and financial management are an important issue and must be addressed. There is a clear call to ensure that the transfer of wards of court decision to the Decision Support Service does not result in continued substitute decision-making, that the persons with disabilities and their families are consulted on the transfer, and importantly that safeguards are in place to protect the property and finances of discharged wards. Related to that, it is important there is an investigation and complaint mechanism to address investments previously made by funds and managed by the wards of courts system. Families are overwhelmed. Large funds are being deposited into bank accounts across the State with no real support to manage them. The Government can and should step in, and provide a resource, a help-line, guidance or support. Currently, for example, all State savings have a maximum investment ceiling. Some will face managing funds exceeding those limits with no guarantee of equivalent security. An exemption from these maxima for former wards' funds would relieve anxiety for families managing vulnerable relatives' money. This is something, for example, that could be considered. It is a complex area and all options should be considered. Related to that is the call for an information hub on investments and assessments and on how wills and the fair deal scheme should be navigated. These issues really matter. Committees and families were appointed by the High Court, yet they feel that once the transition is finalised, they will have no voice. That has been relayed to me and others. These are important points and I ask that the Minister of State take them onboard. Similar to the points made by University of Galway is the NDA report, which the Minister of State will be familiar with, named The Journey from Wardship to Supported Decision-Making. It calls for more in-person sessions, clear guidance and properly resourced agencies. It calls for legislative action, but at the heart of it is a call for partnership. We should all be able to agree that the success of this reform will be measured by whether people feel heard, respected and empowered and whether families feel supported and not abandoned. As we advance this legislation, it will be really important that the Government commits to genuine, ongoing engagement with those that this transition is meant to serve.

Sentiment score: 0.18