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

It is welcome that we are having this debate. It is very badly needed. The failure again to ensure that special education would open this week caused immense anger, heartbreak and frustration among staff, stakeholders, the Department and, I am sure, the Minister, but most of all the affected children and their families. For the second time since Christmas, if not the third, a desperately wished for return to school was dashed. Many children will have been waiting for a bus or lift that did not come today. We must remember who is at the heart of this. These are the children whom we all know were among the greatest losers educationally and socially during the first lockdown. The disruption to routine, the lack of social contact and frustration were unbearable for many of the children and their families. This is despite the best efforts of everyone, from staff to parents and children, but the reality is that remote learning for these children is not equal to that for others. In some instances, it is near impossible.

I realise the Minister wanted the children in school. As she well knows, so did we. I do not know a single Deputy who objected to the principle. I, among others, wanted it as soon as it could be agreed. The Minister finished her speech speaking about a shared objective. The criticism here is not of the objective because we can all have a shared objective and different ways of achieving it. I am sure that we have a similar objective across this House to solve the housing crisis but there are many different ways suggested as to how this could be achieved. There is a huge gap between having an objective and having an agreed plan to deliver something. It is about delivery. That is where the Department has fallen down. I am aware that the Minister has criticisms of others but she, the Minister of State and the Department should consider their own roles and responsibility in this debacle. There are no winners and we must solve the problem, but there should be some reflection on responsibility here as well.

In the first instance, I cannot get over the fact that there was never a plan B for the education system if schools had to close overall. I agreed with the objective of trying to ensure schools could remain open for as long as possible. School is the best way of learning. I look forward to the schools being open again but this Government made it its Alamo that there could never be a plan B. It was asked how the schools could possibly close. For that reason, there seemed to be no consideration given to the question of how education could be continue and to the priorities if schools had to close. It was not set out who could be kept in school buildings. That this did not happen led to the mistakes of the past few weeks. There was no plan for the first occasion. A proposal was rolled out with scarcely any consultation and then, this week, there was a proposal that was subject to consultation to an extent but not agreed. The failure to agree is the crucial element. That is the origin of the issue. In my view, there was a rush to deliver good news – good news that I was glad to see – but that rush upended the entire process, twice.

There may be a temptation to let this drift. That must not happen. I am encouraged to hear that discussions are continuing but that has to continue on an intensive basis. I appreciate that there are lingering tensions between the Minister, the Minister of State and the unions but nobody expects them to be best friends. We want them to work together and get a result for the affected children. I note some of the last-minute commitments made by the Minister yesterday. It is frustrating that some of them seem to have been made when the dye was more or less cast and when the jig was up, given many of these issues and assurances have been flagged since August by me, others in this House and the stakeholders. If the Government is sincere in its efforts, these commitments have to remain on the table and solutions will have to be found for other outstanding issues, including the issues of flexibility for at-risk staff, serial testing for staff, reversing the incredible 40% cut to the grant for personal protective equipment and sanitisation equipment and the extension of supply panels. This has been done elsewhere and it can be done here. We need to change the approach of the Ministers and, indeed, the Taoiseach, who needs to be part of this process. It needs to be agreed before it is announced.

I will move on to some questions. One of the key concerns in schools is to ensure that, where a case arises, the public health response to it is decisive, immediate and comprehensive. One of the issues being raised with the Minister relates to serial testing. Will she ensure that school staff have access to serial testing?

I will make a brief point on public health guidance. We need to be careful in our language here because one of the points of frustration is that people feel they are not being treated as adults when we talk about schools being safe. The public health advice has never been that schools are absolutely safe. They are relatively safe. It is important that they remain open with the right safeguards because of their importance but there is never any suggestion that they are absolutely safe and without risk. That risk has to be minimised and these discussions should be about minimising risks and protecting people. However, we must also treat school staff with the respect they deserve and ensure they understand that. That is the way the communications should be. They should acknowledge the risks that are there and put in place the measures to minimise the risks because of the importance of education. My question there related to serial testing and whether the Minister can provide that.

The other point related to vaccination, which I am sure has been raised with the Minister many times. Has her Department contacted the national immunisation advisory committee to request an increased priority for vaccination? Has the Minister made that ask on behalf of the people who work for her?

My final question relates to a major concern of mine. I am concerned that the issue of special education will be rolled into the overall process of reopening schools. That would be a profound mistake. It can be considered in conjunction with it, but reopening special education must be an objective in and of itself. We all want to see schools open as soon as possible. Schools are the best place to learn and for children to be, but we all know that cannot be guaranteed on 1 February. If it is possible, then great, but the decision could be made that the return to school is not possible until mid or late February. It could potentially be 22 February. I am not prejudging that but it is a possibility. If so, it would be a profound tragedy if children with special educational needs are left behind yet again. They must be a first priority for return and it should not be contingent on the overall reopening of schools. Will the Minister commit that the return of special education will not be contingent on the overall return to school buildings?

See this speech in context