Ms Anne McElduff:

I hear what Deputy Daly is saying about an education ombudsman being there to advocate for everybody. However, he is presenting a contradictory view about how an ombudsman for education would work. There are many advocates and Senator Ruane has articulated some of the reasons we need them. The arguments are for more resources for special needs, smaller class sizes, more relief for teaching principals in order that they can interact with parents, and more delegated posts in schools. It is the resources we need, not the advocacy.

As presented, the Bill is solely an appeal mechanism for parents and students for complaints which currently are dealt with at school level. This is a further appeal on top of that. We think that is unnecessary. It will end up in multiple hearings, which will cost a huge amount of time and take the focus away from resources, supports and resolution mechanisms. We want to hear the concerns and complaints of parents. We want to be open about that and to address it. However, we need to do so effectively and not through multiple layers of appeals. The Education (Amendment) Bill as structured would end up like that, according to my reading of it. Section 66 in particular, as it is written, raises serious concerns for us in terms of practicalities.