SELECT COMMITTEE ON JOBS, SOCIAL PROTECTION AND EDUCATION (Select Sub-Committee on Education and Skills) debate -
Thursday, 29 Mar 2012

Education (Amendment) Bill 2012: Committee Stage

Chairman

Apologies have been received from Deputies Áine Collins and Tom Fleming. I understand that Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan will substitute for Deputy Fleming and move his amendments. Is that agreed? Agreed.

This meeting has been convened for the purpose of the committee's consideration of the Education (Amendment) Bill 2012, which was referred to the select sub-committee by order of the Dáil on 1 March. I welcome the Minister of State with responsibility for research and innovation, Deputy Sherlock, and his officials on this education manner.

Since there are relatively few amendments, we will conclude our consideration of the Bill this afternoon. We will not be here all night, but we will go through the Bill until we finish it. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I remind members of the grouping of amendments for the purpose of debate. Members should have copies of the list in front of them. Are the groupings agreed? Agreed.

I have ruled amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 8 out of order. I discussed my decision with Deputy Crowe. As he is not happy, does he wish me to cite my explanation?

Deputy Seán Crowe

Yes, please.

Chairman

Amendment No. 2 in the name of Deputy Crowe has been disqualified for involving a potential charge on the Exchequer. The amendment seeks to remove the words "in schools" from the definition of educational disadvantage, which could impose additional expenditure in respect of educational disadvantage outside of schools.

Amendment No. 3 in the name of Deputy Crowe has been disallowed for involving a potential charge. The amendment seeks to retain the reference to speech therapy services in the Education Act 1998, thereby imposing a potential charge on the Department of Education and Skills. These services are provided from a different Vote.

Amendment No. 8 in Deputy Smith's name has been disallowed for involving a potential charge. The amendment seeks to remove the provision whereby certain teachers may be redeployed. Not allowing these teachers to be redeployed could incur a charge.

The Deputies may raise the issues in question with the Minister of State during the meeting, but they cannot move their amendments.

SECTION 1

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 1, 9 and 14 are related and amendments Nos. 10 to 12, inclusive are alternatives to amendment No. 9. Amendments Nos. 1, 9 to 12, inclusive, and 14 will be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, lines 24 to 26, to delete subsection (4) and substitute the following:

"(4) The Teaching Council is hereby abolished.".

The Minister and the Minister of State know my opinion on the Teaching Council. It is a quango with a capital "Q". I am reflecting the opinions of everyone I know from my 35 years of teaching. When I discussed this matter in the Dáil, I suggested that I might have been wrong and that teachers would contact me to tell me it was a wonderful invention. They have not. No later than last night, a teacher e-mailed me to ask for advice on how to deal with the Teaching Council, given that it had acted appallingly, had not addressed the teacher's needs and had been most unco-operative.

The Teaching Council was established at a cost of €5 million or €6 million, which was supposed to have been loaned by the previous Government. I have asked for that money to be recouped. The council has revenues of €5 million or €6 million per year. Approximately €2 million is spent on salaries for work that the Department of Education and Skills handles. Since the foundation of the State, the Department has examined teaching qualifications and addressed teaching matters. The council appears to have spent a great deal of money on bringing speakers from the universities of Lapland, Boston and Malta to a conference and on members' expenses in respect of attending meetings around the country. The bigger the car, the bigger the horsepower and the greater the expense, which also raises issues in the context of the environment.

Two years ago, the Teaching Council sought an increase in the remuneration of outgoing directors so as to increase their pension entitlements. What is the council doing for teachers in this country? The Secretary of State for Education in England realised that the English teaching council was a quango - it had pretty much the same terms of references as the Irish Teaching Council - and abolished it. Yet, we persist in retaining ours.

