Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I apologise to the Minister for missing the beginning of her contribution, but I will get a copy of her speech. We welcome the opportunity to discuss the Bill which we will support. There is a major amendment to be tabled on Committee Stage, which the Minister has outlined, on public hearings being the default position. We have not seen the wording of the amendment but we support all the other provisions of the Bill and look forward to the publication of the amendment and to debating its merits. We have some concerns about it.

The Minister and Deputy Charlie McConalogue have outlined the two main purposes of the Bill, to provide a statutory basis for the teaching council in the vetting of registered teachers and to act as a conduit for schools that need to obtain those vetting disclosures, and to strengthen the statutory provisions relating to the Teaching Council’s fitness to teach function. It is a technical Bill. The research paper provided by the Oireachtas Library and Research Service is excellent. It goes through each section of the Bill outlining what it proposes in detail and the consequences for the previous legislation. It is well worth reading for any Member who has an interest in this. It also outlines issues that might arise from the proposals.

We fully support the vetting of teachers. The latest figures are from November 2014 when there were over 90,000 teachers registered with the Teaching Council and almost 54,000 of them have been vetted. Approximately 40% remain unvetted. Many of those are teachers who had been teaching for many years before the vetting laws and procedures came into place. There would have been no need for vetting procedures. The provision in the Bill to ensure that teachers who have not been vetted may now be vetted on an ongoing basis is welcome. We should strive to achieve a position where everyone who teaches in schools is vetted.

This Bill deals specifically with teachers and will not cover other members of school staff such as special needs assistants, SNAs. I know from responses to parliamentary questions we have put down about the number of SNAs who have Garda vetting that the Department does not hold that information. We should try to rectify this. I know it cannot be done in the confines of this Bill, but we should have that type of information particularly when dealing with people who have access to children in classrooms.

Section 15 of the Bill amends section 42 of the principal Act to provide:

“(1) A person (including the Council) may make a complaint to the Investigating Committee in relation to a registered teacher, and the Committee may consider the complaint, where that complaint concerns any of the following matters . . . "

It lists these matters, one of which is:

(g) that he or she has been convicted in the State of an offence triable on indictment or convicted outside the State of an offence consisting of acts or omissions that, if done or made in the State, would constitute an offence triable on indictment.

There are several people with my political ideology and background who were involved in conflict in the past 30 years. I refer to them as political prisoners. Under this legislation somebody may make a complaint to the investigating committee if that person is a teacher and has been convicted of a political offence. We need to ensure people who have served their time, having been involved in political conflict, find themselves open to investigation on the basis of a complaint by a member of the public. I am not saying they should not be open to investigation but that people cannot make complaints on the basis of somebody’s past political affiliations and activities.

On the issue of soft information, Sinn Féin fully supports its use, particularly in respect of vetting procedures for those who are dealing with children and vulnerable adults. The briefing material provided by the Oireachtas Library and Research Service notes that section 5 of the Bill deals with the register and the information that will be contained therein. The briefing note provides a list of all the information to be included such as the name and address of the correspondence, the date of birth, qualifications and so forth. The last item will be the information disclosed by the most recent vetting disclosure in the council's possession in respect of that person. I imagine this item would include any soft information that had been provided as part of the vetting disclosure. However, on publication of the register, it states the Teaching Council may withhold some information to ensure and protect the privacy of persons entered on the register. I ask the Minister to confirm, when she wraps up this debate or perhaps even on Committee Stage, that such soft information would be the type of information the Teaching Council could withhold when it publishes the register. I believe it also is important to protect the privacy of teachers and to ensure that any information that is brought forward but which does not constitute a criminal offence is not included in the register.

While I have covered most issues, the final point I wish to raise concerns the amendment the Minister intends to bring forward. There has been much media speculation on whether there should be public or private hearings. I acknowledge that public hearings are held in Scotland and Wales and that one reason the Minister has cited is to bring it into line with best practices in other areas, such as in the Medical Council, for instance, which has public hearings. Reservations have been expressed by some teaching unions with a view to ensuring that due process is given to teachers who are being investigated and this must be taken on board. I acknowledge, having touched base with the Sinn Féin Minister for Education in the Six Counties, that they currently are considering legislation that would make public hearings the default position there as well. While I am not fundamentally opposed to it, one must be careful that where it is being used - if it is being used - it should be in exceptional circumstances. I understand the Teaching Council has proposed the establishment of a sub-committee to examine which cases could or should be made public. I do not know whether this will be incorporated into the Minister's amendment, which is why I stated at the outset that while Sinn Féin broadly supports the Bill, it must await publication of this amendment to ascertain whether there will be public hearings on a wide scale or whether it will be done on a case-by-case basis. I would prefer the latter because it is important that due process be given to teachers. While it may be something of a cliché, this is a small State and if it enters the public domain that a teacher has been investigated, even if such a teacher is vindicated, he or she unfortunately sometimes still will be victimised because he or she was under investigation in the first place. This may be the case even though the allegations have been found to have been unfounded and the teacher has been deemed fit and proper to teach. A balancing act must be performed in that regard and I look forward to the publication of the aforementioned amendment.

I reiterate that Sinn Féin broadly will be supporting the legislation and looks forward to it being debated on Committee Stage, where Members can delve into each individual section in greater detail. Sinn Féin may table one or two amendments, particularly in respect of the issue to which I referred in section 15 regarding ex-political prisoners. While what is proposed in theory is good, the purpose will be to ensure that in practice, it does not discriminate against some members of the teaching profession.

See this speech in context