Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Yes, we wish to share time.

This is probably a first for the Seanad in that two Ministers have come to respond to a Private Members' Bill, on which I congratulate Senator Mary Moran. I am sharing time with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly. As Senator Mary Moran stated, while responsibility for setting the school leaving age comes within the policy remit of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, the proposals contained in the Bill have significant implications for the areas that come within my remit in the Department of Education and Skills. I wish to make it clear that the Government will support the passage of the Bill through Second Stage and it is welcome to hear that the Opposition is also supporting it. Any proposal that seeks to retain children in school is welcome and I acknowledge the initiative of Senator Mary Moran in preparing the draft legislation and bringing it before the House. My own objective for all children and young people is that they engage positively with education and complete their schooling, having achieved a qualification at upper second level. I am particularly conscious of the need to maintain supports for schools aimed at tackling educational disadvantage. As Members are aware, the Department is reviewing the delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, programme. The review which I announced earlier this year is under way and a particular priority of mine. Through it, I wish to ensure those children and young people most of risk of not progressing and reaching their potential in education are adequately supported.

I certainly welcome the Bill and the Government is supporting it, but there are a number of issues that should be considered, some of which I note were raised in the contributions of the three Senators who have spoken thus far. It is important to note that the provisions of the Education (Welfare) Act 2000 generally, including those relating to the minimum school leaving age and vocational training, were introduced following extensive consultation with all relevant education and other stakeholders. As engagement with the relevant partners is something that generally happens in the education sector, I suggest a similar engagement would be a good idea with regard to this legislation. A key stakeholder group on this occasion is, of course, that comprising the children and young people, and their parents, who will be immediately affected by the proposed changes. Ireland has an early school leavers rate of 8.4%, which is below the European Union's Europe 2020 target of 10% and close to Ireland's own adopted target of 8% by 2020. In addition, as Senator Mary Moran mentioned, my Department's most recent school retention figures show the overall rate of pupils staying on to complete their leaving certificate examinations has increased to just over 90%. It also is known that the majority of students who drop-out at second level do so between the first and second years of senior cycle, usually at the age of 17 or 18 years. School retention data do not, of course, take account of participation in apprenticeship and out-of-school programmes and other training within the first year of leaving school. I will turn to these three sectors shortly as they were raised by the three Senators who have spoken. Rraising the minimum age to 17 years may result, therefore, in students being required to remain in school for transition year or the first year of senior cycle before pursuing these options and it would be helpful to consider why 16-year olds are leaving school early. It is possible, however, that a large number do not leave to take up employment or apprenticeships; rather, 16-year olds who leave school are likely to have experienced significant challenges in the school system, either in managing themselves or being managed, and evidence of this view is expressed in the Youthreach learner interviews during evaluations carried out by my Department's inspectorate. Again, Senators Mary Moran and Brian Ó Domhnaill referred to studies carried out of early school leaving. In circumstances such as these a key question would focus on a school's capacity to continue to manage a student who has particular problems in school, who may be unhappy in school or who may have repeated challenging behaviour. Thus, some schools, particularly DEIS schools where early school leaving is more prevalent, might require further supports to assist them in managing the retention of students to 17 years.

As Senators Mary Moran and Marie Moloney referred to Youthreach, Senator Mary Moran referred to Quality and Qualifications Ireland, QQI, and SOLAS and all three Senators referred to apprenticeships, I wish to comment briefly on them. An increase in the school leaving age would also have an impact in centres other than schools such as Youthreach and community training programmes where the training allowance payable to 16 and 17-year olds is €40 per week. Senator Marie Moloney suggested that perhaps these participants might be counted as being in school. This may be a point at which Members must tease out the issue because I do not believe any of the Senators who spoke was suggesting they be considered early school leavers. Perhaps this is a point to which we might return after the debate. This level of payment, €40 per week, is not regarded as an incentive to attract young people away from school, but it provides some encouragement for those who have dropped out of school to attend an alternative provision. Youthreach is my Department's response to early school leaving and provides places for learners to continue their education when they have dropped out of mainstream school. However, it is important to state that while Youthreach is a second-chance programme, it fulfils the requirement of compulsory school attendance in certain limited circumstances where returning to mainstream school is not a possibility. Again, this point could be teased out. As a general principle Youthreach centres are not encouraged to accept anyone who is of compulsory schoolgoing age. An increase in the entry age to 17 years would have implications for the demand for places and the profile of allowances.I do not think the intention is to in any way limit what Youthreach does.

The foregoing examples show that engagement with education and other professionals working in this area is essential to ensure any policy change will meet its objective and that it will not have unintended consequences for the target group or students generally.

The implications for SOLAS and employers of the inclusion of apprenticeships within the scope of educational welfare legislation also require careful consideration. The specific proposal to allow apprenticeships to be regarded as school attendance may be somewhat at odds with the fact that apprentices are employed directly by the enterprise sector. That issue would need to be teased out. We do not want apprenticeships to be seen as an opt-out from formal education; the nature of apprenticeships has changed in recent years and even many traditional apprenticeships have become more technology-focused. A basic leaving certificate qualification is now regarded as desirable for entry into apprenticeship and almost 70% of entrants present qualifications at that level. It is important that key stakeholders such as employers are included in the consultation process on this provision. Senator Mary Moran referred to the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation as being the third Department involved in this proposal. The new apprenticeship system which I announced recently is an example of the approach needed for effective programme development and was based on widespread consultation and a collegiate approach to policy development. It includes chefs, as mentioned by Senator Marie Moloney. It also includes butchers, the drivers of articulated trucks and areas such as financial services. It is quite broad and 25 will come on stream this year.

The proposed change to the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act 1996 would represent a significant change in the law for employers and my colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, has asked that there be consultation with his Department to allow full consideration of the proposed legislative changes.

I hope these comments have identified some of the key issues that need to be considered and further teased out during the passage of this legislation. I also hope they have been helpful as I have made them in an attempt to positively influence the proposal. I again thank Senator Mary Moran for her initiative in bringing forward this proposal and look forward to the comments of other speakers and engaging further on the Bill.