Fiona O'Loughlin (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chair. I apologise for not being in the room. I was at another committee. In addition, we are in a voting situation today. The witnesses will have to excuse me if I may not be able to stay to listen and respond. I have my colleagues on alert to come in and get me.

I thank the witnesses for being here and for the work they do in supporting families and those who need extra support around helping to develop their full potential as regards what they can do in life and society. Obviously, education is a huge part of that. My colleague Deputy O'Sullivan has just spoken about how confusing it can be. I know that witnesses have all made that point,. As Mr. Harris said, it is not just confusing, it is contradictory as well. I certainly agree.

About three days after the announcement was made regarding this, I tabled a Commencement matter in the Seanad to try to get some clarity. To be honest, I was even more confused after the response I received. What is not confusing, though, is how some schools are impacted. We have had a number of correspondence from schools because young people themselves and their parents are very concerned but schools are also incredibly concerned. For example, one school indicated that it is only getting an increase of 7.5 SET hours. I was at a school yesterday, St. Patrick's Boys National School in Rathangan. Because its hours are being reduced by five, from 85 to 80, under this new scheme, it is losing a teacher. There is nothing confusing about a school being told that it is losing a teacher who is badly needed. The same school is desperately waiting for a new ASD class. To add further, with regard to the appeals process that it is there, it has been told that there is not enough staff in the Department of Education to go through the appeals. That is a real problem. It is fine if a school is told it is losing a teacher, particularly as there is an appeals process. However, the school in question has been told that there is not really an appeals process because there are not enough staff to deal with appeals. The appeals process starts around April. Schools are waiting to know, but there is not going to be anything from that. That, I have to say, really concerns me.

On the briefing note that Deputy O'Sullivan referred to, there are two aspects of concern. It states that schools expressed concerns that the supports from the HSE to include speech and language therapy and occupational therapy were not routinely available, and therefore there was a concern that the HSE would not have a full understanding of the complex needs of children in the school. That was one of the reasons we were given as to why the SET model was reviewed and updated. I agree with what has been said about the CDNTs and the assessment of needs process. That is ultimately what is leading to many of these problems, but what is happening is certainly not going to help alleviate it in any way.

The same document states that the Department worked with the inspectorate, NEPS and the NCSE to determine new and better ways to determine complex needs. There was no consultation with any of the witnesses, which is completely wrong. What is underlined in what we have received is that complex needs have not been removed. Instead, high-quality, verifiable data from all 4,000 schools is now used to determine educational needs. This is not a question for the witnesses but a question for us in terms of how the Department defines what is high-quality, verifiable data. I know some of that is coming from the assessment tests in maths and English, which start in second class. I have a big concern around that with regard to what happens prior to second class. Also, there may well be some children or students with complex needs who may do well in English and maths but who also have other complex needs and may not do well in socialising or in all of the other areas that schooling is meant to support, apart from all of the other criteria. There are questions for us about what constitutes high-quality verifiable data. I am interested in the witnesses' views on those matters. Maybe they could respond.