Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a short contribution on this important Private Members' motion tabled by our party spokesperson, Deputy McConalogue. The motion has two particular elements, namely, the adequacy of resource teacher provision and the need for adequate provision of special needs assistants for students who need such vital ongoing support. This Fianna Fáil motion was tabled last Friday by our party spokesperson, Deputy Charlie McConalogue, and I welcome the Minister's announcement yesterday that he will reverse his decision on the employment of resource teachers which is the first action our motion requested. The Minister has decided to release 500 additional teaching posts to schools in September to cater for the increase in demand for such resources. As a result, in September, students will not see the cut in the resource teaching hours they received during the 2012-13 school year. This is a justified and necessary decision. We should not have to be here tonight discussing this issue because the cuts should not have been made in the first place. As previous speakers mentioned, last Thursday in the House the Tánaiste spoke about there being no cut, and the Minister's decision yesterday clearly shows the fallacy of that statement by the Tánaiste. I do not know how one can reverse a cut if it had not been announced in the first place.

The decision to reverse the 12% cut to resource hours is welcome and our party spokesperson welcomed that decision by the Minister. Unfortunately, the 10% cut to special needs assistants remains in place. Once again, children with special needs will bear the brunt of this wrong decision by the Minister and the Government. All of us as Oireachtas Members and other public representatives such as members of local authorities have received correspondence from parents, teachers, principals of schools and other interested stakeholders who have outlined their utter dismay at the NCSE decision announced on behalf of the Minister a week ago. We learned that the decision to make the announcement was deferred for a number of weeks at the request of the Department.

Like many other Members of the Oireachtas, last week I received calls from parents, teachers and school principals expressing utter desperation when the NCSE decision was announced. People took part in local radio programmes and contacted the local print media. These people would not normally go next or near the media but they wanted to express their concerns and the effects of such decisions on young children.

Next September, 22,000 children who need special needs assistance will, unfortunately, face a reduction in the particular support available to them. There is a well-justified reason to reverse this cut to ensure no child with special needs suffers a reduction in the support he or she needs in the classroom throughout the school year.

In the past 14 to 15 years there has been a marked and much-needed improvement in support for children with special needs. The provision of resource teaching hours and the appointment of special needs assistants for children has improved dramatically the educational attainment of children needing special support. Our party leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, when Minister with responsibility for education from 1997 onwards, made the decision to put those supports in place in classrooms for the children who needed that extra learning support or assistance. We all know of children who may attend special classes for one or two days of the week but who are in mainstream schools for the remainder of the week. The educational attainment for those children has been much improved by those additional supports, whether in the special class or in the mainstream classroom. That additional support must not be denied to them by Government policy.

I will refer briefly to the policy advice paper published last month by the National Council for Special Education. I welcome the fact that a working group has been established to report next September. I welcome the fact that Eamon Stack, a former príomh cigire of An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna, was appointed to chair the NCSE and also to chair the working group. I know him over many years and I found him to be a particularly progressive and practical official. He worked alongside very good officials in the Department who have the best interests of the children at heart in their ongoing work. I know this is also the case for the senior officials in the special education division of the Department.

It is important that the Government acts on the report's findings on the issue of some schools being reluctant to enrol children with special needs or the problems that arise from some schools discouraging parents from enrolling their children. My party is clear in its view that this is not acceptable and this must also be the view of the Oireachtas.

The NCSE's call for a robust regulatory framework is welcome and the major and much-needed annual investment of €1.3 billion in special needs education must provide the best possible outcomes for children. It is essential to optimise that investment. Whatever model is implemented in any public administration or in the delivery of any services, it needs to be reviewed every six or seven years, for example, because new systems and new ways of doing business arise. It is important that the model of delivery is regularly reviewed, and if new or better systems are available, the better model should be adopted. Equally, there must be a fair distribution of resource teaching hours regardless of where a child lives. Deputy Eamonn Maloney said in his contribution that in some areas children may not get the assessment to ensure they are given the extra support. That is not acceptable either. If a child needs support, it must be provided, whether the child lives in an affluent area or a disadvantaged area. The child's needs remain the same and the child's needs must be addressed.

It is important to recognise that the review found that students with special educational needs are being well supported in schools and those children are making good progress. We must recognise the progress that has been achieved but we will not make further progress by standing still. We need to continue to invest in and to review the models of service when necessary. These particular educational supports have been built up over the past 14 to 15 years and now is an opportune time to review the system of assessment and the system of allocation, whether on a school or on an individual basis. The working group should take on this work.

The importance of this area is evident from the response of many stakeholders. It is important that all such stakeholders would have an input into the implementation of the plan. Let us hear from the learners and also from the parents and not just from the unions or the advocacy groups.

I do not seek to take away from the important role these organisations play, but we must listen to the parents and children who have been through the system also. Rightly, the INTO points out that bureaucracy must not become a barrier to children getting the necessary resources. It is welcome that the INTO has raised the issue. It issued a caution about the difficulty of additional paperwork being demanded of classroom teachers. While we acknowledge that there must be records and paperwork, we cannot smother and overcome teachers with it. The practitioner who wants to deliver and impart knowledge must not be overwhelmed by paperwork.

Greater investment in special education at a key stage in a child's development leads to greater outcomes. It ensures children have the opportunity to reach their potential and contributes handsomely to society. It is obvious that there is a clear need for greater co-operation between primary and post-primary schools on the transfer of students with special needs and it is essential that there be a smooth transition for children from primary to post-primary school. It may be that we need a discussion among relevant stakeholders, but it is broadly accepted that the general allocation model at primary level should also be applied at post-primary level. These are all issues which should be assessed on an ongoing basis and should not represent a barrier to progress. They should be an impetus to improvements in the system.

See this speech in context