Ms Áine O'Sullivan:

My name is Áine O'Sullivan. I am the assistant general Secretary with ACCS, the management body that works with 96 post-primary schools across the country. ACCS welcomes many parts of the Bill or what has come with the Bill. It has provided greater clarity and consistency in the drafting and application of admission policies in our schools. The transparency that comes with the annual admission notices is most welcome. The clear designation of the responsibilities of the various stakeholders is also welcome. Section 66, on the co-operation between boards, is particularly welcome. It has really assisted in the allocation of places where schools are oversubscribed. For example, in one large urban area, there are three post-primary schools. A total of 1,192 applications was received by those schools for 472 places. Working together, the schools were able to bring the deficit down to 57 places from the figure of 1,192. On the ground, schools are working hard and constructively to try to work on the issues around oversubscription. The argument that we make in our submission is that schools are communities that are strengthened by strong family connections. In our schools, attending parent criterion is not widely implemented at all. In fact, in a survey of 67 schools, six schools stated that they included that as a selection criterion. According to the survey, of the six schools, only one used it where students lived within the catchment area. Most of our schools work on the basis that living within the catchment area and having siblings at the school are the main criteria, because community schools and comprehensive schools are schools for the local community. Really, it is only where schools are hopelessly oversubscribed that they have to perform this balancing act. In our submission, we reference the judgment of Judge Teehan in the Stokes v. Christian Brothers High School Clonmel & Anor case of 2011, where he talked about the role of school boards in seeking to strike such a balance between legitimate competing interests. We argue that the role of boards in seeking to strike such a balance should not be removed. We do so in the context of that judgment, which was made with some hesitation. The hesitation highlights just how complicated and complex the issue is for schools. We argue that the lack of school places in certain locations is the main issue here.