As I stated, I have yet to meet a teacher who believes the Teaching Council is good for the teaching profession. I object to this policing of teaching. It is a waste of €90. I acknowledge there is a proposal to reduce this fee, which must be paid in respect of attendance at an interview for a teaching position. The fee is payable irrespective of whether the person gets the job or is only awarded a substitute teaching post. We are doing a terrible disservice to teaching at a time when teachers are already under pressure in the job. I do not understand this. The majority of teachers are wondering what the Teaching Council will be doing in its fancy premises in Maynooth.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I welcome the Minister of State and his officials. I will speak to the amendments in my name. One of the issues discussed by this committee during the past 12 months is the need to ensure that as many substitute teaching posts as possible are given to unemployed qualified registered teachers rather than to retired personnel. There is widespread concern among the teaching profession in regard to what is proposed in this Bill. The employment of retired teachers as substitutes must be minimised and controlled. The incidence of retired personnel taking up substitute teaching positions has reduced and needs to be further reduced. I acknowledge that for geographical reasons or in respect of the teaching of a particular subject it is not always easy to source a person who meets the requirements I have outlined. I have spoken to people who have been unable to get teaching experience at an opportune time because of the taking up of positions by retired personnel. These people are anxious that this practice be, if possible, eliminated and, if not, be minimised or restricted as far as possible.

One of my amendments seeks the substitution of the word "may" with "shall". This change would require the Minister to prescribe the circumstances and conditions for the employment of a person in place of a registered teacher in circumstances where he or she was satisfied that it was necessary to do so in accordance with the terms of the Bill. The Bill as drafted merely states that the Minister "may" prescribe circumstances and conditions. There is a concern that a person could be employed in place of a registered teacher without such being governed by ministerial regulation. That would not be acceptable.

At page 8, lines 31 and 32 I am proposing the deletion of "in a teaching position" and its substitution with "in place of a registered teacher", which is the standard phrase used elsewhere in the Bill. The reference to this person being employed in a teaching position is quite anomalous. I do not believe that it is accurate. Further, the following subsection provides that the Minister may require or, in effect, prescribe qualifications for such a person. Persons in teaching positions have their qualifications prescribed under law by the Teaching Council. The Teaching Council has responsibility in that regard under the European directive and the Teaching Council Act. It would appear to me that the Minister cannot take on the responsibility of setting out qualifications for a person employed in a teaching position. The clear message is that we need to make the terms of employment, in particular in respect of substitution work, as restrictive as possible to ensure that the unemployed qualified registered person who needs teaching experience is given every opportunity to take up any teaching positions that may arise.

Deputy Seán Crowe

On amendment No. 1, based on the feedback which I am getting on the Teaching Council I believe a vote in respect of its abolition would be supported. There is huge dissatisfaction with the Teaching Council. People are aggrieved that they have to pay for it. As stated by Deputy O'Sullivan people are annoyed at the level of expenses being paid to members of the council. At a time when we are experiencing huge difficulty in terms of the allocation for education people would cite this as an area wherein there is wastage. While the amendment will obviously not be accepted by the Minister of State, the Minister and his officials need to look again at the Teaching Council in the context of whether it is providing value for money.

Amendment No. 10 seeks to insert the following after line 13, page 7: "and an up to date on-line register listing all available teachers provided by the Teaching Council". When this issue arose during previous debate the Minister said he would consider the provision of such register by the Teaching Council. The unavailability of such a register is an issue raised time and again by principals. It may be that some principals are using it as an excuse for not employing newly qualified teachers. There should be in place a register to which a principal can look when he or she needs to employ a teacher, be it on a short-term basis or in a crisis situation. My amendment No. 10 addresses this issue.

The Minister stated that he would take up with the Teaching Council the possibility of its providing such a register online. Rather than wait for the Teaching Council to make a decision in this regard, the Minister of State might consider making provision for this in the Bill, as provided for in my amendment. I am happy to agree to the Minister of State providing for this using other wording if he is not happy with the wording of my amendment.

The employment of unregistered and unqualified teachers is causing difficulty. This issue was raised during discussions with boards of management and representatives of various groups. We acknowledge that there can be difficulties in regard to sourcing suitable teachers in the primary school sector. I am aware of a particular school having difficulty sourcing a home economics teacher. I am sure this is the case in regard to other subjects. I have heard chefs are being employed, although only on a temporary basis. Concern has been expressed in regard to the qualifications of persons working with children with special needs.

As stated by Deputy Smith when speaking to his amendments, we need to address the difficulties being experienced by principals in sourcing teachers in particular sectors. There is also the issue of what the unions and teachers are saying, particularly the new teachers in the sector.

