Nicky McFadden (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State. I acknowledge the 73% increase in the number of SNAs between 2003 and 2008 who were employed in post-primary, primary and special schools. That is an impressive investment but prior to 2003 there had been no investment and the Minister cannot take this wonderful quality service that they have become used to and need from our schools and children. It is not logical.

If a child has a significant disability or behavioural problem, he or she qualifies for an SNA. The Minister referred to children outgrowing their need for an assistant but an article in The Irish Times yesterday referred to a child with a medical need. Her skin blisters on contact and she needs an SNA to help her stand up, sit down, reach for her pencil and so on. She needs care 24-7 and it is a little disingenuous of the Minister to say children can outgrow their SNA. The mother of the child in the article stated she would not apply for an SNA if the child did not need one. There is not a parent in the world who would want this for his or her child. Every parent wants his or her children to function independently and the Minister was insensitive about diminished requirement. He referred to "surplus posts which do not meet the current criteria". That is a broad statement and when one is dealing with children who need to be toileted and fed, it is insensitive.

The article also reports on a principal teacher in Newbridge who described how SENOs go into a classroom and spend half an hour watching a child before saying "No" all the time. It is my experience following representations that I have made that they say "No" all the time. The child on behalf of whom I made representations was delayed entering second level because the SENO did not believe the child needed an SNA in the secondary school, which is an outrage. The principal in Newbridge stated he has to obtain expert opinions on a child from doctors, psychologists and occupational therapists and then the SENO comes into the classroom and observes the child for half an hour before saying "No". That completely diminishes the authority and professionalism of all the other experts and that must be discussed.

The INTO General Secretary, Sheila Nunan, has raised another issue. I commended the Minister regarding the increase in the number of SNAs but the INTO is concerned about the reduction in numbers this year. The union says the inclusion of special needs children in schools requires adequate staffing to meet both the education and care needs of the children. One teacher said the children will lose out because the SNA hours have been reduced or the children may have lost their SNA. The other 28 children in the classroom will also lose out because the teacher will be unable to teach the full curriculum because he or she will have to look after the child who is unable to stay quiet in the classroom or bring a child to the toilet who is unable to go to the toilet unaccompanied. A total of 1,000 SNAs will be axed and parents are nervous and anxious because of that. I have been approached by them. The Minister said he will continue with the review, which will be completed at the end of March, and he maintains that any child who needs an SNA will get one. If so, why are their positions being axed? I accept if a child has moved on, the SNA should stay with him or her but if a school has 200 pupils, I do not accept that no child will have special educational needs.

I refer to NEPS. I welcome the increase to 210 in the number of psychologists employed but that has not been my experience as a member of several boards of management. The assessment of a child is based on the enrolment of the school in a particular year and the waiting lists are so long that children do not undergo a psychological assessment. That is a dramatic statement and I may be accused of being fanatical and of raising anxiety levels but that is the reality. I welcome the increase in the number of psychologists from 127 at the start of the current year but I am not reassured that will address the waiting lists. They are so long that children will still not be assessed.

The review is being use for a cull. Schools are living in trepidation. One principal described herself as scavenging for hours for children in her care. I appreciated the comment by Senator Keaveney when she asked that the Department should act as guardian angel to our children. This is how our children should be cherished, especially those with special needs. I commend Senator Healy Eames on her forthright and honest motion and down the manner in which she has conducted herself. I resent the personal attack on my colleague which I consider to be an outrage.

Debate adjourned.