Derek Nolan (Galway West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The first thing to point out in any discussion on this topic and in reaction to a little bit of the debate that took place is that the House is elected to make policy for this country. We are elected as legislators. We get together, pass laws and have Departments which make policy. While all stakeholders must be involved in those policy discussions, no one stakeholder should have a veto or be able to dictate what policy should be. No more than one would not have bus drivers deciding every bus route or timetable or doctors deciding how everything should run, teachers cannot dictate how the education system is run. They must be consulted and the Minister has done that and will continue to engage. However, we must also recognise that it is the prerogative of the House to set forward legislation and ideas for reform.

It was very evident from what the Minister said that if one looks at it logically, one must agree that there is a problem with the junior certificate. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment looked at the research and international best practice and put forward proposals based on empirical research from countries all over the world. It said that in first year in our schools children have a difficulty in that they are settling in. Second year is where the real danger kicks in and children can get disengaged and lose out. They may possibly never recover from that. In third year, there is the quick rush with the exam coming in June. The grinds are done and people go mental. We are all studying and have this quick burst of an exam. I remember it myself - it is not that long ago - and as soon as it is over one has forgotten what one knew. It is in there for an hour or two and it is gone. That does not work. The council said that if something is to be valued it must be assessed. If we want it to be valued all the time, we need regular assessment.

It was very telling and the Minister was right to point out that there was previous support from all sides of the House for the idea that we needed that assessment. It happens all over the world. I worked for a year as a language assistant in schools in rural Germany and we assessed the children all the time. There were never phone calls or threats and it was an accepted part of the curriculum. To read into it that teachers will be lobbied is almost to say that teachers are not professionals and that they cannot be trusted but will be subject to lobbying and take bribes. It undermines their professional independence to say "You know what, we cannot trust you. You are not independent enough and do not have the thick skin required to be trusted". It is a horrible message where one is talking about the teaching profession because it is not true.

I acknowledge that it is right to discuss this matter given the strike on Thursday about which families, parents and teachers across the country are very worried. However, Sinn Féin put forward a motion acknowledging all the things that have happened and that reform is needed without setting out a single suggestion as to how that reform would proceed while contradicting what it said earlier. Earlier, Sinn Féin said we needed continuous assessment, but three of its speakers said we could not have it because it would put undue pressure on teachers. The Sinn Féin motion should have read that Sinn Féin recognises there is a strike on Thursday, that there is a bit of political opportunity in having a go at the Government on it, that it does not actually have an educational policy, that it will contradict what it said two years ago and that it might get a few votes out of it. That is the essence of the debate we have had tonight.

The Minister could not have been more clear about where she is coming from, why she is doing this, the empirical research, the consultations that have happened and all of the things we know need to happen. She acknowledged that there were problems and worries and, as such, she negotiated and compromised. She cannot be any more reasonable than that. While it will not happen, if the outcome of this were to give in, ignore research and accept bad outcomes to get people off our backs and obtain a few votes in the general election, it would not be politics and it would not conform to why we are in the House. Not all teachers are opposed to this and many are happy with the compromises the Minister has put forward. We will get there because the Minister is doing the right thing, not by doing the opportunistic thing.

See this speech in context