Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the chance to discuss what is in effect the dismantling of modern guidance provision. I thank Deputy Brendan Smith for providing us with the opportunity to do so.

As I was preparing my remarks, I received correspondence from a guidance counsellor in a western school with 800 students. She gave a diary of an average week in the school and an idea of guidance counsellors' activities. Her work involves a 45-hour week, 22 hours of which are in direct contact with individuals or contact with a range of classes. Some 10% of her time is devoted to counselling, an extremely valuable task that involves using her skills and qualifications, which she continues to update. The time spent counselling depends on the severity of the case.

The school in question does not participate in DEIS and has no school chaplain or home-school liaison officer. The teacher has asked all the Deputies to whom she sent her e-mail where students will go next year in times of crisis when she is removed from her role. To whom will teachers refer students? What will happen to students who have no one to help them or do not have the resources to go to a private career guidance adviser to obtain advice on post-leaving certificate courses, IT or university courses, or when they end up unemployed, applying for the wrong course or dropping out because they are no longer provided for? All of these outcomes increase unemployment, drop-out levels and reduce the status of students within schools.

My correspondent's weekly diary is very interesting. I was relatively ignorant of the role of guidance counsellors until approximately two years ago when I had the honour of opening the guidance counsellors' conference in my role as Minister of State with responsibility for labour affairs. It had nothing to do with education. It involved a group within the education system who focused on industry and business. On the night in question, the group had lecturers from Maynooth and lecturers teaching a range of courses. The event opened my eyes because I am of a generation for whom guidance counselling was Cinderella. It was carried out by very well-intentioned people who believed guidance involved giving one a leaflet for college and telling one that, because one was good at commerce, one should study business. Perhaps that is why I ended up in the House.

With the introduction of the Education Act 1998 by Deputy Martin, Cinderella went to the ball and we now have a complex and comprehensive service in place that looks after career guidance from day one. It is interesting that the guidance counsellor's weekly diary indicates she spends some of her week with first and second year students. Guidance takes place that early in the cycle. The counsellor devotes a considerable amount of her week to fifth-year or pre-leaving certificate students. I do not refer to those filling out CAO forms this week but to those who will be filling them next year. That is when we need to address the needs of students.

Even more important than career guidance is mental health counselling. Anyone who saw "The Frontline" last night or anyone in this job or any other will realise there is a mental health crisis. The counsellor with whom I was in correspondence and many others spend their time dealing with students who are in very serious circumstances, particularly at present. I refer to those who are being bullied and those in very difficult circumstances at home. If a student has difficult circumstances at home, to whom does he turn? He turns to the counsellor in school because he will have developed a relationship with her, based on having spent so much time in school. He will not go to his friends.

Irrespective of the Minister's intentions, which are probably genuine, the reality is that if schools must choose next September between providing core subjects or guidance, the latter will lose out. Where should people in crisis turn? They will go on the public waiting lists or, if they have the resources, to the private sector, thereby reinforcing disadvantage, loss and educational apartheid within schools.

The programme for Government contains ambitious and increasingly grandiose statements about education in light of the cuts affecting DEIS, rural schools, third level and guidance. Education, we are told in the programme, will be a priority for the Government, which will endeavour to protect and enhance the educational experience of children, young people and students. That sounds very hollow in light of the cuts we discussed last week and tonight and which we will discuss again over the coming weeks.

Education is at the heart of a more cohesive, equal and successful society and will be the engine of sustainable economic growth. We all agree with that. I believe this passionately and that education is the way to dismantle and break down social barriers but in order for it to be an engine of economic growth, students need help and to know where the economic growth is. They need to know whether their skills fit particular roles and that they are mentally strong enough to be part of the economic growth. Instead of assisting the engine of economic growth, we are pulling away an important part of the oil that keeps the engine running. The Minister will know what happens when one pulls the oil away from a system.

Barnardos is not necessarily an organisation associated with this side of the House. Its current chief executive is more associated with the Minister. I will finish with a quote from the organisation:

Barnardos believes that the measures to incorporate Guidance Counsellors within schools' staffing quota will severely affect children and young people. ... The implications for the proposed cuts to Guidance Counsellors are far reaching and will leave many young people at risk.

There is no political agenda here but the agenda of young people.

See this speech in context