Mr. Peter Tyndall:

Deputy Jim Daly was very eloquent in support of the principles he is seeking to have built into the ombudsman system and I have no quarrel with him in that regard. It is clear that issues about educational welfare should be addressed in the context of an ombudsman's scheme. My particular issue with it was whether that could be most quickly and effectively addressed by the extension of powers under and the remit of the existing scheme or whether it was necessary to create a new one.

The issue of recommendations being ignored is one that tends not to affect, as I said, ombudsmen working wholly within the public sector. It is the particular role of schools and school boards which fall outside the power of direction that causes many of the difficulties the Deputy properly identified. As I said, within the private sector it is normal for ombudsmen to have binding powers and for the organisations within their remit to have to comply with their recommendations, unless they take court action. As the Deputy acknowledged, this potentially leads to many judicial reviews, which is not helpful. The proposals to allow the Minister to make binding directions are an excellent compromise, one which balances the traditional ombudsman model and the quasi-independence or independence of boards of governors in a way that would ensure recommendations were not ignored. As the Deputy stated, in all of these matters it is the small minority of cases in which problems arise that consistently provide the work for ombudsman schemes.

Although the Office of the Ombudsman deals with welfare issues, they tend to be student welfare issues within the further and higher education sector or, as Dr. Muldoon described, issues around access to support for leaving certificate students sitting examinations. They are crucial and occupy a considerable amount of time for both offices. The existence of both offices has led to major systemic change in the way this support is provided. This shows the capacity of ombudsmen to take individual complaints and turn them into real and lasting change for a much larger number of people than come to our offices.

While I take the point that some of the work we do is about funding, I must also note that a significant educational welfare issue arises where a student is told midway through the second year of a degree course that his or her funding is about to be withdrawn and, what is more, that all funding received thus far must be repaid. These matters have an impact.

The quickest and most effective way to realise the aspirations the Deputy set out for improvements in access to redress in schools would be to ensure the Ombudsman for Children, in particular, had the necessary changes to powers and resources to enable his office to deliver effective redress in the circumstances about which the Deputy is concerned.