Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)

I have heard about the expertise of teachers, as I have heard about the expertise of our Minister for Health in health, but as a parent I am an expert on this area as well from the point of view of my eight year old and six year old children who will be seriously affected by this measure. I am an expert also because as a public representative I have had principals of schools - I must have manipulated them to get them to do this - break down and cry in front of me. I found that awkward and did not really know what to say to them. I am astonished they were behaving as they did because I was supposed to be manipulating their minds. I would love to know how I managed that. They did not come here for the craic but for one reason only, that is, they are disgusted and very unhappy with what is coming down the line.

I understand money is very important, apparently more important than anything in this world. If it is that important, why not do the calculations on the negative financial impact on the country of the Government's actions? For example, my eight and six year old daughters will not be as well-educated as they would be if the cuts were not made. The cuts will affect their ability to contribute to society. The cuts will affect the contribution to society of children with special needs. They will affect us financially and are, therefore, not smart.

The Government tells us there is nothing it can do and that it does not run the country any more because it is being run by the IMF and European Union. It states it will not be able to do anything about the debt and asks where the money will be obtained. Why does it not prioritise? How about not digging up any more footpaths unnecessarily in my town or county this year and putting the money saved towards special needs assistance? Parents will put up with and dodge the cracks in the footpaths to get to school rather than have no special needs assistants. It is a question of investing in our future and speculating to accumulate. This is a concept that the Minister of State, as a former member of the Progressive Democrats, will understand. If one invests, one gets a dividend down the line.

I know the Government would love the special needs assistants to emigrate to solve its problem, but not everyone will do so. Therefore, the Government will have to pay those remaining social welfare and rent allowance and it will have to give them medical cards, and rightly so. Would it not be better to leave the special needs assistants in the system, where they would not cost a lot more, and thereby help to develop society for the future?

I agree with the motion with regard to the school transport system. It must be maintained. Without a shadow of doubt, the Government will create circumstances in which parents will not be able to bring their children to school. The Government's approach is another penny wise and pound foolish solution. Parents will no longer be able to work because they will have to give up their jobs to bring their children to school. The Government will lose tax revenue and will have to pay for those parents. Why not let the parents keep working and collect their tax to pay for all the required services?

There is one thing for sure: we are not manipulating anybody. Special needs assistants are not an insatiable mob. Reference is made to the increase in staff from 3,500 to 10,500 and that 11,000 will be sought by parents next year and 12,000 the year thereafter. It is asked whether they will ever be happy. It is incorrect to make these assumptions because the truth is that the parents want their children to grow up and fulfil their potential. They are not making their demands because they comprise a manipulated, insatiable mob, as the Government is suggesting.

See this speech in context