Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 31:

In page 11, lines 13 to 16, to delete all words from and including “in” in line 13 down to and including line 16 and substitute “by the repeal of subsection (2).”.

My amendment seeks to amend the section, which amends section 9 of the Ombudsman for Children Act 2002. I thank the current ombudsman and staff in his office for meeting me to discuss the provision. The section, as it stands, simply makes a technical amendment to reflect the legislative references made by this Bill. I refer again to the pre-legislative scrutiny process undertaken by the Joint Committee on Education and Skills. This exact amendment was proposed in head 7 but it has been dropped from the Bill, as initiated. I have yet to receive a substantive explanation as to why this crucial provision was dropped. I have tabled my amendment for that reason.

The amendment proposes to delete section 9(2) of the 2002 Act, which states that the Ombudsman for Children can only investigate the actions of a school on foot of a complaint from a parent or student where the local grievance procedures within the school have been exhausted. I do not see the need for the provision as I am concerned about the levels of oversight that will be possible under the provisions of this Bill if the ombudsman can only intervene at the very end of the process. There are many reasons the ombudsman may need to begin an investigation earlier than currently allowed. I can imagine a belligerent board of management using the knowledge that the ombudsman cannot intervene until its procedures are exhausted for the board's own ends at the expense of the interests of the student. Imagine if we only allowed other investigatory and regulatory bodies to begin investigations once local complaints procedures were exhausted. Would we allow this in hospitals and social care homes? We would not allow it and we should not allow it in schools.

I want the ombudsman to be able to intervene and investigate at the stage that he or she believes most appropriate and helpful, not because an arbitrary restriction in the legislation provides that he or she must wait until local procedures have been exhausted. I do not understand the reason such an important provision was included in the general scheme presented to the joint committee on Education and Skills before being dropped without explanation. My amendment must be accepted and this unnecessary restriction on the role of the ombudsman removed. It allows for an intervention to be made much earlier in the process. It also improves the balance of power and brings equality for students, teachers and schools. Grievances could be resolved at a much earlier stage, rather than having to exhaust every single possible solution. At that stage, a child could be missing school and the relationship with the school will have broken down. This provision is a preventative tool as it would allow the ombudsman to intervene at an earlier stage if he or she fits to do so, rather than waiting for processes to conclude.