Seanad debates

Wednesday, 24 February 2010

Special Educational Needs: Motion (Resumed)

 

6:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

First I wish to place this in a context. At the outset of this economic crisis, I warned that the Government was completely wrong to dismantle every agency that spoke out on behalf of the vulnerable. It did so and this kind of thing is the result. However, I do not believe that all virtue or human feeling resides in this House and I know my former colleague from this House, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, to be a decent and caring man. This does not mean the policies always are decent or caring because they may in fact not be. Regardless of what one might think, the loss of 1,200 special needs assistants is a quite extraordinary cull and must be explained. It appears as though there has been an attempt to explain this in economic terms, which can be highly problematic because these are the most vulnerable people and I do not believe the full case has been made.

I wish to say something in particular about St. Joseph's school, Balrothery, at which there has been a quite extraordinary and devastating reduction of 66%. In his contribution, the Minister asked an extraordinary question of Senator Healy Eames. He asked Senator Healy Eames:

whether she really believes that a child who is developing independence and confidence should continue to receive support he or she does not need. Might that inhibit the child's further development?

That was a most extraordinary phrase, at which I turned round and looked at some of the parents and teachers from St. Joseph's school, Balrothery, in the Gallery. If the Minister is good at reading body language, he will have read the answer. It was a grotesque question as of course the children need it. I was very glad that Senator-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.