Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

I spoke about this issue on Second Stage when I made some of these points. It is unfortunate that the Minister chose to reject something that even the Teaching Council of Ireland had recommended, namely, that it be looked at on a case by case basis and that a sub-committee could make a recommendation on whether a case should be heard in public. For some reason, the Minister rejected that recommenation. Perhaps she might explain why.

Let us be honest about what we are talking about. We are not talking about teachers who are dangerous to pupils in terms of grooming or sexual abuse because any such case would go to court. We are talking about fitness to teach for a variety of reasons we discussed in respect of previous amendments, some of which are very loose and where there is carte blancheto determine them in various ways. They include being medically unfit to teach. What is being said, in effect, is that we should have public show trials of teachers who are potentially unfit to teach in order that the tabloid media, in particular, can feast on someone's misery. I do not support such hearings in other professions either. I do not see the advantage in having compulsory public hearings, or the reason for them, except to add to somebody's difficulties. I do not see why it is necessary to do so. I agree that the amendment is well worded. It states cases could be heard and the findings made public. The Minister is feeding into a tabloid media mentality where teachers, the object of scorn on many occasions in the media, would be put on trial.

Doctors face public fitness to practise hearings. A case I cited on Second Stage involved a doctor who asked to have his name erased from the medical register rather than appear at one of these public hearings because several lawyers testified that it would increase his risk of suicide if he was to be put through a public hearing. The committee voted not to accept that his name be erased from the medical register.

It defies logic if an individual is volunteering not to practise again.

Why is there this burning need for cases to be tried in public? Disciplinary hearings for many if not most workers are not held in public and for most, if there is a disciplinary hearing, it is not reported by the media. It seems to be a creeping development for certain professions to hold disciplinary proceedings in public. Other workers are not subjected to this and I do not see why teachers and nurses should be. That is not to say that serious cases where teachers are a danger should not be made public - we are taking it as read that such cases would be tried in court, as they should be. No one is defending anything like that but we must be very careful, particularly in a small country like Ireland. In Scotland, for example, it is done case by case. If a case is considered serious enough to warrant a public hearing, that is what happens, but if a case is not considered to be very serious, the hearing is held in private. Why has the Minister rejected that option? Perhaps she wants to be seen to be meeting a demand or an appetite in the media. We are constantly hearing that there is an enormous problem of unfit teachers, an argument which is regularly made by Independent News and Media. However, as I said in an earlier contribution, the biggest problem in teaching is the fact that there are many teachers who are not able to survive. They are not able to pay their rent, never mind buy a house because they do not have proper jobs. The casualisation of teaching is a huge problem and is much more serious than this issue, with one in four teachers in the secondary sector without a proper job. We have spoken in this House about zero-hour contracts for Dunnes Stores workers and others, which is totally disgraceful and which has not been legislated for. That would be a more fitting Bill for the Government to be bringing in front of the Dáil. We actually have many teachers on zero-hour contracts. They show up and do not have a clue if they will have any money at the end of the week. I would love to see more coverage of that issue and not just at Easter when the teachers' annual conferences are taking place. The Minister has said that this will be addressed but it will not be unless the Minister creates more permanent jobs by reducing the pupil-teacher ratio. Teachers will continue in temporary positions because the Minister has not increased the allocation to schools.

I have not seen any evidence of a burning demand for the provisions we are discussing today.

See this speech in context