Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I am glad the new Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, is present for the debate on this important joint motion on behalf of Fine Gael, Labour and the Green Party. However, the motion is an indication of the need for a change of Government. Despite the wealthy economy, the money flowing into the Exchequer and the awareness of the problem of special needs, the issue has not been properly addressed. All taxpayers want to see their money spent on prioritising this issue. However, the most vulnerable are being left behind. The Government has neither the capacity nor the political will to address this issue. It is an indication of the Government's failure when, with all the money available, the needs of the weakest children who need support from the start cannot be met.

Studies prove that early intervention is crucial for these children. However, this is not happening. Last year when the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act was debated in the Houses, over 4,000 children, already professionally assessed as having a need for intervention, lost that vital year. They were left sitting on a waiting list for a decision in the Department of Education and Science. While the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, introduced legislation to focus on each child's individual needs with individual assessments and educational plans, he planned to change to the weighted system. The final draft of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act did not match the expectations of a rights-based Bill. Although it provided for individual plans and assessment of needs, it was dependent on the availability of resources. Meanwhile, the Department has moved to a weighted system, based on the number and gender of children in a school. In effect Government policy in this area is in total confusion.

In the meantime, those children with the greatest need are the meat in the sandwich while not having their needs addressed. This motion highlights what needs to be done to address those children's needs. It does not deal with individual children but claims one size fits all. A system where school size determines the number of resource teachers and special needs assistants it will receive will not work. I appeal to the Minister for Education and Science to ensure there is scope for the individual needs of each child to be addressed. I support Deputy Enright's call for the need for the Department to respond to parents and schools when they raise issues.

Yesterday, I heard of a child who had just transferred to second level who was in need of one-to-one support but it was not forthcoming. That child is now out of school. The child's mother went into school with the child for the first two weeks so that her child could attend school. In the end the school decided that was not appropriate but it has still not been able to get the support the child needs. Professional educational psychologists have assessed this child.

One of the big problems that arise in this area is when children transfer, whether that be from primary to second level or from one primary school to another. We need to have adequate resources in the system for these children. It is not good enough to have them waiting. They cannot cope in school if they are not getting the resources they need. In many cases they simply cannot adapt to the system.

I have received many letters on this matter and I will read extracts from them.

"Since [the child's name] was approximately three years old it has been apparent that he has developed mental delays. For the last six years we have fought for everything that he has received. Now the time has come, and actually passed, that he needs resource hours. His need for help is becoming greater but yet the supply of help is not forthcoming."

Another letter stated:

"Our son has had a special needs assistant to cover all the hours he was attending school for the last two years. As he was due to begin first class this September, which requires him to spend an extra hour at school, the school principal applied to the Department of Education to have his SNA hours increased to cover this extra hour, however, instead of an increase his SNA hours have been reduced to 12.5. This, we feel, will have a devastating effect on our son's education."

Another letter stated: "I believe the Department of Education is in breach of its statutory obligation to meet my son's entitlement and worse, does not appear to give a damn." In reading that out I stress that we are not criticising the people working in that section of the Department. They are absolutely swamped with work. They need extra resources which is one of the issues referred to in the motion.

I have other letters from school principals, one of which states:

"What really has got to me and to teachers is that we were advised to have consultations and meetings with parents re referral for assessments. Then parents and teachers met the psychologist and we had assessments, recommendations, and follow-up meetings. In most of our cases it was all for nothing. After resource hours were recommended and other strategies the Department changed the rules. Parents and pupils were and are disenchanted, maybe disenfranchised would be better and after all the meetings with teachers who often initiate but are always part of the process their children got nothing. It certainly makes the school-home relationship more difficult. Further, particular children with behavioural and/or emotional problems who were brought through this process became more difficult to teach and deal with."

Another letter from a teacher stated:

"As you may be aware, the situation with resource and special needs assistant hours in schools at the present moment is becoming a shambles. I have been in contact with the special needs section in the Department of Education on several occasions and, through no fault of theirs, they could not give me a definite answer as regards support for these children."

Another teacher's letter stated:

"With the proposed reduction of special education teachers from three to 1.8 in September 2005, the number of children receiving learning support and resource teaching under the new special education teaching will be reduced from 81 to 49. Some of these 32 children who will have to be dropped have already been sanctioned by a Department of Education and Science letter for resource teaching."

This is one of the real concerns of principals. In cases where children have already been assessed and special needs assistance sanctioned by the Department but the number of resource teaching hours given to the school under the weighted system is reduced, principals do not know what they should do. They are put in the position of having to decide which children will have their hours reduced and which children will not. Again, to go back to the main point, legislation that is already enacted goes in the other direction by stating that the needs of each child must be addressed, that each child must have a plan and the resources to implement it. However, the system now being put in place does not provide for that. The Minister needs to clarify her thinking on this.

It has been suggested that schools in rural areas may be grouped but that has not been clarified as yet. Deputy Enright raised the issue of the role of special needs organisers. I recently spoke to a newly appointed special needs organiser who explained to me that they have no idea what they are supposed to do, yet there is a great deal of work to be done.

The motion states that the legislation needs to be implemented as soon as possible. The Minister should do this because it will put things in place whereby the focus will be on the child, special needs organisers will be able to do their job, principals will not be expected to do an impossible job and parents and children will see their needs being addressed.

Issues also arise regarding resources and the number of resource teachers. Extra posts were announced in the summer and they were very welcome. The INTO and others involved in the issue pointed out that those numbers will not be enough even to address the weighted system, not to mind schools that may have well above the number of children in need of support that they are supposed to have under the weighted system. It is essential that we provide that kind of support.

We also need to appoint more of the ancillary people who diagnose these children and provide the support they need such as educational psychologists and speech therapists. In particular, speech therapy at an early age is of crucial importance to many young children who would not otherwise be able to participate fully in the school system. I am sure other Members of the House are aware of many cases where children are known to have a speech therapy need but are not getting the appropriate support at the right time.

It is preferable if we can give the support needed when children are young, as soon as possible after they are diagnosed. Children should have the required support in their local primary school, whether it be a one-to-one special needs assistant or some hours of resource teaching, speech therapy or whatever else. If children get the attention they need at an early stage and this is followed through the school system, they do not lose what they have learned if they change school or when they transfer from primary to second level. This would allow such children to reach their full potential. That is what we are supposed to do for all children under the Constitution so we cannot allow the current situation to continue.

In the past year the situation for children has got worse. They have been waiting in confusion. First, there was a review of resource teachers. Second, there was a review of special needs assistants. Neither parents or teachers know where they stand and, most importantly, the children themselves are confused. People expect their children will get the back-up they need at their local schools but when they go, the back-up is not there. In many cases this can lead to behavioural problems for children or they fall behind and cannot catch up. This is one of the most important things a government or society can do, to provide for the children who need that special support at the early stages in the school system.

I put it to the Minister to look for the resources in the forthcoming budget for implementation of the recommendations in the motion. If that happens we would truly do a great service to the children in the system and for society in the future, because if we intervene at an early stage we can be sure these children will be able to get the best possible deal from the education system. They are not children of a lesser God, they are as entitled as anybody else to get the full benefit of the education system.

I thank Fine Gael for giving its time for this motion and I urge the Minister for Education and Science to take on board the points we make and provide for children with special needs.

See this speech in context