Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach as an deis cúpla focal a rá i dtaca leis an díospóireacht tábhachtach seo ar na hacmhainní atá ar fáil ón Stát agus ón Roinn do scoileanna agus, go háirithe, do micléinn a bhfuil riachtanais speisialta foghlama acu. Creidimid uilig, ar ghach taobh den Teach, go bhfuil sé tábhachtach na háiseanna ceart a chur ar fáil do dhaoine nach bhfuil, b'fhéidir, in ann foghlaim chomh maith céanna le duine eile sa rang céanna.

I am glad we have the opportunity today to debate special needs education and the provision of same from a learning support point of view, the SNA provision in schools and the allocation from the Department. It is the responsibility of everyone who serves in public office, especially at a national level, to identify the provision of services to the most needy in society. The 1916 Proclamation states we should cherish all children equally. By extending those words we must ensure children who have special needs, in particular, are perhaps cherished more equally than others, if that is appropriate.

I sat on the Joint Committee on Education and Skills over the past four years when the party of those of us on this side of the House was in Government. The now Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, also sat on it and I often heard him refer to the real need to provide for people with special needs. I agree with him. After he became Minister, he was called upon to reverse the decision of the previous Government to reduce learning support teaching staff by 125 from this September. The Minister outlined in a statement, on 3 May this year - in answer to a parliamentary question and I understand also through the media - that he could not roll back on the decision to reduce the first-year reduction of some 125 posts which were targeted in budget 2011. I can accept that the Minister is going with the budget decision, but it is alarming that he would go further than that, particularly given his genuine background in protecting the most needy in society. I would expect nothing else from the Labour Party. It is alarming none the less that the Government now decided to double the reduction of targets set out by the previous Government, thus ensuring 250 posts will be taken out of the resource learning complement which will be available to schools from September this year.

The other issue of concern is that of special needs education and the assistance available for this from the Department. We all appreciate that Exchequer resources are very limited this year. It was in this context that in last December's budget a decision was taken to reduce spending across several areas. The provision of special needs education was ring-fenced in that budget. Perhaps we will get some clarification on this matter from the Minister of State. While I do not want to dwell on the point, it appears that an allocation of 90% of what was available this year for next year will not meet next year's projected demand when one takes into account the projected pupil numbers and the increasing demands being placed on pupils as a result of increased class sizes. In this respect, no consideration is being given to small rural schools.

In his address, the Minister of State said that where less than 25% of pupils needed language support, it would be limited to two years. If one takes the example of small rural schools throughout the country, however, very often there may only be one special needs pupil who requires additional language support in a cohort of 50. While the Minister of State and the Department recognise that there will be cutbacks, it would appear that they will be greater in small rural schools. Can the Minister of State clarify that matter?

We on this side of the House cannot agree with the decision being taken. We appreciate that fiscal demands on the country are creating difficulties, but we cannot understand why the reduction is being doubled. In other words, 250 learning support teachers are being taken out of the system this year instead of the 125 agreed by the previous Administration. In addition, why is this year's allocation only 90%? I understand that additional special needs posts are being provided to the appeals tribunal so that it can allocate such posts where there is a genuine need. One would expect that allocation would be met anywhere in case of genuine need, without having only 90% of this year's allocation being available next year.

Pupil numbers are growing, particularly in urban schools, so one can appreciate that the demand for special needs education would also grow considerably in those areas, particularly with class sizes also rising. I am wary of the Department's position and am saddened that provision for the least well-off and educationally disadvantaged is being attacked in this way. I appeal to the Minister of State to examine alternatives rather than trying to make cost savings in special needs and learning support teaching staff.