Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his response and those Members who contributed to this debate, Senator Mooney for seconding the motion, Senators Jim D'Arcy, van Turnhout, Moran, Norris, Clune, Ó Domhnaill, Healy Eames, Reilly and Hayden.

I want to acknowledge a number of valid points and I echo what was said about the very informed contributions made by various speakers, for which I am grateful. I want to acknowledge Senator Deirdre Clune's valid comment, which I certainly support, about the important role played by special schools. I also acknowledge Senators Brian Ó Domhnaill and Fidelma Healy Eames for their recent contributions on this issue in the Seanad.

Whenever we consider these matters, it comes down to a question of what type of society we want to be. I hope we are all aiming towards a secure, gentle society that is life-affirming and inclusive. It is always the test of a civilised society how well it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members, and I believe that is tied in closely with this issue.

I am interested in a number of the points made by Senator Healy Eames. She is right to talk about the importance of outputs rather than inputs. We need to measure developments in terms of the impact they are having or the outcomes for children and their learning. I acknowledge the commitment of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, to this area, and I note his proposal to introduce legislation. In the context of the health debate, it has often been said that money should follow the patient. For me, one point that emerges very clearly is that money should follow the student, so that, instead of seeing the issue in terms of the funding of schools, we identify the specific needs of individual children. This is why it is so important that we look to the full implementation of the EPSEN Act.

I want to thank the representatives of Down Syndrome Ireland in particular for being here today. The case of children with Down's syndrome is central to this debate and I, of course, acknowledge Senator Aideen Hayden's point that we need to be concerned with the wide range of special needs that present to us. It is important, as numerous speakers noted, that Down's syndrome be classified as a low-incidence disorder and that we see the issue through that lens. I believe the Minister's decision in this area should be informed by the findings of the Ombudsman for Children, Ms Emily Logan, in her recent report. Her view is that the decision of the Department of Education and Skills not to grant pupils with Down's syndrome an automatic entitlement to additional teaching resources has adversely affected the capacity of children with Down's syndrome to engage to the fullest possible extent in mainstream primary schooling. Of course, that criticism came in a report arising from a complaint by the mothers of two children with Down's syndrome attending mainstream primary schools. In a situation such as that we are not talking about direct discrimination against children with Down's syndrome, but we are talking about discrimination in effect.

The Minister said, and I have to agree with him, that advice is different from direction. Far too often, Government hides behind advice to push through very controversial measures. I can certainly think of reports that deserved to be more closely scrutinised before the Government hid behind them. That said, it is not unknown for reports that are credible and excellent to have an early commitment to implementation.

I totally understand the Minister's position. He is doing his best but, like any Minister in his position, he is terrified of the resource implications. I know that is not the only issue he adverted to, and he said he wants to see whether he agrees with all of the recommendations. However, while I can understand that it is the Minister's sense that it is his duty not to jump in, and I acknowledge that he, by implication, accepts the thrust or content of the motion, none the less, he stands back from a commitment because he wants to consider it. I feel it is my duty to ensure we keep the pressure on here, and that we have seen and heard enough to know this is something we ought to implement.

I have not heard any substantial criticism of the recommendations in the report and, for that reason, I believe I and this House ought to call on the Minister to implement it. It is not unknown for politicians or the Government to make commitments to implement certain things and then, when they find difficulties, to step back, delay or review. I do not believe we will be doing any harm to the cause of children with special needs - in fact, quite the contrary - if we state in this House that this report and its recommendations should be implemented. On that basis, I cannot accept the Government's amendment to the motion. While the Minister may have the best intentions, for this House to say he should merely consider the report would not pay a just tribute to the content of what is a very fine report. On that basis, I must persist with my motion. None the less, I thank the Minister for his attentive and informed answer, and for all the work he is doing.