Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 18, line 35, to delete "with the consent of" and substitute "having consulted with".

Section 13 is probably the kernel of the Bill. While it may be fine to see the legislation on paper, the most important issue alluded to by Members of both Houses on Second and Committee Stages was the need for adequate resources and finance to deliver the service. We have received very welcome indications that adequate resources will be provided as a result of what are in effect the shackles placed on the Minister for Finance. However, section 13(1) goes that little bit too far in using the phrase "with the consent of the Minister". We want balance in the Bill. To have balance we must remove from the Minister for Finance and his officials the overall power they will have in the implementation of this legislation. This is achieved by deleting "with the consent of" and substituting "having consulted with", as provided for in the amendment.

By stating "with the consent of the Minister", we are qualifying everything. There is no denying that the Minister for Finance has responsibility for the national finances but it is within his remit to give to the Minister for Education and Science a certain sum of money and ask him to deliver what he can with it because he will get no more. With the permission of the Chair, I will draw a parallel with the health services. In the past four years, when there were adequate finances to solve the problems in the health sector, the Minister for Finance did invest a certain amount but put a limit on it. This will also be the case in financing education for persons with special educational needs if he continues to have such a grip on the purse-strings of the Minister for Education and Science.

As I stated, this legislation looks wonderful on paper. It is a wonderful breakthrough — this jargon can be used — but the necessary resources must be provided and a balance struck such that the Minister for Finance will not be able to negate the effectiveness of the Minister for Education and Science in delivering those resources to the schools and individuals who need them. This is my fear and that is why the amendment was tabled. I remain to be convinced otherwise.