Last week I adverted to the fact that there appeared to me to be some contradiction in terms in regard to the introduction of this Bill in the first place in that its mover, Deputy John Bruton — now Leader of Fine Gael in which position I wish him well — declared that in 99.9 per cent of cases he did not see any problem with the local selection committees of VECs in putting the best prospective teacher into any given post. Nonetheless he appeared to have a very serious problem with 0.01 per cent of cases. He reckoned this required us to change the whole system inside out to deal with what he regarded as a suspicion of political interference, or an idea in somebody's mind that he or she had not been appointed to a post because it happened that there were politicians on the relevant selection committee. I know that, when one is going forward in Leadership elections, one must pander to minority interests now and again but I contend that that was taking the matter to an absolute extreme. I find it difficult to comprehend why it is necessary to seek to change present procedures when one has problems vis-à-vis 0.01 per cent of cases only. I know that when somebody mentions 99.9 per cent of cases usually he or she is using a figure of speech. Nonetheless such comment does indicate that, to all intents and purposes, there is nothing wrong with the present system.
What is even more intriguing is to discover that, on looking at the Official Report of 30 October last, Deputy Bruton, in proposing this amending Bill — that of allowing the Local Appointments Commission to deal with the appointment of teachers — said at the end of his contribution that, if the Minister had any problems with the Bill, that is that the Local Appointments Commission would replace the Vocational Education Committee selection committees, he would be prepared to listen to amendments tabled on Committee Stage. We now find ourselves in circumstances in which Deputy John Bruton, the proposer of this Bill, in the first place says there is nothing wrong with the system in relation to 99.9 per cent of cases, then introduces a Bill to put the Local Appointments Commission in their place, then says, before concluding his remarks, it need not necessarily be a Local Appointments Commission but somebody else, anybody except a politician. Of course what Deputy Bruton selectively omitted to say was that there is a very senior official of the Department of Education who serves as a member of every Vocational Education Committee selection committee. Deputy Bruton also omitted to say that a chief executive officer serves in an advisory capacity and, in the case of some Vocationalo Education Committees, is a member of the selction committee.
That brings one to pose the question: what is the point in introducing this Bill in the first place? As I said last week, the big plus factor in Deputy Bruton's candidature as Leader of Fine Gael was the fact that he is an original thinker. If one puts forward the proposition that, in 99.9 per cent of cases there is no problem encountered but that nonetheless one wishes to change the whole system inside out on that basis, that is original, that bears the stamp of an original thinker; it might not make much common sense but is original if nothing else.
It is about time Fine Gael decided where they stand in relation to the democratic control of education. I contend it is very important that we have a Vocational Education Committee system allowing local representatives have a say on behalf of the people who should teach in their schools. It is a non-selective system, one which has given an awful lot to Irish education. I served as a member of that system at one time. As a local representative, I understand the importance of local decision-making. Indeed that lends credibility to appointments in that they are the local representatives, plus a senior official of the Department of Education, who decide who will teach in vocational schools. I fail to see how it would be in any way more democratic to have a centralised bureaucracy, such as is the case with the Local Appointments Commission, deciding who will teach in our schools when it is admitted by the proposer of the Bill that, in 99.9 per cent of cases, there is no problem encountered vis-à-vis such appointments.
The whole logic of this Bill escapes me. Of course people like Deputy Bruton and others on the opposite side of the House contend we should give more powers to local representatives, that we must democratise the system, decentralise it but, heavens above, we should not allow them appoint teachers to our schools. That is quite a contradictory position to adopt. Of course the impression is being given that, based on some suspicion, or on some figment of the imagination — since there is no hard evidence to suggest there is anything wrong with the present system; in fact Deputy Bruton states there is absolutely nothing wrong with the present system — the vocational education committee system is engaging in some type of time war, that they wish to retain some type of oblique patronage system which there is no evidence to suggest exists in the first place. In fact the vocational education committees, the IVEA in particular, brought forward a very progressive document for discussion at special Congress at the end of this month, seeking to further democratise the system, to bring about new local education authorities, not restricted merely to the vocational education committee system but to primary, second-level and any tertiary education that exists within the area of operation of any vocational education committee. In fact that proposal seeks to widen the representation in those local education authorities. It seeks to introduce representatives of trade councils, of parent councils, management associations, to deal with education on the ground on behalf of the people they represent.