I presume the vote will go against Deputy Smith's proposal but if it does, the Government should move closer to his position. The Bill needs to be amended in that respect and although I recognise the difficulties principals will have in some sectors, I am also conscious of the new teachers. There is a failure and the system is not allowing them to move on. There is also the issue of getting experience. The easy option seems to be to fall back to the retired teacher, which should be a last resort. We must give supports to principals in that position, which is why I am suggesting my own amendment. There is a system that can be used but it should be simplified so that teachers could be available under certain sections, particularly with difficult areas that are hard to fill. It is not just a rural problem as I have been told there is a problem in major urban areas like Dublin.

Rather than voting down Deputy Smith's amendment, we should move the legislation closer to his position. I am trying to be helpful and I am also conscious of the teachers who are trying to get into the system but up to now they have not been given an opportunity or support to do so. In particular we should think of those looking to gain experience.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Sean Sherlock)

I thank the committee members for their welcome. With regard to the choreography, should I address all the grouped amendments in one fell swoop?

Chairman

I am afraid so.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

That is fine. The proposed amendments are not accepted. Amendments Nos. 1, 9 and 14 are rejected as there is no question of the abolition of the Teaching Council. Education is at the heart of this Government's ambition to build a more cohesive, equal and successful society and economy, and teachers are at the heart of education. The Teaching Council has a central role in delivering on the education reform agenda in ensuring that we have quality teachers to meet the challenges ahead. The full implementation of the Teaching Council Act, when possible, will support a cohesive framework of teacher education, professionalism and registration based on quality inputs across the whole continuum of teacher education. It is hoped to commence the few but critically important remaining sections as soon as is practicable.

The Teaching Council's work directly impacts on the attainment of the strategic high-level goals of the Department of Education and Skills. It has a central role in effecting the change necessary for implementation, for example, of the literacy and numeracy strategy, junior cycle reform and requirements for robust teacher induction processes. Its statutory responsibilities of maintaining, promoting and improving standards of teaching are key to supporting the Department's priority of improving the quality, relevance and inclusiveness of education for every learner in our schools.

As the professional standards body for the teaching profession, the Teaching Council seeks to set and uphold high professional standards for teaching and teachers. It does this in the interests of pupils and the public good but equally for the reputation and status of the profession. Quality of teaching has been determined as the single most influential factor towards achieving good educational outcomes for students. The work of the council is focused towards the maintenance and improvement of the standards of teaching.

Developments that have taken place or are under way include: developing and implementing a continuum of education which links the professional, education and training needs throughout all phases of a teacher's career; restructuring and extending the programmes of initial teacher education so newly qualified teachers are better equipped for the needs of the modern day classroom; reviewing and accrediting teacher education programmes; putting in place higher qualification and teacher education standards for teachers in the three sectors of primary, post-primary and further education; putting in place strict good character and Garda vetting requirements; publishing a code of professional conduct for teachers, which is currently being revised; preparing to put in place induction and probation procedures for newly qualified or registered teachers; preparing for fitness to teach procedures and processes; developing a continuing professional development framework for teachers; promoting research and engaging in debate on policy issues related to education; and enhancing the status of the profession and promoting teaching as a career. A new council has just been appointed on March 28 for a period of four years and I and my ministerial colleagues, Deputies Quinn and Cannon, look forward to working with the council to advance our common goals.

The effect of amendment No. 10 would be to require the Teaching Council to provide an up-to-date online register listing available teachers to the Minister and each vocational education committee. This would place an additional requirement on the Teaching Council to monitor the availability of registered teachers for employment, which is not appropriate to the remit of the Teaching Council. The council's role is fundamentally to regulate the teaching profession and therefore I will not be accepting this amendment.

There are already administrative arrangements in place to prioritise the appointment of unemployed registered teachers. Under Circular 31/2011, issued by the Department of Education and Skills in summer 2011, schools are required to keep a list of those appropriately qualified registered teachers who inform the school that they are available for substitute teaching work. Teachers who are in receipt of an occupational pension must be excluded from this list, thereby prioritising unemployed teachers over those in receipt of a pension. Where the school wishes to source a teacher for short-term substitution duties, the above list or national services such as SubSearch or TextaSub should be utilised to source a registered teacher who is not in receipt of an occupational pension. Only where an appropriately qualified registered teacher who is not retired is unavailable should the school move to employ an appropriately qualified and registered retired teacher. The above regulations seek to provide the greatest possible opportunity for unemployed and newly qualified teachers while safeguarding the policy of the Department, which is that, to the greatest extent possible, only appropriately qualified and registered teachers should be employed in our schools.

