Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy de Valera. I congratulate her and her colleague, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on the work that has been done in respect of the Bill to date. I am aware that it was substantially amended in the other House. A good cross-party consensus on the Bill was reached by, the Minister and the Opposition spokespersons in the Dáil. It is fair to say that the Bill before the House is a good one and I wish it well. However, I do not think the problem is this Bill or the other legislation in this area. It is like many other things in this country.

Two parents in my constituency asked me to call to their house last week to discuss their seven year old child, who was diagnosed with high functioning autism two years ago. He is falling behind in his local national school, even though he receives six hours of special needs assistance each week. The assistance, which is more than most children get, is of great benefit to him. His mother and father have been pulling their hair out for the past two years. They have consulted various agencies but nobody has taken responsibility for the child's specific need for speech and language therapy. Senator Ormonde mentioned a range of general issues, but I would like to discuss this specific case. The child's parents have known about the diagnosis for two years.

I have worked out that four agencies are involved in this case — the National Educational Psychological Service, which is under the remit of the Department of Education and Science; the local health board, which takes responsibility for the appointment of speech and language therapists; the child's school, its teachers and its management; and Beechpark Services, which is part of the health board but is contracted to do special work with children who present with these difficulties. I have been doing my best to contact the four administrative agencies in recent days to find out if they can come together to decide when the child will receive some speech and language therapy. The longer he has to manage without such therapy, the further he will fall behind. His parents are concerned because nobody is responsible for developing a plan for the boy, who is falling behind. His special educational requirements, as they are currently constituted, do not fit the bill.

I hope that some element of responsibility will be provided for when the council meets to put together plans for each child, as is intended under this legislation. I accept that it is an issue of finance, but it is more than that — it is an issue of management. One cannot tolerate the continued involvement of three or four separate players in providing a service to a child because it means that nobody is responsible for anything. The health board took great pleasure in stating in a letter to the child's parents that it is no longer responsible for the child. I have a copy of the letter, which states that the child has been moved to another service. The board states it has done everything it can and that responsibility simply lies with another service now. It strikes me that some agencies take great pleasure in moving the cases that appear on their desks each day to other agencies. They regard it as a success.

This is an issue of political responsibility. If a child presents with autism, dyspraxia, dyslexia or any of the problems that arise in special needs education, there should not only be early intervention but complete monitoring of that child's educational requirements through national school and one person must take responsibility for that, not four agencies.

In the early 1990s under various Ministers, not from the party opposite — Members can work out who I am talking about — there was a great demand for what were called inter-agency responses. Having been in politics for ten years, my experience is that when people talk about an inter-agency response it is an excuse to do nothing or for one agency to wring its hands while the other takes the rap. When this Bill is enacted and the council is working, with all the resources in place, we must put the responsibility on one person to take charge of that child up to the age of 18. That person will then be held accountable for the services he or she puts in place.

I wish the Bill well. The Government's intentions are correct. I realise there will be calls for resources but I appeal for better management of the services, less foot dragging and more responsibility on the part of all the agencies involved. Why does the area of speech and language therapy come under the Department of Health and Children and not the Department of Education and Science? If we are talking about providing speech and language therapists for which, from my knowledge on the ground, there is a great need it should come exclusively from within the Department of Education and Science. That would give the Department greater control in providing additional places.

The Minister can correct me if I am wrong but I understand Trinity College, Dublin, is the only college operating this course. Will the Minister outline when replying her Department's plans, and those of Trinity College, to expand radically the number of undergraduate courses? Hundreds of speech and language therapists are needed. They are not available currently and the two options available are to increase the intake to the undergraduate course or purchase them from abroad. There are gaps in the service because we do not have enough therapists in place. I ask the Minister to respond to that point.

On the issue of special needs assistants, credit is due to the Department over the past few years and in regard to the announcement made by the Minster recently. We now have many more special needs assistants in place, which is welcome. In trying to formalise this area does the Department have the view that we should have a number of designated special needs assistants assigned to each school rather than to various children in that school? Once the child goes through that school, while they get extra hours per week, which is helpful, there are other children who cannot even get that level of assistance. A school in my constituency which has six special needs assistants asked if it would not make more management sense to allocate those assistants to the school rather than to the children. I would be interested in hearing the Minister's reply in that regard.

If a child is falling behind as a result of one of these problems, a useful practice is to encourage him or her over the summer months in particular to get extra help. A very good scheme is run by the Department where extra help with tuition is put in place over the summer months but in regard to the child I met last week with his mother and father, they have only recently been told by the Department that they can get summer tuition, which I understand is three hours a day, four days a week between now and the end of August. The parents' dilemma, however, is that they have to find a teacher to take up that offer but how many teachers would take it up in the two months they are off? Is there not a greater responsibility on the National Educational Psychological Service, or the Department, to specifically provide extra help to parents of these children over the summer months rather than putting the responsibility on them to find a teacher? Without the help of their local school, the parents in the case I am bringing to the attention of the House would not know where to turn. Even in that school environment there is no one who could provide two months' help to the child. The Department, and NEPS in particular, have a major role to play in providing extra help at key times in the year when the school is closed for holidays.

I echo a point made by Senator Hayes and other colleagues. The key time for a child is in primary school. Children with these types of difficulties can make amazing progress if the intervention is made at an early time. We must focus our efforts on giving all of them the potential to deliver their best in terms of their educational opportunities. It is about delivering opportunities for everyone. Our focus must be on primary school level and we must work to address the problem of the approximately 20% of the current cohort who either do not make it through to senior cycle or else lose out in terms of basic numeracy and literacy skills. We are all aware of the difficulties in terms of literacy skills. Perhaps I am old-fashioned but I believe the basics have to be got right first and the way to do that is to pour resources into our primary school system.

I wish the Government and the Minister every success. I have always admired the Minister of State, Deputy de Valera. She is a humble Minister. She does not highlight her achievements the way other Ministers do from time to time. She gets on with her work in a quiet and dignified fashion and I have always appreciated that fact. I wish her well in this area in which I am aware she has a keen interest. We need a Minister like the Minister of State working on the commitments that will be put in place when the Bill is enacted. It does not matter how many agencies are put in place. Unless people take responsibility for their actions and there is proper accountability in terms of the money allocated to a service, we will not get the dramatic change we need in terms of providing fair opportunities for these children.