Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 91:

In page 12, line 3, to delete “66.(1) In” and substitute “67. (1) In”.

The amendments I am bringing forward relate to the designation section of the Bill. Amendments Nos. 98 and 110 provide that the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, and the Child and Family Agency shall have regard to the admissions policy of schools in the locality when making a designation. Amendment No. 94 provides that the NCSE should also have regard to the availability of places in schools in the locality when making a designation. This is a matter to which the Child and Family Agency already have regard.

Amendment No. 118 also removes the reference to designation being cancelled where a school has proved that the refusal to admit the child is essential to maintain the ethos of the school as provided for by section 7(3)(c) of the Equal Status Act. This amendment is necessary as a designation appeals committee would not be suitably qualified to make this determination and this provision is straying into the remit of relevant equality legislation legal process.

Amendment No. 104 is a minor wording amendment which replaces the reference in the Bill to "where the child has not been admitted to any school" with "where the child has no school place."

Amendments Nos. 142 and 144 provide that the Minister, in addition to consulting with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, the NCSE and the Child and Family Agency as provided for in the Bill, shall consult with bodies representative of patrons, national associations of parents, recognised school management organisations and trade unions, and staff associations representing teachers, when setting out procedures to be followed by an appeals committee. Amendment No. 144 clarifies that such procedures shall be determined as opposed to being set out by way of regulation.

A small number of minor typographical amendments are required, such as amendments Nos. 92 and 105, removing the reference to a school admitting a child "as a student". The wording "as a student" is not required as its use in this context is not compatible with the definition of student in the Bill.

Amendment No. 149 defines child as including a person in respect of whom an application for admission to a school has not been made. This takes account of situations where a parent may not have made an application for admission to a school. Amendments Nos. 91, 95, 97, 99, 109 and 111 are consequential numbering amendments.