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

If the Minister can use that phrase and sees the necessity for such complaints to be serious, I see no reason for that not to be provided for in the legislation.

The Minister has not really responded to the point on the Corbally judgment. I do not know about the legislation governing the Medical Council but I presume the same promises and commitments about it applying to serious complaints only were made, yet it still managed to happen. The issue had to go to the Supreme Court to be rectified and the judge was very clear about the matter. The word he used was "serious". He said these things had to be serious to get to hearing. That was the threshold that had to be met. If it required the Supreme Court to state and assert that requirement, is it not logical for the Minister to insert that qualification or threshold? Otherwise we may end up with cases like the Corbally case where this could be challenged legally. We may end up with an uncertainty that could lead to hearings on things that are not really meeting the threshold of seriousness and the resultant damage that could cause to someone's career, reputation and so on. Everyone is asking for this qualification in the legislation and I do not see why the Minister will not insert it.

Nor do I accept the point made on other factors that are outside a teacher's control and that a teacher could not be, under certain circumstances, scapegoated for other issues such as system failures that go beyond them. In fact I would say it happens all the time. Perhaps not all the time. That is too strong, but I would say it happens quite a lot. It is likely to happen more frequently when there are big resource and funding shortages, overcrowded classrooms and resultant stresses. We all know they exist but it is not just about whether they exist now. At any time in the future factors things can come into play. They can cause big problems and individuals can be scapegoated because someone does not like them. Someone wrongly blames them for things that are not their fault. They might consider it very serious but any independent observer would say it is clearly not their fault.

It is very reasonable to put in a threshold or qualification requiring the matter to be serious. The contraventions or instances of professional misconduct should have to be serious. The whole issue needs to be addressed in a much precise and qualified manner. It is far too open and vague.

I will press the amendment. I know the Minister will not accept it but we will press it. Similar amendments are being tabled in the Seanad. Those amendments will have been worded by people more eminent in legal matters than myself I suspect - probably senior counsel who represent the unions. I hope that if the Minister is not going to accept the amendment that we will press now, she will accept it in the Seanad.

See this speech in context