Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Government has had 20 minutes in which to speak and neither the Minister nor the Minister of State actually addressed the purpose of the motion, which is to underline the fact that we faced this crisis, and that this jurisdiction was one of the slowest developed countries in Europe or elsewhere to reopen closed schools, because our school system is underfunded, understaffed and overcrowded. Unfortunately, that issue was not addressed in either speech. I appreciate that there are other issues to be addressed, I addressed some myself, but this is a fundamental point. We were put in this situation, and schools have been closed longer than they otherwise would have been, because it was so difficult to establish how to reopen schools safely.

I am disappointed at that but I ask the Minister to reconsider the Government's position on this motion and on its amendment. There is an opportunity here. I emphasised that to the senior Minister, who was here earlier, and I now emphasise it to the Minister of State. As a result of demographic trends, there will be an opportunity to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio dramatically on a cost-neutral basis. All that is required is for the Ministers in the Department to insist that the number of teachers at primary level not be reduced and that these teachers stay there to provide a better standard of education at a more appropriate ratio for a developed state because our high pupil-teacher ratio has had a significant impact on our ability to return to school and also on the quality of education received.

We talk in this House about the progression to university and how that varies from area to area and demographic to demographic but the fact is, inequality is baked in to the Irish education system from an early age and that is because of issues such as this.

I will briefly address some of the other issues that arose. School transport is an issue I am concerned about. I welcome that there is additional funding but it seems to be for reconfiguration. It does not appear that there has been extensive discussion with the transport companies or Bus Éireann for that matter. If there was, the outcomes have not been published. If discussions are happening and the outcomes are to be published, I would welcome that, but I am concerned about the children who rely on school transport schemes. Approximately 120,000 children rely on the school transport scheme, between buses and the taxi scheme, and if they are not included in the public transport scheme, we cannot be guaranteed that they have another way of getting to school. That is an issue that needs to be resolved.

I want to return to special educational needs. There is much concern in that regard. Deputy Pringle has left the Chamber now but he raised a point a few moments ago that was not addressed. I ask the Minister of State to address it. If she cannot address it now, perhaps she would respond to me tomorrow. The concern fits with my reading of the circular which relates to the sequence for covering all teacher absences. The first is the supply panel if a school is part of a supply panel cluster arrangement. The second is where the school is on a panel for regular substitutes. The third is the national substitute service. The fourth is that if no substitute is available from the above options then a school may, for teachers in mainstream schools, use non-mainstream teachers to cover the absence. As far as I am concerned, that means special education teachers can be used to cover absences. Not only that, but it is clear that in other parts of the document they are also being asked to be, effectively, the people who are delivering education for those who are not able to attend because they are in a high-risk categories, although the high-risk categories have yet to be defined. There will be children who will not be in a position to attend. Special education teachers could be covering absences and breaks and they could be directing the teaching of those who are not able to attend. When are they supposed to deliver the special education that is needed? The Minister will be more aware of this than anyone. Those children have lost out more than most, obviously in terms of education but also in terms of socialisation and isolation. They have fallen back the most and they need the most attention. I think this is wrong and it needs to be addressed.

There is also an issue concerning special needs assistants, SNAs. The Minister of State said she will cover the absence of SNAs. There are no SNA substitute panels. That needs to be examined and rectified. The Minister of State can take that as a constructive proposal. We have substitute panels for primary schools and secondary schools and there is a need for panels for SNAs as well. It is important to note that, throughout this process, staff other than teachers, and in some instances even teachers, have not received the respect they deserve. I include SNAs in that but I also include school secretaries, who are not mentioned. There is no discussion of what would happen in their absence either.

I mentioned children who are immunocompromised. There is not enough detail in that regard. There is not a specific resource. It seems to be leaving it to the special education teacher to decide how they will continue to be taught. Their condition is not going away and neither is the pandemic. We must ensure that they are not totally isolated and that they continue to get some form of education.

I will finish on this point. The key point is that we were put in this situation because of underfunding and understaffing. We have an opportunity to get out of it and that process should start now. I urge the Minister of State to back the motion and to begin the process of delivering an education system that is fair, equal and in proper accommodation that is fit for this jurisdiction.

See this speech in context