Ann Ormonde (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State. I am pleased she is present to hear the debate on this issue as I know she has empathy with the issue given her previous background of educational psychology.

I am glad the Title of the Bill has been changed because it represents a holistic approach to education for children with special educational needs and provides us with the freedom to ensure the rights of such children are guaranteed. That is to be welcomed. I am delighted the Bill has been teased out by so many teaching organisations within the teaching profession and by bodies which represent all forms of disability. The Bill has been broadly welcomed on all sides of the House.

Legislation in this area up to now has included many ad hoc arrangements and much unfinished business in terms of how we handle such problems. Everything is going well on paper. This legislation puts in place a structure on how we deal and cope with the problems which may arise. It ensures, as provided for in the Constitution, that such children have a right to education, something which has not been stated in legislation up to now. That, too, is to be welcomed.

It is important we aim as much as possible towards assisting such children to blend into mainstream education and, if that is not possible, that we find a way around the problem. It is equally important we involve parents at all levels in the creation of educational plans. Existing arrangements have only dealt with issues in an ad hoc way. The Bill incorporates an appeals system for parents who feel the rights of their children are not being guaranteed. The Minister appears to have got everything right so far. However, we must ensure we have the resources to implement the Bill, an issue raised by all speakers in this and the other House.

I am glad the Bill provides that the Ministers for Education and Science and Finance will have a statutory duty to provide the money to enable children to pursue an education which will allow them to develop to their full potential. I have a difficulty with the notion that while the implementation of the plan will commence immediately, it will take five years to complete. When a problem with a particular child is identified the class teacher, subject teacher or principal is informed. It does not take long to do that and having identified the problem, an assessment is then organised. It has been stated that such assessments could take up to three months. I do not understand why that is so. I am basing my argument on the model of which I have experience, that operated by the City of Dublin VEC. One should not have to wait three weeks for an assessment. It could be done within a week if one acts quickly having identified the problem and calls in the psychologist and informs the parents and guidance counsellor. With such a team it should be possible to have the assessment done quickly. It would be very easy for one to get the assessment done quickly and to form one's educational plan from it.

One might also have an organiser from the national council. I am not sure what the organiser, who will be part of the education plan, will do. It is easy to solve simple problems, for example, by withdrawing a child from the classroom if he or she is not fulfilling his or her normal ability. I refer, for example, to children with good ability who have pulled out of the educational mainstream for whatever reason. One can cope with that, but one has to return to the special needs council in the more complex areas. I do not fully understand how it will work on the ground.

The progress of the education plan will be monitored. If we do not succeed, parents will have redress through the courts but it is natural that we do not want to go down that road. I welcome the Minister's reference to a process of mediation. Both parties — the parents representing the child and the various professionals dealing with the situation — will be able to meet to work out their positions rather than imposing a further burden on the parents. I welcome this measure because it represents the way forward.

The need for close co-operation between the Departments of Health and Children and Education and Science is an important issue. It was great on paper. Throughout my educational life, we felt we could ring the Department of Health and Children when problems existed in respect of dyslexia, ADD or other issues with health implications. We failed to get co-operation on every occasion, however, and we were sent from Billy to Jack. It is important that we fill the gap if we are to succeed with integration, co-ordination and co-operation. I refer to dyslexia and autism in particular.

Trained professionals, such as remedial teachers and resource teachers, must be employed on the ground very quickly. Backup services must be provided in schools to help us to detect where problems exist and to formulate educational plans. Class teachers will not be knowledgeable in this regard without proper inservice training. One cannot expect a maths teacher, for example, to be able to organise an educational plan for a child with special educational needs. Such people need to be trained so they know what is involved. They need a backup team. On paper, the Bill is great but I am trying to imagine how it will work on the ground. We need to tease out this area further to ensure that what we are saying is workable. I believe it can work, but it is important that the right people are employed to work on it.

Senator Henry spoke about the transition from primary school to secondary school. There has always been a large gap in that regard. Problems were often picked up in first year, but it was too late at that stage. Major problems affecting children should be picked up. For example, one might not be able to understand why a child is falling out of the mainstream. Such issues should be noticed before first class. The Department of Health and Children has a role in that regard. Problems begin to manifest themselves before children reach the age of two. I would like entire plans to be worked out at primary level. I maintain that it is much too late when children reach the age of 13 or 14 because the transition has been completed at that stage. It is very hard to pull it back then. The emphasis should be placed on primary level.

All speakers have mentioned the cut-off point of 18 years of age. We cannot use such a yardstick for children with special educational needs because they start late. More often than not, a child with such needs who has a chronological age of 18 has a mental age of six or eight. We should be in a position to make that more flexible. Each case should be analysed. If a child is doing well at the age of 18, we should not remove him or her from a programme. If children are doing well, they should be allowed to proceed in whatever environment, other than the mainstream education system, that allows them to continue with their education plans. I am looking for a change in the section that sets a cut-off point of 18 years. I do not like the idea of a cut-off point.

Funding is a major issue. If we are to implement the Bill properly, it is important that trained professionals are employed. We have it all on paper now, but I am concerned that it will not go any further. The principals of the schools may not be able to handle education plans because they do not have the personnel to do so. If one telephones a psychologist, he or she might be unable to give one an appointment because he or she might be too busy. One might have to wait for four or five months before the psychologist can get to one's school. More often than not, psychologists represent a region and have to cover a certain number of schools in that area.

I believe in instant plans. If I identify the problem, I want to be able to get an assessment done within a short period of time, to be given the expertise to put a plan in motion and to monitor the plan. The parents, psychologists and teachers should be able to come in to monitor it, to examine the progress that is being made and to determine how best to move forward. If we include such a measure, provide the funding and make available the professional skills, this will be seen as a superb Bill. I look forward to seeing how it will work on the ground.