I find it very difficult to listen to politicians who seek to equate political activity in the area of education as being in some way wrong or open to suspicion. It is about time politicians, at national level, began to trust local politicians who, let it be said, put them in here in the first place. It is about time national politicians, far from decrying their local counterparts, sought to back them up in the very limited area of activity in which they have discretion. The whole idea in so far as this party is concerned is to give more discretion and responsibility to local politicians. We must remember that, at the end of the day, they are not awaiting the cheque at the end of the month unlike their national counterparts. It is time politicians ceased to say of other politicians: if you become involved in this you will leave yourself wide open to any charge even though we agree that such charge is unjustified.
It is about time leading politicians, particularly leaders of political parties, began to practise what they preach and not come into this House seeking to take away the very limited discretions available to local politicians while on the other hand talking about decentralisation and increasing powers at local level.
My attitude to this legislation is one of contempt. It is claimed there is support among the TUI for such a change. Certainly I have not been lobbied by any member of the TUI to change the system, neither has it been indicated to me by any member of the Teachers' Union of Ireland that anything untoward has happened in my Vocational Education Committee area or in anyone else's. I am not prepared to change legislation or a long established procedure within the vocational education committee system on the basis of someone's suspicion or grievance because he or she did not get a job. I can name any area of political activity where such a grievance would exist. If ten houses are to be given out by a county manager and there are 40 applicants he can put only ten families into ten houses and there will be a sense of grievance somewhere. It is wrong to suggest that local representatives or the local selection committee will have any consideration other than the best educational reasons for appointing any teacher.
The other bogey argument raised on Second Stage is that if a teacher had a certain political activity or political bent, that will deny him a fair hearing at a selection committee. That is an outrageous remark. Teachers at every level of the system, be it first or second level, are very much involved in politics. There are many teachers on all sides of this House who, of course, are members of political parties and I am sure they never felt their jobs were at risk because they were politically active. By the nature of Irish society teachers are very prominent, properly so, in every aspect of our public and local community life. It is totally a bogeyman argument to suggest that because someone has a particular political bent he will be denied the prospect of a job. It comes back to the argument that if one is involved in politics one is in some way tainted. No politician should come into this House and make such suggestions without credible evidence, and the proposer of this Bill, the Leader of the Opposition, has no evidence. He has mentioned a figure of 0.01 per cent of the cases; in fact, he has mentioned two cases out of I do not know how many appointments made. As a member of the Vocational Education Committee, at every meeting I can put forward five or six temporary appointments, part time appointments, temporary whole time appointments and permanent appointments and not once is any of them questioned. Never does any member of the vocational education committee question such appointments. It is outrageous to come into this House and say that there is a suspicion, that some poor devil did not get a job either because he was of some political persuasion or none. You cannot come in and seek to undermine the vocational education committee selection committee system on that basis. Come in here with hard evidence or do not come in at all.
The IVEA have put forward a very progressive document which seeks not only to widen the representation as regards policy decisions for local educational interests in any county but is proposing on the other hand to devolve even the power of appointment down to the local management committee of each individual school which again would involve representative vocational education committee management associations, teachers, etc.
I find it amazing that the "alternative Taoiseach", as he is now, has come into this House, proposed legislation to be changed, provided no evidence, accepts that in 99.99 per cent of the cases there is no problem, seeks to change the system inside out, then says at the end of his speech that he is not insisting that a local appointments commission would be the necessary mechanism by which this would be done, and finally seeks to involve a centralised bureaucracy which would not meet local needs. In my understanding of the Local Appointments Commission it could take months to get a decision. In the event of a teacher being absent or being required by any vocational school, are the Opposition going to wait for the Local Appointments Commission to make the decision or are they going to allow local representatives and the Department of Education officials to sit down and appoint a teacher which, in the words of the proposer of this Bill, in 99.99 per cent of the cases is the correct decision?