Dáil debates

Thursday, 18 May 2017

Topical Issue Debate

Special Educational Needs Service Provision

5:50 pm

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I understand why the Minister made the decision. As he said, it was partly due to financial and administrative reasons and the time taken for diagnostic tests. He referred to socioeconomic criteria for schools. The profile involves an averaging system, but children are not average. Every child is different. That is the essential point that is being lost in the system. It is administratively convenient.

I am speaking on behalf of the parents and schools who have come to me about this issue. The Minister has said there is no need for diagnostic tests. Without such tests, sometimes particular conditions or children's special requirements will not be made available to a school principal, who cannot be an expert. Medical and professional diagnostic tests were necessary to identify specific requirements for children until now. The Minister decided that costs money and instead proposed to save some time, scrap the system and allow principals to muddle away as best they can. That is not really good enough because principals are not experts and do not have the required diagnostic skills that professionals have.

We are shoving the old system to one side. The Minister is giving more flexibility to principals who now have to play God a little bit more because they are not receiving specific reports on specific children.

I am also concerned about the paragraph in the circular which states that some schools may now choose to enrol children that they know have special needs in these areas because it will eat into the allocation they already have. Essentially, the Department said the Minister reserves the right to review the allocation. In other words, the Minister is threatening to punish the other children in a school by reviewing its allocation if it does not enrol children who would otherwise have enrolled in the school and may have received an extra allocation.

The appeals process was very short. The process began in early March and appeals had to be in by the end of March after the earlier announcement. How many appeals has the Minister received? That information would be a good indication as to whether the problem is significant or manageable. I ask the Minister to be flexible with appeals, given that this is a new system.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.