Richard Bruton
Question:24 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education and Science the basis of his legal challenge to the decision of the Information Commissioner on the release of information regarding examination results. [25157/99]
Priority Questions. - School League Tables.
As the Deputy will be aware, a full affidavit setting out the grounds for the appeal to the High Court against the Information Commissioner's decision on this matter has been lodged with the High Court. This deals in detail with matters relating to the application of both the Freedom of Information Act and the Education Act. Given that the matter is now before the court, it would be inappropriate and unpro ductive for the House to seek to rehearse the legal arguments which will be considered.
As I have stated on a number of occasions, the basic reason for appealing the commissioner's decision is that I believe the impact of publishing the league tables which have been sought would be damaging to the achievement of important educational goals. The most important of these is that we have a school system, all parts of which value and work with all students, not just the academically gifted. League tables would establish an artificial basis for comparing schools which would, inevitably, limit school choice and unduly skew activities within schools towards achievement on a narrow range of programmes. I am advised that we have strong grounds for believing the provisions of the Acts support a refusal to make available information on the basis of such concerns.
Schools, and the communities from which they draw their students, differ greatly across a wide range of social and economic factors. League tables, in my view, do not tell us in any meaningful way about the achievement of schools, they do not compare like with like and they may discourage schools from seeking to work with children who are weaker academically, have special educational needs or who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Overall, I believe that league tables can have a damaging effect on students and schools and undermine the possibility of making schools more responsive and accountable.
However, our education system must, of course, be accountable. This includes giving parents the right to membership of school boards of management. It also involves collaborative reviews of schools that take account of all relevant factors and are designed to help schools identify and rectify problems. Whole school evaluation and school development planning are built on these principles. League tables are a distraction from the achievement of real accountability and result in unfair and inaccurate labelling of schools.
Does the Minister believe parents are entitled to the fullest possible information about a school before they make a choice, and that that information should include a comparative analysis of the examination results achieved by the school?
I know the Deputy has changed his position on this issue. We achieved unanimity last year during the passage of the Education Act through the House on the importance of including in that Act a clause forbidding the publication of league tables. I am, of course, committed to the fullest information possible being made available to parents on a school's activities and—
Does that include information on examination results?
I had not concluded.
Of course, the Minister had not concluded because he is wasting the scarce time available.
It does not include the use of examination results for comparative purposes.
Who does the Minister believe has to be protected from this information? Parents are the primary educators under the Constitution. Why does the Minister believe parents, of all people, should be denied relevant information about the education to which their children will be exposed?
I am not denying parents any such—
The Minister is denying them. He just said he would not—
Deputy Bruton should allow the Minister to speak.
With respect, the Deputy has published three different positions on this issue. His position is very confused.
I am not the Minister, I am asking the questions.
Deputy Bruton must allow the Minister to speak.
I have talked to parents about this. It is interesting to note this. Where is the demand coming from for the publication of crude league tables and statistics?
No one is talking about crude league tables.
Yes, they are. Where is the demand coming from? It is not coming from parents. I am not getting telephone calls every day or a huge amount of mail from parents asking for league tables. Parents, teachers, boards of management and the majority of the academic community are saying they want a broad based, accountable system and proper evaluation, and not league tables. That is what people are saying and what this House said last year.
Deputy Bruton may ask a brief final supplementary.
I need some equity here. Is the Minister saying he will deny access by the primary educators of children to information about the only yardstick the Department uses to judge how children fare, namely examination results? Is it not the case that what the Minister is really concerned with is to protect his Department from the exposure of the policy failures which have resulted in many disadvantaged areas having education results which are far below par? Is it not the case that he is afraid to expose himself and the Department to that information? People are entitled to information.
A question please, Deputy.
No one should be protected from information – information will help. We need to compare and analyse what is happening in our schools if we are to get results.
What is the question, Deputy?
Will the Minister reconsider and arrange for parents and prospective parents in every school to get information across the full range of issues relating to that school, including examination results?
The Deputy needs to explain why, 12 months ago, he voted for and spoke in favour of a clause which prevented the use of examination results as a basis for national comparative analysis.
I did not speak in favour of it. On a point of order, I would ask the Minister to withdraw the suggestion that I spoke in favour of this measure. If he checks the record—
I did check the record and the Deputy supported this idea.
I did not support it.
We cannot have an argument across the House.
The Deputy supported the clause.
I ask the Minister to withdraw his suggestion that I spoke in favour of this measure. I did not speak in favour of it. I oppose league tables but I support, and have always supported, information through the schools on examination results. I have published this in policy papers and it was there for all to see long before the Education Act. I do not support league tables but neither do I support the Minister's view which is that parents must be denied information about the most important issue, namely examination results. Long may it be that other issues in our schools are valued by the Department.
Minister, the Deputy has put a disclaimer which it is normal to accept.
With respect, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I made the point, and was interrupted in mid stream, that Deputy Bruton supported the clause in the Education Act—
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I asked whether you would allow the Minister to withdraw his statement that I spoke in favour of this measure.
I did not even finish my statement.
Rather than having the courage to withdraw the statement, the Minister is trying to change the message.
No, I am not.
The Deputy is being very disorderly. Each time the Minister tried to speak the Deputy was on his feet. We have to hear the Minister.
Each time the Minister got up to speak he put—
I have said to the Minister that when a Member makes a disclaimer it is generally accepted. The Minister was not given an opportunity to accept it.
He did not offer to withdraw.
Deputy Bruton's position is changing so rapidly—
My position is not changing at all.
At the beginning of his question he asked whether we would use—
This matter will have to be settled elsewhere. We are moving on to Question No. 25 in the name of Deputy Michael D. Higgins.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I am asking for a little equity in the way you treat Members. You allow the Minister to say what he likes but when I seek a withdrawal you do not even ask him if he will do so.
I do not get a chance to speak at all. I did not make the statement the Deputy alleged I made.
I told the Minister that it is usual to accept a disclaimer. The Minister has not been given an opportunity to do so.
The Minister is refusing to withdraw.