The new Disability Bill represents a "fundamental shift in Government policy", the Minister of State for Justice has told the Dáil.
Mr Frank Fahey, who introduced the legislation to a barrage of severe criticism from a succession of opposition speakers, said the Bill "contains no clause specifically to protect the State against litigation for the breach of statutory duty".
The first Disability Bill was withdrawn three years ago in a storm of protest over section 47, which expressly indemnified the State against such litigation.
The Minister said the absence of such a provision was a fundamental shift in Government policy and was taken to accommodate widely held concerns.
But opposition deputies described the Bill as seriously flawed, shoddy and mean-spirited. Mr Fahey insisted, however, that the Bill gives a statutory basis to the policy of "mainstreaming public service delivery".
Major funding on a multi-annual basis would be provided and the Bill "will significantly advance the position of people with disabilities and will be instrumental in sustaining progress into the longer term".
The legislation provides for the assessment of health and education needs for people with disabilities, so services could be provided based on those needs and "consistent with the resources available to them and their obligation in relation to their allocation".
Mr David Stanton, Fine Gael's equality spokesman, said his party had seriously considered rejecting the Bill out of hand. "We believe it is seriously flawed, obtuse and in some ways further entrenches what is already a seriously dysfunctional system."
Mr Stanton read into the record a letter from a man to his severely disabled 11-year-old son in which the father said of the Bill, "supposedly the best thing to happen for people with disabilities since the foundation of the State, it is 80 per cent to do with the State running away and the balance is a flawed attempt to give a little something".
The Cork East TD added that how it was eventually enacted "will dictate what kind of a society we are and how real is our commitment to inclusiveness".
Ms Kathleen Lynch, (Labour, Cork North-Central) described the Bill as a "shoddy, mean-spirited, badly written piece of legislation".
She said the "spirit behind it is motivated by an absolute determination to deny greater equality to people with disabilities. The consequences of the legislation will be a cumbersome, bureaucratic nightmare for thousands of people. It is a betrayal of the commitment made by every political party in this House, and enshrined in the Programme for Government."
Mr Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Sinn Féin, Dublin South-Central), who demanded the Bill's withdrawal, said it was a "disgrace" and "may even cut access to services for people with disabilities". It was "not a rights-based Bill, it is a resource-based Bill".
Mr Finian McGrath (Ind, Dublin North-Central) said he was bitterly disappointed with the final outcome. "I have significant concerns about this Bill, which is flawed, full of hot air and lacks teeth. It dashes the hopes of many families and appears to have the fingerprints of the Minister for Finance all over it." He added there was no ring-fencing of funding for disability.
Mr Ciaran Cuffe (Green, Dún Laoghaire) described the Bill as a "false dawn" for people with disability. It was "weak on commitments, lacking in rights and unclear on finances".
He said that "there appears to be no obligation on the private sector to make buildings accessible to persons with disabilities and even public-sector bodies are given 10 years to get their houses in order".
The debate was adjourned.
