Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State will get no argument from me on that point, nor from most people involved in education, including patrons. This series of amendments are really all the same but they relate to different processes. As she noted, they relate to the provision in another section regarding admission statements.

The provision is not that the patron shall co-operate in regard to the provision of a special class or classes. The legislation does not say the patron of the school shall have an opportunity to engage with the NCSE around the provision of operation. It says the patron of a school shall co-operate "by the provision and operation of a special class or classes". The law is putting in place an obligation to co-operate in a particular way. In effect, the law is saying that the patron of a school shall ensure the provision and operation of a special class when requested to do so by the council. On any reading of this legislation, that is a contradiction of the section 37A process.

If the obligation were there and there alone, there would be no need for a section 37A process because it would already be a requirement that the patron shall co-operate by the provision and operation of a special class. The wording does not refer to a requirement to co-operate in the provision; it refers to a requirement to co-operate by the provision. There is an obligation on the board of management to co-operate by way of the provision of special classes. The legislation is crystal clear that it is creating an obligation on the patron to ensure the board provides. That is the confusion I see in this. I am with the Minister of State on the desirability that provision would be made in all circumstances, but I am not with her on the confusion I see, which is being caused by decoupling these obligations from the section 37A process.