Ms Breda Corr:

I will take excerpts from it. First, I thank the members of the Oireachtas joint committee for affording us this opportunity. I read what was said in the Dáil on this issue with interest and a number of members mentioned special educational needs and a number did not. We welcome many of the suggested changes but we are concerned by the manner in which the legislation does not appear to take into account the necessary practice of requirements of schools catering for children with special educational needs. We made a submission to this committee on the heads of the Bill previously and some of the changes we proposed have come into place and some have not.

However, we have specific areas of concern and I will briefly outline them. As in section 61, there is a requirement that a school would have a specific statement of non-discrimination on all the usual equality grounds but also on the disability ground of the student or the applicant in respect of the student concerned. It goes without saying that special schools and special classes must be able to differentiate between types of students with special educational needs. A special school or class catering for children with a particular diagnosis should be in a position to refuse enrolment to a child who does not have that diagnosis because it is not in the best interests of the child to be there. It would be especially essential that they would be able to differentiate between those disabilities.

Section 62(6)(c) dealing with admissions policy sets out a limited number of circumstances where a school will not be obliged to enrol a student. Special schools and schools with special classes must be given the right to refuse an applicant on the basis that the needs of the applicant does not match the profile of needs catered for by that particular school or class. It is imperative therefore that a fifth ground is included here to ensure that special schools and mainstream schools with special classes can refuse enrolment on the basis that an applicant student does not have that special educational need.

A few of the regulations also pose a few problems and we are of the view that a distinction needs to be made in regard to special schools and classes. That should be hard-coded into the Act rather than in the regulations. I will mention the five issues I have set out in my statement. The first relates to the prior attendance at a specific specified category of preschool. Many special schools have early intervention units and the parents would fully expect that the child would be able to get a place in the special school or class. Another issue is the student's academic ability. Schools catering for mild, moderate or severe disability or educational needs would need to know what is the aptitude of the student to ensure that the student is in the right place. Another issue is the interview or open day. It is essential that special schools or special classes would be able to meet the parents and meet the child involved because the parents and the school need to assess whether the child's needs can be met and properly catered for in that school.

The last piece of regulation we have a little difficulty with is the preclusion of a school from seeking information relating to any medical condition, disability or special educational needs of the students. It is essential that this provision would not be applied to special schools or classes because, as Paul Rowe mentioned earlier, that is resource dependent. Some of these would create obstacles for the enrolment process in special schools and classes.

The last issue is the designation of a school by the NCSE or Tusla. There have been changes since the last proposed Bill in 2015 and there are provisions in it now regarding the ability of the school to accommodate the child, the best interests of the child and special educational needs. As the NCSE and Tusla do not have a daily involvement in school affairs and do not know the make-up of the school or class on a daily basis it is important that the school would be consulted fully before making a proposal to designate. There is another issue related to that. If a child was expelled from a school, there is nothing in the Bill to stop the NCSE or Tusla ignoring the expulsion and re-inserting the child into that school. It is very rare that a child would be expelled from a special school or class and if that were to take place it would be a very serious matter, so it would cause difficulty if the child were to come back into the school. We welcome the provision in section 66(14) that a person with a special interest in or knowledge of education of persons with special educational needs will be included in the appeals committee where the case concerns somebody with special educational needs. However, it is important that management bodies would also be consulted on the procedures for the appeals process. They are not mentioned at all.

In conclusion, we recognise that under the Education Act each pupil with special needs has a right to an appropriate education. As a school management organisation, we wish to ensure that parents can engage in a transparent manner to choose the placement most suitable for their child's needs and that any forthcoming legislation will facilitate boards of management in their efforts to respond to the needs of both pupils and their parents. Finally, we have had detailed discussions with the Department of Education and Skills and we are hopeful of a positive outcome.