Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

There are two sides to the story. I was on both sides of the fence growing up. If one is seeking one's qualification or "pilot's licence" in terms of teaching, one must complete so many "flying hours". A similar issue arose with regard to construction apprentices who were made redundant when their employer's went bankrupt. Those individuals were left high and dry. They just wanted to complete their training and obtain their qualifications in order that they could go to Australia in search of work. They could not obtain - I use the phrase figuratively - sufficient flying hours. I am in favour of young teachers obtaining sufficient real experience in classrooms - that is, the necessary flying hours - in order that they can be probated and thereby progress in their careers. Many young people are pursuing teaching courses in order that they might emigrate and teach abroad. There is a worldwide shortage of qualified teachers and people can make fortunes in places such Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. A person who goes to Dubai can return home after three years with approximately €50,000 in cash and use it to pay off their loans, etc. They can then decide what they want to do thereafter. I am referring here to people in their mid-20s who are in a position to travel where they want. People who are willing to teach in schools in particular areas of England, including inner city London, are receiving bonus payments at present. There are providers of education in England who are employing Irish contractors for this purpose.

I am of the view that we can no longer consider education from a domestic, inward-looking perspective. People have the right to train as teachers. When they obtain their qualifications and complete their training - and once they have paid their taxes and so on - they should be free to do so. Probating trainee teachers and making them available to obtain experience in classrooms is good for them and for the schools in which they teach. It is also good for existing teachers. Is it good that they are being used as a cheap, yellow-pack source of labour? The answer is "No". However, the position is not black and white and there are arguments which can be put forward. I believe I am correct in stating that the teacher unions stated that they would not facilitate a limited number in this regard. When the social employment scheme was established many years ago, trade unions and local authorities objected on the grounds that it would displace existing workers. An agreement was reached whereby if local communities wanted to build community halls and if they were prepared to raise the necessary funding and use apprentice construction workers in a way which would ensure that full-time employees would not be prevented from doing their work, then they could do so.

There are models which can be used and, as already stated, we circumvented the difficulties relating to local authorities, etc. I am of the view that a similar exercise should be undertaken in the area of teaching. In some instances, the presence of an additional pair of hands would make it much easier for certain teachers to do their jobs. In addition, the relevant young person would obtain sufficient flying hours and be in a position to enter the labour market as a qualified teacher. That is my view. Is the system being exploited and abused? Of course it is but once such exploitation or abuse is reported in the context of MOMENTUM or JobBridge, the relevant firms or entities are debarred from ever again participating in those schemes.