Vol. 541 No. 4
103 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Education and Science his proposals to roll out an improved educational service for people with disabilities arising from the Jamie Sinnott judgment; the timeframe for these improvements; and the cost involved. [23019/01]
Since I assumed office in January 2000 as Minister for Education and Science, I have provided unprecedented additional resources and supports for people with disabilities. These actions were based on the Government decision of October 1998 to provide all necessary supports based on assessment of needs. In addition, in August this year, I announced a range of important new measures in the special education area. These measures include the holding of a special needs education forum, the introduction of a Disabilities (Education and Training) Bill, the accelerated development of the National Educational Psychological Service, the accelerated development of the National Council for Special Education, and the establishment of a group of senior officials in my Department to examine special education services for students with special needs at second level.
Arrangements for holding the special needs education forum are proceeding in my Department. My objective is that the forum should take place in early November 2001. The discussions at the forum will be considered in the context of the debate on the Disabilities (Education and Training) Bill which I hope to publish as soon as possible. This Bill is being treated as a priority by the Government.
A priority – it will not be published until next year.
The objective of the Bill will be to clarify and copperfasten the entitlements of people with disabilities to appropriate support services and to facilitate the delivery of these services in an effective manner. It is not possible in advance of the preparation of the Bill to quantify the likely costs involved.
The original development plan for the national educational psychological service – NEPS – envisaged the service achieving nationwide coverage by the end of 2004. The Government has approved my proposals to accelerate the development of the service to achieve nationwide coverage by the end of next year. This will mean an increase in the number of psychologists employed by the service from its current 83 to 200 by the end of 2002. The annual cost of such an expansion is estimated at £6 million.
Additional Information.The Government has also approved the accelerated establishment of the national council for special education. The intention is that the council, which will be responsible for the provision of research, expert advice and certain operational functions in the delivery of special education services, will be set up this year and will be operating on a full statutory basis as soon as feasible thereafter. The detailed arrangements for the structure and operation of the council and the associated costs are currently the subject of discussions between my Department and the Department of Finance.
A group of senior officials in my Department has commenced a review of provision for special needs students at second level. I expect this group to report soon and it is my intention to seek Government approval for any measures considered necessary to improve services in this area.
The above measures will build on the substantial progress made by the Government in the special needs area. One such development, which has had a major impact, was the Government's decision in October 1998 that all children with special needs within the primary system should have an automatic entitlement to a response to their needs. As a result of this decision the number of special resource teachers supporting children with special needs has increased from 104 to approximately 1,000 and the number of special needs assistants supporting children with special needs has grown from less than 300 to approximately 2,500.
The cost of the resource teacher service in the current year is estimated at £30 million. Funding of £23.5 million has been allocated for the special needs assistant service in the current year. The measures which I have outlined will ensure the delivery of a quality education service for all children with special needs and remove the unacceptable situation of parents of special needs children having to resort to litigation to assert their children's rights.
The Minister's reply defies logic. He says that the Disabilities (Education and Training) Bill is a priority, yet in the draft legislative programme it will not be published until next year. The promised task force report on autism has yet to be published and in terms of commitment to children with special needs FÁS-funded classroom assistants for these children have been withdrawn throughout the country. That certainly does not look like the position of the open cheque book which the Minister said he had after the Jamie Sinnott judgment.
What plans has the Department in regard to second level education for children with special needs, particularly children with autism and Asperger's syndrome? Today's Education & Living supplement of The Irish Times states that a parent is threatening legal action in pursuit of an appropriate education for her child. What about the education and training needs, the ongoing lifelong learning of persons over 18 years, arising from the Jamie Sinnott judgment? The Minister of State with responsibility for adult education is here and he may wish to comment on the apparent contradiction between the Department's commitment to lifelong learning and the withdrawal of educational services for people with a disability once they reach the age of 18.
Can something practical be done for parents of children with special needs? In the health arena we have given some tax concessions to parents who acquire orthodontic treatment privately. Can we do something tangible in terms of recognising the scarcity of speech and occupational therapists and the whole gamut of services required by children with disability and can we say to parents that given the fact that we cannot provide the service publicly we will fund their access to the service if they can procure it privately?
The Deputy should realise that I am doing that. There have been press releases about this. In relation to tax the writing off of expenditure against tax was provided for in the last budget.
Will the Minister clarify what he said?
That was only for psychological assessment.
In relation to the number—
The Minister is misleading the House.
—the Deputies seem to think we are doing nothing here.
The Minister is misleading the House.
One should consider what has been achieved in relation to the special resource teachers supporting children with special needs. These have been increased from 104 to 1,000 and the number of special needs assistants supporting children with special needs has been increased from less than 300 to 2,500. Nothing of that order has been achieved in the past. No other Government has done as much in this area. These are the facts. The Deputy may try to mislead people but that is actual fact. The Deputy also asked about the Bill. I said that the Bill is a priority and it will proceed as a priority.
A priority – it will not be published.
The Deputy should not worry about that. We will look after it as a priority.
I ask the Minister to conclude as the time for the question is concluded.
One final issue—
Please conclude as we want to have order in the House. There has been a lot of disruption since I came in.
I want to protest. The Deputy has stopped me giving answers and tried to interfere with the time. There should be penalty time for that. The Deputy need not laugh because this is serious. As far as FÁS special needs assistants are concerned, they can be provided directly from the Department. Any assistance that FÁS provided can be got from the Department.
May I ask a supplementary question?
The Chair has no discretion in the matter. There are six minutes for the question and if Deputies interrupt the six minutes will be absorbed rapidly.
The Minister should answer the question asked instead of waffling.
