Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)

While we need to examine specific measures in this Bill, the general context in which the legislation is being put forward is depressing due to the cuts in education. Of course, the Minister and his Government colleagues will throw up their hands and say: "There's nothing we can do. We're in a straitjacket. We're bankrupt and insolvent, and therefore we've no choice but to do these things." I do not accept that in general, however, because it was a political decision of the current Government and its predecessor to prioritise the interests of bankers and speculators, and those who represent them in the EU-IMF, over our society and its citizens. It is extremely foolish to cut the education sector. I ask the Minister and the Government to consider this. While there may well be more, there have already been specific cuts to rural schools.

There has been the increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, which will do extreme damage to small schools in rural areas, and a cap on special needs assistants. Against a background of 10,000 extra pupils joining the school system every year, essentially a demographic bomb working its way through the education system, these caps, cuts and holding of budgets at current levels will mean a degrading of the quality of education delivered to our young people. This is at a time when precisely enhancing the quality of and access to education is vital to get us out of the economic mess in which we find ourselves. Equipping our people to the highest possible level of education and educational standards is the only way we will be able to work our way out of this crisis. The Government talks about a high-tech and globalised economy. How that can be achieved is beyond me when the Government is degrading the quality of education available to people by increasing student-staff ratios, capping special needs assistants and cutting school capitation grants. It just does not add up and will only do extreme damage in the medium to long term.

The specific issue in this Bill I want to raise is that of unqualified teachers. I am deeply concerned about this and for that reason, unless the Government reconsiders the Bill's provisions in this regard, I will be voting against it. The Bill proposes an amendment to section 30 of the Teaching Council Act and to section 24 of the Education Act to allow for the employment of unqualified teachers to fill in for teacher absences. The Government claims this is not the best solution as it is preferable to have qualified teachers. It claims there will be all sorts of provisions and protections to ensure qualified teachers will be employed in the first instance to fill gaps for teacher absences.

This country has mass unemployment and a considerable number of those unemployed are teachers. In the last week, 1,000 newly qualified teachers looking for employment protested outside the gates of Dáil Éireann, for example. Against this background, I simply do not understand why the Government sees it as important to make provision for unqualified teachers when there are plenty of qualified teachers seeking employment and will be in the future.

The key way to fill certain absences on occasion is by dealing with the issue of qualified teacher supply. It is the Government's responsibility to ensure an adequate number of qualified teachers are available. With the brutal pay cuts the Government has imposed, along with the removal of the degree allowance, a newly qualified teacher will be coming in at €27,000, approximately €7,000 less than previous entrants. This will act as a disincentive for people to join the teaching profession and will either drive teachers out of the profession or the country. Did the Minister know that Abu Dhabi is advertising for English-speaking teachers, of which it has a shortage, on a starting salary of €90,000 per year? If I were newly qualified teacher and had no ties here, I would strongly consider going to Abu Dhabi, particularly when the Government here imposes pay cuts on newly qualified teachers and does not give a damn about the teaching profession.

In fact, the Government is degrading the teaching profession and is now opening up a situation where we will rely increasingly on the provision of unqualified teachers. It is particularly concerning when those unqualified substitutes are paid less. Whether it is the Government's intention as the pressure for more cuts comes, it may come to rely more on unqualified teachers, resulting in a yellow pack layer of teachers which degrades the quality of our education system.

The Government claims this provision is simply to cover short-term gaps and absences. Teachers accept the need for flexibility in addressing these gaps but they are concerned about the possibility of an over-reliance on unqualified teachers with all its implications. Teachers have proposed that instead of amending the Act, a circular should be issued to allow for supervisors to be employed in extreme circumstances so that unqualified people can supervise a class for a day or two to avoid having to send it home.

An additional and even better proposal to cover teacher absences would be to re-establish and expand a pilot project which provided supply panels of teachers to service particular clusters of schools. Such a project was established in 1995 but was abolished, presumably as an austerity measure, in the 2010 budget. For every 150 teachers in a cluster of schools, there would be four or five supply teachers permanently employed to be deployed to cover absences. Such a scheme would address the circumstances the Government wishes to address rather than opening the dangerous door to having unqualified teacher levels expand with the consequent threat to our children's quality of education. Will the Minister consider these suggestions?

See this speech in context