Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move that Deputy Martin's motion be amended to read:

That the position that students affected by the dispute and not others will automatically lose 10% of their marks through no fault of the students is deeply unfair to these students and cannot be allowed to happen and is placing an undue burden of stress on the students; that the ASTI's current directive is now directly negatively impacting on examination students; that such selective targeting of students is an unprecedented and wholly unjustifiable industrial relations strategy; that, as a result of the directive, current ASTI English teachers are now in their third year of delivering a new curriculum for which they have been prevented from receiving full professional development; that the Minister for Education and Skills requested the ASTI to provide an immediate derogation from its directive for current teachers of English while talks between the Department and the union on the junior cycle proceed; that the Department remains in discussions with the ASTI on this issue; and that the Minister for Education and Skills remains willing and available to engage with the ASTI on this issue; urges the ASTI to engage positively on this issue with a view to finding a solution; and calls on the ASTI to respond immediately and positively to the Minister's request for an immediate derogation from its directive for current teachers of English while talks between the Department and the union on the junior cycle proceed, and to engage urgently with the Department to resolve outstanding concerns.

I thank the Chairman for facilitating this conversation. No one has a monopoly on concern. We all share a concern for the students and their education. That we are discussing this matter is welcome. As Deputy Byrne stated, this has had an impact, given that there appears to be some movement. That is welcome and positive. As a committee, we can play a part, but we must be careful when going down the road of tabling motions to the Dáil. By doing so, we are involving ourselves in a level of detail that might not be fully known to us. I have reservations about the committee tabling motions related to an industrial relations situation and sending them to the Dáil. This is not for a second meant to take anything from our ability to discuss the matter, but getting the motion right will be difficult and challenging for us as a committee. We could make matters worse rather than better.

At the heart of this situation are the students. Other Deputies alluded to this. There is discrimination between students who are being taught by ASTI members and those who are being taught by TUI members. By tabling a motion to advance a plan B for a set of students over another set of students, we as a committee are furthering the existing apartheid. That would be wrong. All students should be treated equally. As a committee, we need to tread carefully in how we proceed in this instance.

By insisting on putting a plan B in place, we are also asking the Minister to facilitate a directive by the union, which I am not comfortable doing. I do not believe that it was the intention, but the directive segregates one group of students from the other. I would have a difficulty with that.

By involving ourselves in industrial relations disputes in schools, we could be setting a precedent and be drawn into any other issue, grievance or division that arises if we proceed with a motion directing that a plan B be put in place.

What is of significance is that we would be undermining the integrity of the State exams by creating a plan B for one set of students over another. By directing the Minister to create a plan B and, therefore, a divide, we would be fundamentally challenging the integrity of our examination system. I appeal to the committee to be very careful before doing something like that.

As my amendment points out, that the union's directive targets the students' exams - I do not believe that it was intended in that way - is unprecedented. The students are pawns in this situation. That is regrettable. I urge talks and hope that there will be greater immediacy as a result of this debate, but I would prefer not to agree the motion.