Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and apologise for leaving the meeting earlier. I had to speak to an amendment I had tabled in the Seanad. With that in mind, I apologise if I repeat something that was said in my absence.

The Bill is very important as this issue could affect the child of anyone present. The issue is particularly important in areas of rapid population growth, including Galway where I live. As Ms Ní Ghréacháin stated, excessive demand is where the problem arises in most cases. Mr. Whyte indicated that the Minister appears to be effectively micro-managing a school. Based on some of the things I have observed, such micro-management is necessary in some cases.

Is it fair on the part of schools to retain broader catchment areas, which include schools outside the parish in which they are based, if it works to the detriment of local children? In some cases, there are five or six primary schools in a parish. The children of the parish have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to attend their local second level school. I refer to the problems experienced by the eldest children in families as the siblings of children enrolled in a school are favoured when enrolment takes place. The eldest children in a family must try to get on the first rung of the ladder, as it were, but are subjected to a waiting list or lottery, as is the case in Mr. Whyte's school. Some of them do not succeed and whereas most children know which second level school they will attend the following September, some children are left on a waiting list. The children enrolled in a school must take a test in January - I will not use the term "entrance examination", whereas the children who do not succeed in the lottery are not invited to take the examination. These children may be offered a place later in the year if other children drop out. It is particularly cruel to exclude such children. Is it fair that schools retain wide catchment areas with outlying primary schools when this acts to the detriment of local children?

Dr. Ní Fhrighil alluded to adopting a 10% threshold criterion for all groups. Do the witnesses accept that all schools should be required to accept a minimum percentage of children from a number of strata, for example, children with learning difficulties, children of various religions and none and children from ethnic minorities? A publicly funded, inclusive school system must be prepared to do this. Currently, many schools engage in a form of exclusion for the purpose of safeguarding their results.

The analysis I have done shows that the disciplinary system in place in some schools hurts children with learning difficulties, particularly ADHD. Children with this disorder do not learn in the same way as other children. When they answer out of turn they are told they are interrupting the learning process of other children in the class and given cards for breaches of discipline. If X number of cards lead to suspension, some of these children will lose time in school because of the disciplinary card system. Eventually, some of them will receive so many suspensions that they must leave the school, which poses problems in respect of admission to other schools. This is an unreasonable approach which does not work for the education of the child. As Ms Donnelly noted, children have a right to education. I ask the witnesses to respond.