Pat Buckley (Cork East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. It has been a Pandora's box, to be honest. It was a comprehensive opening statement. The statistics and the numbers are rising because the spectrum is broadening. We have to talk about one specific point and how we can accommodate it. I do not want to nit-pick but we are a committee, but we are also legislators. If there was a legislative change to make things better, could we do that to assist the State Examinations Commission? We also recognise the work the State Examinations Commission does, to give credit where it is due.

The issue I am worried about is the review. I understand where Senator Lombard was coming from. It is trying to strike the balance between access to the service based on the needs, fairness and what is compatible. Ms Feeney touched on points such as that people do not have to get a professional diagnosis but I am not putting more pressure on teachers and SNAs. They are at the forefront every day when kids are at school. Surely the mathematics teacher, an English teacher or whatever would spot problems in kids. Does the State Examinations Commission engage with schools? Is there a different format that could be used? I know it would be a large workload but when we see the numbers jumping from 19,500 in 2014 to almost 34,500 in 2023, it is a massive amount of work to try to accommodate so many people. I know where Ms Feeney is coming from. We do not want to give somebody a jump lead but unfortunately it is so complex and there are so many different issues and concerns here for people. Society has changed. Let us call a spade a spade. The number diagnosed with autism is rising rapidly and then that spreads to other complex issues. We could pick just one subject.

Normally, committees say there is so much to do and they look to where can they get the small wins first. A review was mentioned. There was a review in 2009 and another in 2016. While reading the notes, I wondered whether the review that started in 2016 was done every year or whether it was a case of possibly reviewing the situation the following year. Has the new review just started?

I welcome that this scheme is unique in our examination system. That is brilliant. I love thinking outside the box. It is difficult to please everyone, but is there a way to follow best international practice? Let us say another country has a higher standard. A percentage of 15%, 20% or 25% was mentioned. Is there a way for the commission and the Department, working with stakeholders like students, their families and, in particular, teachers, to use joined-up thinking in conducting a review? The parents of children with this complex need are frustrated. We in the Oireachtas often say that a commonsensical approach goes out the window. I know where the witnesses are coming from, in that their organisations have to try to be fair to everyone, but the parents we are listening to are asking for a commonsensical approach. The parents are probably the experts anyway, as they will have the kids most of the time. They are asking for an additional ten minutes or whatever. I understand Senator Lombard’s comments about pens and so on. A different type of processing is involved, one that is slower. Certain cohorts of children taking these exams are at a disadvantage because of the current rules, even though they are much more open than they were. I have sat on Oireachtas committees, including the committee on Sláintecare. The main line at that committee was that the service was to be provided on the basis of need, not means. Need is the main issue in this conversation.

I am thinking outside the box. Can it be done if we change the legislation? I do not know. How can we as a committee assist the witnesses’ organisations in bringing this matter to a close? If it is resolved, something else will come along to do with reasonable accommodation. Autism and ADHD diagnoses are increasing. I could start listing off conditions. Obviously, the organisations have rules, as do the countries with the best international practice, but this is all about giving the kids extra time. Could there be a rule book to set out timeframes for certain conditions? It sounds like that would be sectioning people off, but anything that works would make this much easier for the organisations and the schools. There could be a booklet. Unfortunately, we have to class people by certain criteria. Under the booklet, if someone had X, Y and Z, he or she would get an extra ten minutes. Would doing it in this way assist matters and make the system fairer?

I have put a great deal to the witnesses. I am not expecting a million answers.