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 They were refused because they do not meet an exceptionally narrow and outdated set of medical criteria that prioritise amputations over functional ability.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.
