Mr. John Curtis:

The JMB has long argued for greater coherence in national education policy-making. We therefore welcome the bringing together of a clearly articulated set of principles underpinning the relationship between parents and students on the one hand and schools on the other. The principles, as framed in the draft Bill, represent an ethical framework for parents founded on democratic civic values and the setting out of their appropriate engagement in their children's schools. Furthermore, in essence, they place the student at the centre of school life and are predicated on a positive and forward-looking vision of school.

In being party to a process whereby all aspects of what the charter might entail are being considered, some issues will of course need to be borne in mind: the need to accommodate the fact that many of these provisions are already underpinned by legislation and regulation that are well established in schools in our sector; the possible erosion of autonomy and the potential for micro-management of voluntary sector institutions; a potential weakening of the principle of subsidiarity by which decisions are best made at the lowest appropriate level, that is, by the school community itself; the need to avoid the emergence of an adversarial culture in the partnership between schools and the families they serve; the need to recognise that while parents have a fully appreciated focus on their own children's situations, the education and safety of the whole cohort of students must remain the overarching focus of school authorities; the sense that there should be an identification of responsibilities associated with the charter's set of rights; and the potential for the emergence of additional layers of bureaucracy and financial cost in already overwhelmed schools. These issues readily emerge. We imagine their consideration is already under way and we look forward to engaging in the ongoing conversation.

We contend that existing procedures in schools have been fundamentally inclusive in engaging with parents and students through established mechanisms of representation that have evolved in an incremental manner and that much of what a charter might envisage as best practice may already be in place in our schools. This is especially true of the integral and still developing role of student councils and parent associations in our sector and the manifest impact they have had, especially in recent years. The incremental change already occurring in the nature and level of engagement of our students and their parents in our schools should serve as a foundation for what might be envisaged for the charter.

We are conscious that Part 5, titled Fitness to Teach, of the Teaching Council Acts 2001 to 2005 commenced on 25 July 2016. This allows members of the public, other teachers, employers or the Teaching Council to make a complaint against a registered teacher. The implications of what this will entail for schools and how it might impact on current practice and procedures perhaps still needs to unfold. How this process will ultimately develop may have a relevance for what is envisaged for the charter, and it will be important that in this area there is a mapped strategy regarding engagement and function in place.

Likewise, the role of the ombudsman - for children or for education - will need to be incorporated in an appropriate way in what will emerge, and the nature of the interface between the ombudsman and the school will have to be carefully considered and defined. It is very important that the energy of school communities radiate towards the student and the teaching and learning process, and that accountability and appeal processes do not become overly invasive and suffocating. Furthermore, it is crucial that an appropriate balance is maintained between the rights of the individual student and parent and the school's charge to the well-being and health and safety of the entire student cohort.

Part of our remit at this juncture is of necessity to identify issues that might warrant particular attention, but we very much embrace the promise of what this process can lead to in improving efficacy, accountability and the education experience in our schools. The JMB has always valued the collaborative and fruitful nature of our work with officials in the Department of Education and Skills. We will work with the Oireachtas and the Minister to ensure that each of the 14 principles framed in the draft Bill will continue to be part of the lived experience of our schools and we look forward to engaging with the Minister in the development of the forthcoming guidelines.

The draft Bill to establish an ombudsman for education has significant alignment with proposals framed in the parent and student charter Bill. The charter Bill's extension of powers to the Ombudsman for Children are focused on the processes of appeal, investigation and direction, and appear, to the JMB, to be sufficient for the reinforcement of parents' rights in responding to decisions made by a school. Childhood, to age 18, and formal education are concurrent in our society. It would appear to represent an artificial segregation of experience and process if there were to be two separate ombudsman frameworks increasing the potential for incoherence of process and authority in the childhood space.

We note that in his Education in Focus report of November 2016, the Ombudsman for Children, Dr. Niall Muldoon, stated that 45% of the 1,649 complaints his office received related to education. Given this reality and that in many of these cases there can be attendant issues surrounding disability, health, children in care, housing or other issues, as outlined by Dr. Muldoon in his submission to this committee on 7 March last, it would seem appropriate that issues relating to education would continue to be addressed by means of the broad remit that currently pertains in the Ombudsman for Children's office. Regarding some specific issues, we would seek to explore what "appropriate remedial action" might be taken by the Ombudsman in the context of an appeal to his office. As we indicated earlier, the JMB seeks greater coherence in educational policy-making at a national level, and any progress towards the "coordination of policy relating to education" as mentioned here is most welcome. That due consideration is given by all parties to all that pertains to legislation in the area of education is very important to us as an organisation. Again, we welcome the opportunity afforded to us by this engagement and we look forward to further discussion on these issues as matters unfold.