Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Deputies who have contributed constructively to the debate. It was a very interesting - Deputy John Lahart used the word provocative - debate and it certainly is so on a number of levels. These issues are not the easiest to deal with. We all probably agree what are the problems but we need to identify how we can solve them and put forward a solution.

This Bill was before the last Oireachtas education committee. We had good debate on it and there was cross-party support on that occasion for the concept of an ombudsman for education. Notwithstanding that, Deputy Carol Nolan has rightly identified some issues and I referred to some of them myself in my initial contribution. While it is provided for in the Bill, there is an issue with the compellability aspect and the involvement of the courts. I absolutely accept that to be so and look forward to dealing with it on Committee Stage. I would be happy to delete the compellability element, which is not necessary. I take on board Deputy Nolan's concern in that regard.

Perhaps I am referring to these matters in mixed order, but Deputy Lahart asked if this was meant to serve teachers as well. Ideally, it would. This is about procedures. I would not see the ombudsman being judge and jury in all complaints. For example, if I were to say Ms McCarthy is not a good teacher and not teaching my son John well enough, is the ombudsman to come in and review her teaching standards and make judgment? Absolutely not. Does the ombudsman examine how my complaint was dealt with if I went to the principal and said Ms McCarthy is not teaching my son well? The principal should tell me that I am to refer my complaint to the Teaching Council under the current legislation. Perhaps the principal just tells me that Ms McCarthy is a great teacher and to go away and not be annoying him. The ombudsman would examine the procedures followed as opposed to dealing with the substantive complaint.

Could the teacher avail of the service? I see no reason why not. This is not a case of teachers versus students. A teacher could be a victim of bullying in the school and go to the board of management, say he or she is being bullied, only for the board of management to do nothing about it. I see no reason teachers could not have the procedures that were followed examined, but the ombudsman would not get involved in the substantive issue. I hope that brings clarity to the Deputy's question.

We can get lost in the terminology used. We float things like "section 28" and "Part 5", but parents who are struggling daily with the pressures of life do not have time to understand the admissions Bill and what it does or anything like that. This is why I consider an education ombudsman an attractive proposition. It would be a one-stop shop for parents. They would get competent and efficient advice steeped in the education aspect of the law. The education sphere is huge, which is why I believe there should be an ombudsman dealing solely with the area. How many children are attending school on any one day in Ireland? They all have parents and grandparents. The education sector has a huge impact on and reach in society and it is high time we acknowledged that fact.

I endorse what was said about boards of management being voluntary and the good work they do. There was a question about where the role of the ombudsman would end. I have addressed that already. The role deals with procedures - that is the beginning, middle and end of it - and not the substantive element of complaints.

Is there cross-over with the Education (Admission to Schools) Bill and the charter? The charter is an aspiration. We all aspire to parents having a say in their children's education. The admissions Bill sets out how things should be done. In the event that someone has a grievance with how it is done, that is where the ombudsman would come in. The ombudsman would be an enforcer that provides oversight. It would provide oversight - it would not be an enforcer - of all these aspirations laid down in various charters. Circulars, for example, are often issued by the Department. They are just advisory. If a principal chooses to ignore a circular, one can go to the board of management, but it can say, "Sorry, there is nothing here. Move on". If the person goes to the Department, it will say it has no role in the matter, that it cannot get involved and that it is a matter for the board of management. I want an ombudsman that can ensure circulars are being adhered to.

Would it discourage volunteerism? That is a worry, but many would be happier to go on a board knowing it is not steeped in what can be a clandestine arrangement, that is, that it is being kept in-house. I do not think people would have an issue with accountability, openness and transparency. Many parents would love to be more involved in the education of their children and much happier to give time on boards but do not get the chance. A parent complained to me recently that he has never been notified of the election of parents to the board of management. The principal tells someone to go on and stay on it. This is perhaps a one-off, isolated case. I am not suggesting it is widespread, but it is an issue. Many parents would love to be contributing what skills and time they have to the better education of their children and a more robust board of management would be more attractive to them. I hope this Bill would not discourage people from volunteering to be on the boards.

An interesting point was made about Education and Training Boards, ETBs, formerly Vocational Education Committees. I would hope someone from Education and Training Boards Ireland, ETBI, would make a presentation to the committee. The ETBs have a much more robust appeals system and are much more transparent. Deputy Lahart made a good point about public representatives being on their boards. I was on the Cork county VEC board for long enough and learned much. They have a system I would aspire to see being transposed into other systems. I would look forward to a delegation from ETBI attending our committee and giving us some of their knowledge of operating boards and dealing with complaints and grievances, etc. I agree with the concept of having a more democratic model of governance.

Deputy Nolan raised the legally-binding aspect. I have addressed it already. It is not my intention that this would ever be legally binding. As I stated initially, and the Minister referred to it as well, the Ombudsman has said that his advice has only once been ignored. I am happy to have the provision removed on Committee Stage. I certainly do not want to be entering into the legal domain. I saw in The Irish Timestoday that the Ombudsman for Children commented that he would see this as leading to increased legal fees and so on. I would not accept such a situation and will remove the provision from the Bill if there was any issue in that regard.

Deputy Nolan stated there was no such office in Europe. We have a different model of education in this country and a historical model of governance. Why should Ireland not be a first? That it is not happening somewhere else in Europe is all the more reason for us to be leaders as opposed to followers in the area. Deputy Nolan also spoke about widening the remit of the Ombudsman for Children. I addressed that in my initial contribution. My first port of call in the last Dáil was to widen the remit of the Ombudsman for Children and I published legislation to that effect but it was not accepted by the Ombudsman for Children or the Government at the time.

7 o’clock

I do not know where that Bill went. I guess it went to wherever these Bills go to die. That was my starting point but I do not think that is the solution any more. We have to look at an educationally-driven ombudsman. We spent €2.1 billion on special needs education and €2.1 billion on policing, the latter for oversight in the form of the Garda Inspectorate and the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, but we do not have the same oversight for our education sector on which we have spent a total of €8 billion. I would not envisage that third level would be part of this but an ombudsman for schools would be fair. It is more than that, and I spoke earlier about the wider issues in education.

It has been a very useful debate and I have listened and learned. I thank all Members for their contributions. We will have a big job of work in the committee to tease out the finer detail. We will have hearings first and then go onto Committee Stage, line by line. I hope the hearings will start in the first week of October. The education committee met today and decided we would bring in various people, including the Ombudsman for Children and anybody else who has issues to be addressed. This is a partnership approach. Everybody in the committee was in agreement and that is the way I hope we can continue.

See this speech in context