Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)

I will make a couple of brief points. The idea of establishing a single organisation, rather than several, to deal with standards in further and higher education and training obviously is eminently sensible. While people may raise some objections as to how it is done, the principle of it being done is appropriate, should be examined and should be proceeded with. As other Members have noted, the issues of standards in education is critical and in an Irish context, they have been falling in recent years. While I do not suggest Deputy Tom Fleming made this point, I do not accept any implication that in dragging down our standards, this is the fault of immigrant children. I consider the falling standards to have much more to do with the education cutbacks that were carried out by Fianna Fáil and the Green Party obviously but continued by the present Administration, as well as the failure of the Government to ensure an adequate investment in education that is appropriate to the growing population. In this context, one cannot consider the issue in isolation because funding for education is critical. Members have had many debates previously on how even economically, it makes far more sense and is far more cost efficient to invest in children from an early age and to reap the benefits of so doing in later life. In this context, the continuation of cutbacks in SNA provision, the damage done in rural schools, the attempts on the DEIS schools, the increasing class sizes and so on will be, and already have been, extremely detrimental to the individual development of children and to the well-being of society as a whole. Members must consider this point both from the perspective of individuals and by recognising what in my opinion is a crime, namely, one would fund people's education and not have jobs for them at the end of it. All this knowledge and all this expertise that has been developed here at home is being exported because gainful employment is not available for people at the end of their education. Consequently, a holistic approach is required when addressing these issues and in this context, it is linked to the fiscal treaty because were the targets being set to be enforced on the economy, it undoubtedly and inevitably would lead to further cutbacks and education undoubtedly would be to the forefront in this regard, as it already has been.

In respect of the proposed amalgamations, this Bill follows on from amalgamations that took place previously on foot of the 1999 Act, with the amalgamation of the National Council for Educational Awards and the National Council for Vocational Awards, as well as the establishment of FETAC, HETAC and all the other organisations this legislation now proposes to amalgamate. In this context, I wish to address the issue of the protection of employees in that transfer. I consider this to be the weakest part of the Bill and the provision to which Members must pay attention. This should not be a difficulty and I am somewhat surprised as to the reason it has been left out or the reason for the provision's wording, which has caused great concern for staff in that area. Although it was possible in previous legislation to enshrine the rights and entitlements for all the terms and conditions of the staff in those bodies, this Bill is leaving the position much more open. Deputy McLellan made the point in respect of section 21(2) but it should be spelled out because it pertains to people who are employed in these organisations and who will be transferred over to the new authority. It is quite explicit and states "Save in accordance with a collective agreement negotiated with a recognised trade union or staff association... a person referred to in subsection (1) [that is, an existing employee] shall not, while in the service of the Authority, be subject to less beneficial conditions in relation to remuneration than the conditions in relation to remuneration" to which he or she already was subject. This refers solely to remuneration and the fact that section 21(3) then goes on to specifically exclude superannuation makes the original clause even worse and makes people feel more vulnerable. Section 21(2) spells out there will be no protection provided except in the area of remuneration, while section 21(3) specifically excludes superannuation. Members must consider this provision in the context of the changes to public sector pensions that have taken place recently and the fear among people to which it gives rise, because unless this legislation is amended, as it stands the pensions of existing staff members could be undermined seriously in the transfer. Could they be exposed to a situation whereby they would be treated akin to new entrants? It is clear, based on the Act as currently drafted, that this could happen, putting those people in an incredibly vulnerable position.

Section 52(8) of the 1999 Act covers other areas of employment and states that the rights and entitlements, in terms not only of remuneration but tenure, fees, allowances, expenses and superannuation, enjoyed on the commencement of the Act by a person shall not, by virtue of the Act, be any less beneficial than are the rights and entitlements enjoyed by a person immediately prior to its commencement. The following subsection lists the organisations which are being amalgamated in this Bill in the context of spelling out whose terms and conditions are being protected. That Act states that the rights of staff currently employed in these bodies, of whom there are approximately 30 or 40, should not be exposed further. I hope this is an issue which the Minister intends to address otherwise the people concerned and the Technical Group would not be happy to support this legislation, in particular in the context of the radical changes that have taken place in regard to the terms and conditions of public sector employees. We do not want current employees to be placed any less favourably than their peers.

There has been much talk of this amalgamation resulting in savings of €1 million per annum. It is stated in the relevant documentation that these savings will be made over time. However, there is a need for clarity around what jobs will be affected. Will it be CEO posts in respect of which administrative functions will be eroded and so on? I have no problem with the amalgamation of the bodies concerned. There are greater problems in our education system than those being addressed by this amalgamation. The further progression of this Bill is dependant on protection of the terms and conditions of all existing employee arrangements in the transfer to the new body.

See this speech in context