Amendment No. 11 seeks to ensure that a person could not be employed in place of a registered teacher without this being governed by ministerial regulation. As written, the provision states that where the Minister is satisfied that it is necessary to facilitate the urgent temporary or occasional staffing needs of recognised schools, he or she may from time to time prescribe regulations governing the circumstances in which an unregistered person may be employed in place of a registered teacher and any condition that might attach to that employment. Those conditions could relate to a maximum time limit for his or her employment and the purposes for which he or she is employed. The Act does not give the Minister discretion to do anything else through which an unregistered person could be employed in a teaching post.

Therefore, if the Minister does not make regulations specifying the circumstances in which an unregistered person may be employed, such a person cannot be employed. The Oireachtas is only permitting this to be done by regulation and not by any other instrument. Amendment No. 11 is therefore unnecessary and I do not propose to accept it.

With regard to amendment No. 12, the phrase of employing an unregistered person "in place of a registered teacher" is used in certain places in the new section 24, in subsections 8(a), 10(a) and 10(f). However, there are also references to teaching positions in subsections 9(a), 10(a) and 10(b). The reality is that in the very limited exceptions in which the employment of an unregistered person will be permitted, that person will be engaged in a teaching post. The wording is simply designed to reflect this. The fact that a person employed in such a post does not make him or her a teacher. The amendment proposed is therefore unnecessary and I do not propose to accept it.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan

I would like to get a copy of the Minister of State's speech so I can pass it to my teaching friends when they are wondering what the thinking is on this. Teachers have maintained high professional standards over the years. It is the Teaching Council that must look at maintaining high professional standards. I do not know if the Minister of State knows how difficult it makes it for teachers to get Garda vetting and the hoops it puts them through. In its recent election, it could not send out the right forms initially. It had to take them back and send out the forms again. That is an example of its high professional standards. The Minister will now have no control over it because it will be self-regulating when it is set up. I look forward to the day the penny drops and the Minister for Education and Skills will have to do what the Minister with responsibility for education in England did and finally abolish it as a waste of money and time.

Deputy Seán Crowe

The Minister read a script in response to this. Can he meet us half way on some of these issues on the next Stage? The elephant in the room is the difficulties we have highlighted. We have tried to amend the Bill to deal with some of the difficulties teachers, principals and the system are experiencing in this regard. There is a difficulty with people accessing registered teachers. That is what we are being told. However, we are not putting in supports in this area. The Minister of State says it would not be appropriate for the Teaching Council to go down that road but the Minister, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, is on record as saying that he would approach the Teaching Council to see if it would put a system in place. He has said he thought it was a good idea. I understand if the Minister does not wish to include it in the Bill but I am seeking a signal that we will start addressing some of the difficulties within the system in this sector.

Deputy O'Sullivan mentioned the difficulty with the vetting of teachers. When it was discussed in the Chamber I mentioned that of the 73,000 teachers in Ireland, 43,000 were still awaiting clearance from the Garda vetting unit. When the Minister, Deputy Quinn, spoke on the matter he said that while it was problematic, it would be dealt with on Committee Stage. I do not know if the Minister of State will be able to do that but it is one of the difficulties within the system. We have established that teachers must be vetted but 43,000 are still awaiting that vetting. Is that a difficulty for somebody going into the profession? If it is, it must be addressed. We will only get one chance to upgrade this Bill. When we discussed the Bill in general there was agreement across the board that it was quite technical given that it was bringing various parts of legislation together. People tend to switch off when one starts mentioning section 6, section 7, subsection (c) and so forth. It is difficult to follow.

We only have this opportunity to deal with it and I am keen that we get the legislation right. The Minister said he would address certain things on Committee Stage and one of them was vetting. It must be addressed whether it is in this section or when we are voting on the Bill. The Minister must look at the difficulties within the system and try to devise solutions, even if it is on Report Stage. Flexibility must be shown. The Parliamentary Counsel should move nearer to the sensible approach being put forward by Opposition Deputies in this regard.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

I wish to put on the record my worries about the Teaching Council. I agree with Deputy O'Sullivan. In Cork, 8,222 voting papers were sent out for ASTI members and only 461 were returned. That elected the teacher member for the Teaching Council. That is because it was a second vote. Teachers there feel there should be court proceedings because they believe it was unfair given the way the vote was constituted, the mistakes and so forth.

