asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, being taken to ensure that next month's Oral Irish tests for Leaving Certificate pupils will go ahead as planned.
31.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Orals Answers. - Leaving Certificate Oral Irish Tests.
30.
asked the Minister for Education if he is aware of the ASTI ban on the Oral Irish Leaving Certificate examination and his intentions in the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions No. 30 and 31 together.
I am fully aware of the position in this matter and will make a further statement as soon as possible. It is, of course, my objective to do everything within my power to ensure that the students are given the opportunity to take their examination.
Is the Minister aware of the considerable anguish being caused to secondary school students at the moment because of the uncertainty about the holding of this examination? Can he give any clear indication of when that uncertainty may be resolved?
I regret very much any anxiety caused to candidates in the public examinations and I hope that the anxiety will be eliminated in the very near future. I understand that the union concerned will be considering a proposal from me at a meeting on Friday and I hope that they will accept the proposition I have put to them.
This matter was the subject of a private notice question which I had down last week but I was not allowed to ask the appropriate supplementaries. Will the Minister inform the House as to the position in respect of the pupils involved if the union, the ASTI, refuse to accept his offer this week?
My proposal to the union includes a 20 per cent increase in fees and an offer of quick arbitration with a prior acceptance by me of the arbitrator's conclusions. I am very hopeful that the union concerned will accept that proposal and this should end the anxiety.
I would like to point out to the Deputy at this stage that when I brought to his attention last week that his question was a repetition he made an unprecedented attack on the Chair which I asked him to withdraw or leave the House. In doing so he made a statement which does not reflect on the credit or prestige of either the Deputy or this House.
I am not allowed to reply.
In future I will deal in a different manner with statements of this kind.
A Member is not allowed to reply to the Chair.
If the Deputy had any respect for the House or the Chair he would apologise.
If the Chair had any respect for the rights of Deputies he would have granted some latitude.
The Deputy's questions were repetition as the Official Report shows. I am perfectly entitled to do what I did, and in future the Chair will not accept abuse of that type and the penalty will be different.
How do you know it was repetitious?
The Deputy will not argue about the matter.
That is the problem.