Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I welcome the Minister. I have great appreciation for his talents and ability but I have significant concerns about this legislation and advise him to gird himself because I foresee a long Committee Stage, assuming it is allowed by the Government and there is no guillotine.

I draw the Minister's attention to a booklet called, A Brief Guide To How Your Parliament Works. One of the advantages of having guests in Leinster House is that they sometimes draw our attention to things we should have perhaps seen ourselves. On the legislative process, there is a question on page 17 of the booklet that asks if is there any consultation with the public, to which the answer is:

Before a Bill is introduced, there will be consultation meetings and discussions with the Government Departments and groups likely to be affected by the Bill. Sometimes the Government will publish a Green Paper. This is a discussion document which sets out the Government's ideas and invites comment.

The Minister presented this Bill today as, in effect, a rehash of a Bill previously introduced but as he acknowledged, there are very significant changes in this one. This is, effectively, new legislation. The first thing one should observe here is that there has not been consultation with the various groups and education partners on it and I wonder why that is the case. My fear, to put it at its kindest, is that the Bill tends in a particular statist direction and has the potential to be applied in quite an ideological way.

The core issue in regard to redeployment is the departure from a notion of agreement towards a mere idea of consultation. This is what is proposed to be done. The Minister presented that in terms of expediting decisions, good administration and so on. However, the fact is that when we talk about education, we are talking about a very peculiar and particular type of service to people which has an important constitutional dimension. It is not like other services, such as the provision of water, policing and the like. The provision of education in Ireland is founded on the primacy of parents, in particular. The spirit of the education legislation to date has been that education is a matter on which important decisions are taken in partnership with patrons, trustees, management, unions and so on. That is a vitally important principle. Throughout this legislation, I see a departure from that principle and nowhere is it more obvious than on the issue of redeployment.

The Minister is well aware of, and there has been much discussion about, section 37 of the Employment Equality Act 1998 which protects the rights of religious run institutions to take necessary employment decisions in order to protect their ethos. I am informed that section was required in that legislation lest it be unconstitutional. The Minister can take his own advice on that. By giving himself the powers he does on the issue of redeployment and by effectively proposing the ability of the Department to impose certain employment decisions on school managers in this way, he undermines the whole spirit of what section 37 proposes to guarantee. In the case of a Catholic school, there could be a person who is not suitable from the point of view of a Catholic school's employment. The person could have radical views on abortion or whatever. It might not be of concern to some other school employer but under this, it seems quite possible that a different view could hold sway.

It is not just a question of Catholic concerns. Church of Ireland schools rightly seek to employ and deploy within their panel. It seems that is undermined. Too often in our society such concerns are characterised as sectarian when, in fact, they are concerns for legitimate diversity in the provisions of education, according to the will of parents, faith communities and so on.

It is not just a question of concern to faith communities. For example, special schools could find themselves in a situation where somebody from a mainstream school is foisted on them, despite that person not being the most eligible or most suitable for that position. The Minister might say that would never happen and that the Department would always consult very carefully but last year there was a situation where the visiting teachers for Travellers, some of whom might not have had much, or any, experience of teaching in a school room situation, were effectively visited on certain special schools.

As nice as the word "consultation" sounds, it is not a patch on the word "agreement" because agreement requires that the State pull in its horns and respect the fact there are other bodies which deserve to have a strong input into the making of certain decisions. "Consultation" in that context is a very weak word. I stress again the peculiar constitutional context in which we are operating.

I note there is nothing in the legislation which provides for any consultation procedure. No definition of "redeployment" is offered. I cannot but conclude that this is, in effect, a grab for power for the Minister, his Department and his successors in a way which I do not believe is conducive to a genuine spirit of partnership in the making of important decisions about education. Other concerns have been expressed. In the new primacy of mere consultation over agreement, we see that the same applies in this Bill to decisions on suspension and dismissal.

I also have concerns on the particular needs of persons with disability. The operation of section 40 of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004 will change if this legislation goes through and the Minister will not have the function of requesting the assistance of relevant health authority in respect of planning, provision and co-ordination of support services. The Minister made the point that the HSE has the responsibility for providing services but the trouble is that if the HSE does not adequately provide, or does not provide these various special support services, including speech and language therapy, occupational therapy or whatever, adequately, is the duty on the Minister to ensure such services are provided weakened by what is in the legislation? I would welcome the Minister's answer to that question.

I am concerned about the amendment of the definition of "educational disadvantage" in the legislation. Section 4 amends section 32 of the Education Act 1998 which states that educational disadvantage means "the impediments to education arising from social or economic disadvantage which prevent students from deriving appropriate benefit from education in schools". Is there an issue here concerning children who are outside the school system? I could go on but I have said enough to indicate there are major concerns with this legislation and I propose to revisit these and other issues on Committee Stage, if I can.