I am attempting to talk to the Teaching Council through this committee. If one telephones the Teaching Council, it will only answer queries from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. That is not good enough. There is also the expense of it. It owns a building but now I understand the building is not big enough and it wants a bigger building. It should be working out of the Department of Education and Skills. I have no difficulty with the Teaching Council but it should cut down on expenses. There are more than 20 on the board and approximately 37 elected members. It seems to be a large council, it is very expensive in terms of expenses and is now looking for a new building. It is only open from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Only 461 teachers voted for it out of a total of 8,222. That is not a great message being given by the Teaching Council to teachers.

Teachers are very annoyed. The council is collecting €90 every year, which some might consider a small amount, but all the council is doing is checking the qualifications of teachers from year to year. I cannot see why it is charging that amount of money. I hope the Teaching Council will hear what I and teacher representatives are saying.

Deputy Brendan Smith

Perhaps the Minister will clarify one issue. Section 6 provides for the Minister to prescribe qualifications for a person working in the place of a registered teacher. My understanding is that, under the law, a person's qualifications can only be prescribed by the Teaching Council, not the Minister. Will the Minister of State clarify that apparent anomaly?

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

With regard to the overall discussion about the Teaching Council, there must be a mid-way point between absolute abolition and retention as it is. Perhaps the committee could invite representatives of the Teaching Council to appear before it for a wide-ranging discussion on the way the council does its business. The Teaching Council is currently considering matters relating to some of the requirements to become a teacher in primary education, including some of the requirements from the leaving certificate. It might be timely, in view of this discussion, to talk to some people in the Teaching Council about its structures and its engagement with the teaching profession. It is fair to acknowledge, as Deputy O'Sullivan has correctly pointed out, that there is a level of dissatisfaction among teachers. Every agency of the State in this period of reform must reassert its credibility and the need for the agency. I will propose inviting the Teaching Council to attend a meeting when we sit as the Joint Committee on Jobs, Social Protection and Education.

Chairman

The Teaching Council is due to appear before the joint committee on 2 May in a debate with the Ombudsman for Children. We can cover those issues on that day.

Deputy John Lyons

I concur with Deputy Ó Ríordáin's comments on the Teaching Council. I am still registered as a teacher because if I decide not to, I will have to face the same format as 43,000 other people, including the Garda vetting procedure. People feel there is no value for money in the €90 they each pay every year. I welcome the meeting and many valuable points were made. People need to see value for money in the €90 they pay every year. It is not delivering for the individual teacher as a professional person. Questions need to be asked at the meeting about buildings and expenses. The Teaching Council seems to be a body that needs to be called to order. Perhaps it is still living in times when the economy was much better than it is now. When the Teaching Council appears at the meeting, I will ask its representatives to consider reducing the figure teachers must pay. A sum of €90 is a lot for anyone to pay in this day and age. Although I agree with some of the items mentioned, I will be voting with the Government. There is a lot of sense in what Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan said.

Chairman

Some questions relate to a later section but the Minister of State can respond now if he wishes.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

We must defer to the expertise of the Deputies in these areas. If one is to look at the Teaching Council, one could argue that the Teaching Council and this committee should have a qualitative analysis of the role of the Teaching Council in May. I do not want to be controversial. Some 22 of 37 members of the Teaching Council are teachers or are allied to the teaching profession through representative organisations. Rather than the State or the Department dealing with qualitative issues, the conversation could happen in the committee. With due respect to Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, I cannot comment on the outcome or the number of people who voted in elections. I take the point that the low turnout may reflect a certain annoyance. The way to deal with this, if I may be so bold as to suggest it, is for the committee to engage with the Teaching Council on its qualitative role. With 22 of the 37 members of the council allied to the teaching profession, many things can be worked out. The new board is in situ, which should give grounds for hope. It could serve as a potential new departure in dealing with the issues Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan raised.

Regarding Deputy Smith's comments, qualifications for entry to the profession are set by the Teaching Council. The Minister has the power to determine what qualifications the teacher should have for a publicly paid job, such as a special needs assistants or a resource teacher. The right to set the qualification exists under the Education Act 1998.

Regarding registration delays, a new teacher is registered within two weeks of application. We readily accept there is a resource issue with vetting. With 40,000 teachers, it will take time for the vetting process to succeed and be expedited. The point is well made and we accept the concerns raised by the Deputy. The Government is seeking to work through the issue.

