Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

I too, thank Fine Gael for making its Private Members' time available for this important and opportune motion. The Green Party is very happy to work in concert with both Fine Gael and Labour in pointing out the inconsistencies of Government policy in this area. One of the frustrations of being an elected Member of the Dáil is to find dozens of people making representations about a commitment that has been entered into, sometimes withdrawn and often still to be met. I am speaking on behalf of many parents of children with special needs who still live with the uncertainty as to whether the educational needs of their children will be properly met in the years to come. The Minister will have to account for this situation.

We are now many weeks into the new school year and the fact that hundreds of parents across the country find that their demands and expectations have not been met is not just a flaw but something the Government should feel great shame about. At its most benign, perhaps it may be said that the Government has created this expectation through recognising many years ago that there was a role for special needs assistants in education and using the community employment scheme to allow such people access to the education system. That in itself sent out many mixed messages, especially when the Government started to mess around with the community employment scheme in terms of numbers and as regards the turnover of people who were allowed to be used in such a manner.

The Government did not and is still not moving fast enough to ensure that special needs assistants are not only mainstreamed but given both the initial training and ongoing support in the important role they play in the education system. Special needs covers a wide variety of areas. It covers not just children with physical disabilities, but those with sensory deprivation and many young people with a condition of autism or its variants. We are talking about socialisation skills and the need to have someone available on a one to one basis or close to this. If the Government is serious about the policy of including all children in mainstream education, then the programme has to be backed up by appropriate resources and a consistent policy.

As with previous speakers, the frustration of trying to contact the Department when making representation on behalf of such parents has, from my point of view, been much more than that. To be fair, when the civil servants concerned could be accessed, they were co-operative and polite. Often, however, the civil servants who were contacted were not the people making the decisions. They were the ones processing the applications. Within the process itself, decisions are made by officials in the Department which affect the rest of the life of the child concerned purely on the basis of a paper application, with no physical examination of the child. Very often a balance sheet approach is demonstrated as to how the resources should be provided for the child, the school and on a national basis. Even when supporting reports are given to Department officials by health care professions that state clearly that individual children are more than deserving of special needs assistance, there is reluctance and delay. The Minister must explain why this inconsistency exists. My experience, this year in particular, of the balance sheet approach to the provision of resources, relates to many young people with autism and especially those with Asperger's syndrome.

If in any one school it was found that more than one child was affected, the Department officials actively discussed the possibility of whether a special needs assistance could be shared. This approach is widespread throughout the country, not only in terms of autism, but as regards children with sensory and physical disabilities. When it is asserted that one person may relate to two or more young people within the school system, that is where the Government's logic falls apart. What happens where two or more children have physical needs at the same time? The task cannot be properly undertaken and the young people, the special needs assistant and the school are put at a disadvantage.

Previous speakers spoke about what I term school shopping. This has nothing to do with where the nearest school is or even where the best facilities exist for the child concerned. This is particularly true of the transition from primary to secondary education. Parents have to telephone several schools to find out whether every item on a long checklist may be met, in particular continued access to a special needs assistant. The problem of approaching particular schools often is compromised by the fact the Department may consider some institutions over quota as regards other aspects of their activities. To add another member of staff to the school may be seen as unnecessary, regardless of the needs of the individual child. Again, this is another area of inconsistency that the Minister needs to address.

The Government's policy, in so far as it exists in terms of ensuring that every child can access mainstream education, is confused. This is not only true in terms of access to special needs assistants but also where special schools exist to assist the process of entry to mainstream education in helping the socialisation of children. In terms of autism there is a small number of CABA, certified associate behaviour analysts, schools around the country, which even to this day operate on a pilot basis. The Department is still uncertain as to what the long-term need will be in terms of resources for such an innovative and successful approach to special education.

At the other end of the scale are young people in need of special assistance in terms of taking examinations. I received correspondence today from the education board which provides statistics showing that since 2000 the number of people given special allowances in the taking of exams has been reduced each year. How is that possible if the Government is putting more resources into the assessment of young people and with the population in general on the increase? All these signals are being sent out to the parents of children with special needs.

The Minister's first real policy statement has caused a great deal of offence to parents of children with special needs, in her scoffing and sneering at the need of people to use the court system to vindicate the rights of their children to access education. For every case the Minister and her Department might win in this regard there are dozens being lost. The Minister would be wise not to start her term in office with such a sneering attitude and to remember the O'Donoghue and Sinnott cases. Every advance in terms of the education of young people with special needs has come about more through the courts system than through this Chamber or any policy initiative of Government. That is a sad state of affairs.

I hope in her response the Minister can at least accept much of what is in this joint motion. It makes eminent sense. It requires far less resources than this House approved earlier in the day in terms of the horse and greyhound racing industries. When we get a proper sense of priorities and finally begin to put in place the constitutional implication that all children in this country are equal, perhaps we will begin to see the need for fewer motions such as this. This might even provide an opportunity for more Members on this side of the House to compliment the Government for putting in place policies that are badly needed.

See this speech in context