Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)

I wish to share time with Deputies Healy, Crowe and Finian McGrath.

On behalf of the Green Party, I welcome the publication of this Bill. As other speakers have stated, it provides a welcome opportunity to debate a number of issues, the primary one being school discipline and trying to achieve a balance between the rights of individual students, the right of all students to learn and the right of all teachers to teach.

There are a number of other areas, such as extending section 29(1)(c) which relates to situations where a child has been refused enrolment to an all-Irish division or class of a school. Other issues relate to the National Educational Welfare Board, NEPS, provisions and the maintenance of the rights of students with special educational needs. Due to time constraints, I will put down amendments relating to these matters on Committee Stage rather than dwell on them here.

The main issue is school discipline. This is a very challenging issue to deal with — otherwise this Bill would not exist in the first place and there would be no ongoing complaints from teachers' unions. One of these unions, the ASTI, carried out a survey recently which revealed that more than one in ten teachers had been physically attacked by a pupil. It also found that more than half of teachers had also been subjected to verbal abuse and taunts from students. Some 7%, a significant number, admitted they were sexually harassed in the classroom environment. How can one teach properly in such an environment and how can other students learn?

These are the challenges the Minister has attempted to deal with through this Bill. As the Minister has stated, it is primarily aimed at ensuring that the rights of the pupil appealing an expulsion are treated equally alongside the rights of the majority of students to learn in the classroom and trying to balance the rights of teachers to do their job in a normal working environment. I commend the Minister and her Department on their efforts in trying to address this problem which nearly every second-level school faces on a daily basis.

The changes proposed do not go far enough to ensure the rights of children to learn in a safe, non-disruptive and idyllic environment. In short, a disruptive pupil is still allowed to rule the roost. Notwithstanding his or her right to appeal decisions, there is still too much leeway to allow him or her remain in the school. A pupil may be allowed remain for the most spurious or technical reason.

The Bill seeks to amend section 29(4), allowing the appeals committee to consider a range of factors in appeals relating to expulsion and suspension. They have been mentioned before and take in: the educational interest of the student making the appeal; the educational interest of other students in the school; the nature, scale and extent of the student's behaviour; the reasonableness of efforts made by the school; the safety, health and welfare of teachers and students; the school's policies, code of behaviour and extent to which this complies with any issued guidelines; statutory duties of schools; and other relevant matters.

In attempting to cover all these issues the balance still has not been struck and schools can still be forced on a technicality to let a student return. A student could continue disrupting and acting as a real and present physical danger to others in some cases. It is high time schools were provided with the powers to act effectively against students who disrupt the class time and again after a warning. This Bill is an opportunity to do so and I look forward to amendments being put forward by various parties and individuals.

The TUI, another teaching union, has indicated that decisions to suspend or expel pupils are usually taken in complete exasperation with refusal by the pupils and parents to heed repeated requests for changed behaviour. Every opportunity is normally offered to pupils to make amends; it is not like a dictatorial regime where a hand is chopped off after one offence. The students go through a lengthy process.

If a student's conduct is continually disruptive and robs other pupils of the right to learn, or if pupils continue to misbehave, action must be taken. There are cases where students appeal and are rightfully let back in. I hope this will occur not on a technicality but for a good reason. Some cases of disruptive behaviour can occur, as Deputy O'Sullivan mentioned in mitigating circumstances.

There are no clear guidelines in this legislation for dealing with cases of violence or where violence has been threatened. An example is where recently at a school in my constituency a 17 year old student allegedly assaulted a teacher, breaking his nose and teeth and damaging his eyes in a vicious assault. It is claimed the row broke out after the student had been playing with a mobile phone in class and took a photograph of the teacher. Having been told to put the phone down, the student attacked the teacher.

I will not comment on the individual case because it will go before the courts. In such cases, the student should not be allowed back into the school under any circumstance. The authority of the teacher will have been severely damaged and the student, in order to save face with other students, will have to walk with a bit of a swagger and keep his or her head high even if he or she has been humbled or realises his or her error. That student would have issues of self worth and will try to keep it up by swaggering around and boasting that he or she may attack the teacher again. This is why there cannot be an environment worthy of learning where a pupil is readmitted who has been expelled for violent behaviour. Such a student would have to go somewhere else, which I will deal with presently.

Deputy Enright mentioned the Fine Gael policy of possibly searching students for drugs or alcohol, which I disagree with totally. We do not live in the Bronx or a violent era in which kids should be routinely searched for weapons. We are still a relatively sane society, thanks be to God. To bring such searches into schools would be wholly negative and would criminalise young people at too early an age.

Kids will take drugs and drink outside the school system. It is more of a problem for young people to come into school after drink or drug binges, when they cannot concentrate or stay attentive. It is not so much the problem of drink and drugs being taken within the school but a case of such actions affecting school work. That is a wider societal issue which I will not try to skirt over. It needs to be dealt with and we should tackle the root causes. We need more intervention at an early age.

In previous responses to questions I have put down the Minister has correctly stated the Department cannot take total responsibility for children. However, we need more intervention and the task force on student behaviour recommended an holistic approach to the problems. We need resources put in at primary level to cover the Department's role. For example, the Green Party has proposed a new responsibility to ease the transition for students entering second-level education. The TUI has called for an induction for students on discipline issues when they enter first year. These deal with people going into second-level education.

I previously mentioned in committees that teachers would predict that a particular youth would cause trouble or end up in prison, although the student could be as young as six or seven. Resources must be put in place to deal with problems that are not always within the education system itself. We should consider expanding social services or assessment. For example, if we had the full complement of 200 National Educational Psychological Service personnel, it could go some way in providing an overall solution.

Deputy O'Sullivan mentioned that children excluded from school also have rights and I agree. We cannot forget that while on one hand we should ensure those who cause trouble should be kept out of the system, particularly if they will affect the rights of other students and teachers to do their job, we cannot on the other hand label them as scumbags and leave them with it for the rest of their lives.

Disruptive students were not born that way. Very few people are born bad. Many are moulded by the system into disruptive students. Social background, such as a dysfunctional home life or having a special educational need that is not dealt with, could be a factor. In recognising the turmoil that leads a student to become violent we should also help such students. This may not lead to a student going back into the same school after he or she has committed a violent act as that would affect the way students and teachers relate.

Another approach outside the existing school system is required. Perhaps we need a new type of education centre. On a visit to Sydney in New South Wales some years ago, I visited Edgware school in a rough suburb of the city. That school has been specially set up with other centres to deal with discipline issues. The Minister is aware of this school.

In this facility youths can go in and out at their own time and learn when they want or learn in very small classes. This is because some may have problems interacting with others. These youths can sometimes go back into the mainstream system after a spell in Edgware, whereas others get some form of qualification through the school itself. That is the way forward.

The task force report refers to out-of-school provision. Youthreach could be expanded to be a model in this respect and a junior Youthreach, as mentioned by Deputy O'Sullivan, would be a good idea. Youthreach must be resourced as it does not currently have the special educational needs services that primary schools do. Some 70% of the people in Youthreach have special educational needs. If such issues are dealt with, Youthreach could be a model with a section dealing with particularly disruptive students. These youths could be given the opportunity to develop their lives in the way they see fit while protecting teachers and other students so that they can teach and learn in a safe environment.

See this speech in context