Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the Deputies who contributed to the debate, in particular, the Opposition spokespersons for their support for the legislation. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien thanked the Oireachtas Library and Research Service for the very good summary of the Bill it had provided. I, too, thank the service for its work on the Bill. We do not always acknowledge its work in assisting our discussions on legislation.

I agree with speakers on all sides who pointed out that the vast majority of teachers did a very good job. For a long time, however, there has been a general view inside and outside the teaching profession that a process that enjoys public confidence should be in place to deal with cases in which questions arise about whether a teacher is providing an adequate education for young people. For this reason I introduced a section on fitness to teach. Deputy Jim Daly summed up the issue well when he pointed out that children only got one chance at education. While Deputy Michael Moynihan noted that some adults returned to education, it is extremely important that children have the best possible teachers. Deputy John Paul Phelan also referred to the influence of very good teachers.

No one questions the need to have a system in place to allow for the removal of teachers who are not performing. The holding in public of fitness to teach hearings will be the default position. This issue generated considerable discussion, although it is not addressed in the Bill, as published. I will table an amendment to provide for public hearings. This will give Deputies an opportunity to tease out the issue on Committee Stage. As Deputy Jonathan O'Brien noted, such hearings are held in public in other jurisdictions, including Scotland and Wales, and in other professions. Public hearings are held, by and large, to ensure there is public confidence in the hearings system. This will be the default position, which means that the Teaching Council may decide that it would not be appropriate for a hearing to be held in public for reasons of confidentiality or to protect a person's reputation. I intend to table an amendment to provide that public hearings will be the default position. I will do so because public hearings will instil public confidence in the system and protect professionals in giving people access to information.

As I stated in my previous contribution, a threshold must be reached before an investigation committee refers a case to the next stage in the process. The committee must be of the opinion that there is a prima facie case to warrant further action. This will ensure only cases that merit a disciplinary inquiry and hearing will be progressed to that stage. The committee will establish whether a complaint is frivolous or justifies a hearing and if it considers that a complaint is without substance, it may decide not to refer it for a disciplinary inquiry or hearing. This will provide protection in cases in which a hearing is not appropriate.We will tease out on Committee Stage the concerns expressed about public hearings.

Concerns were expressed about the number of vetting applications that had been completed. To clarify the issue, the number of teachers on the register is steadily increasing. Approximately 54,000 of 90,000 teachers are on the register, which amounts to almost 60%, rather than 40%, of the total. The Bill has been designed to place the vetting process on a statutory footing and will result in teachers being vetted. As Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor stated, one of the advantages of the process is that a teacher will not have to be vetted every time he or she moves school because the Teaching Council will hold the vetting documentation. This is a positive development.

Deputy Ruth Coppinger who is no longer present referred to security of tenure for teachers. I received a report from an expert group led by Mr. Peter Ward, SC, which specifically examined the issue of improving tenure for teachers and giving them tenure at an earlier stage than was the case. The report also addressed the need for teachers to have certainty that they would have a minimum number of teaching hours. I received Mr. Ward's report a couple of months ago and I am working on the implementation of its recommendations. It specifically addresses the issue raised by the Deputy.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien referred to cases involving teachers who had been convicted of offences, etc.

It is only where the complaints relate to fitness to teach that they will be considered under this legislation. In other words, unless there is a fitness to teach issue in terms of their conviction, it will not be relevant to the Bill.

The Deputy also raised the issue of the vetting of SNAs but the vetting of people other than teachers is covered by the National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill 2012 and will not be dealt with under this legislation. However, it is intended that this issue will be addressed.

I have covered the issues that were raised relating to the Bill. I acknowledge Members have raised other education issues, as always happens whenever an education Bill is taken, but I will only respond to the issues relating to this Bill.

We will tease out on Committee Stage the issue around public hearings. The Bill will make a significant contribution to safeguarding children in schools and upholding the high standards of teaching that students and society expect and deserve. I thank all the Deputies who contributed to the debate.

See this speech in context