Deputy Seán Crowe

The difficulty is that the Minister said he would address this issue and that he would talk to the Minister for Justice and Equality. I am not putting the Minister of State on the spot but the Minister said this in the Dáil. It would be useful to see how we will try to resolve this. It is a causing chronic backlog in the system and needs to be resolved. I accept the availability of resources makes things difficult. There is a structure whereby people dealing with children and vulnerable adults must be vetted and the State needs to respond. Many of the teachers may have left the system but I would be more comfortable with the Bill if there was a sense of how the Department would address the problem. The Minister of State can come back to the committee at some stage on this issue but it must be addressed.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

There is a dialogue to be had on this point. It is a continuing challenge. I will relate this point to the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, to see how it can be addressed.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Can we have a discussion at the joint committee before it goes to the next stage? It represents a huge difficulty for the system. We could discuss it separately from the Bill or it may need to be addressed within the Bill. I would be happy if it could be discussed prior to next stage of the Bill. The Minister could appear before the joint committee to outline the proposals. I presume there will be discussions with the Minister for Justice and Equality. Perhaps we could have a signal on what will happen.

Chairman

We will ask the Minister to correspond with us in writing before Report Stage. There will not be a chance to meet him but Deputy Crowe can raise it in discussions on Committee Stage. I doubt there will be a chance to have the Minister appear before the committee prior to Report Stage. We can arrange written correspondence with the Minister to get his views on this. Deputy Crowe will have the opportunity to raise this topic on Report Stage.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Perhaps we could speak with someone in the Department dealing with the issue. That person could fill us in on the difficulties and how it is affecting teachers who are not vetted in order to tick the boxes on the difficulties facing teachers in this situation.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

A working group has been set up on this point. It involves stakeholders, including unions, the Teaching Council and the Department. I am happy to facilitate the process or relay the message to ask the Minister to communicate directly on that issue.

Chairman

An official from the Department could appear. It is information Deputy Crowe seeks.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I want those boxes ticked with regard to how it is affecting the system, teachers and children.

Chairman

We can arrange that briefing and, if the Deputy is not satisfied, he can raise it on Report Stage.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 1 agreed to.

Sections 2 and 3 agreed to.

SECTION 4

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 have been ruled out of order.

Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 not moved.

Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."

Deputy Seán Crowe

I am disappointed amendments Nos. 2 and 3 have been ruled out of order. It is important the definition would not be as narrow as simply being in school. There might be a cost factor but the definition of educational disadvantage should include colleges. There are people in the education system dealing with disadvantage and the children they deal with are not in the school structure. The Bill should recognise that. This is important because if a child or parent might want to take a case against the Minister or Department on the education of that child the fact education took place outside the school structure might impact on them further down the road.

The Minister is stepping back from children who have special needs. The HSE has a responsibility for speech therapy. I am worried that when the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act was being debated in committee, everyone highlighted that it would only work if the resources were put in place. We all know the problems parents are having in securing speech therapy and other resources for children with special needs. It is unfortunate there will be no discussion of this. I wanted to delete the whole section because I felt it was the best way to deal with the Minister's proposals on changes. I will return to this on Report Stage but to use the flag of convenience of cost implications is wrong. The Department is responsible for the full implementation of the EPSEN Act and to respond to the needs of those children with special needs. Writing out its role in this section is a retrograde step and an attack on the children looking for those resources and their families. The State should provide adequate resources to ensure children with special educational needs have an education appropriate to those needs. That is what I was trying to achieve here.

Chairman

It is not the Minister or the Department's problem, it is a constitutional issue and is also covered by Standing Orders dealing with amendments. It is an issue that causes problems but I always point out that it is not the Minister who asks that amendments not be taken. The Minister of State can deal with them if he wants but they cannot be tabled at all.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

It is a technical amendment, not a qualitative judgment on educational disadvantage. I do not accept amendment No. 2. The definition of educational disadvantage as currently laid down in statute is not being amended but section 2 of the 1998 Act is amended to restore the definition of educational disadvantage. The rationale for section 4(a) of the Bill is to safeguard the definition of educational disadvantage as currently laid down in statute. The provision in the Bill is not to alter the definition of educational disadvantage but to include a technical amendment which, due to the repeal of section 32 of the Education Act 1998, requires the definition to be reinstated in the 1998 Act.

Deputy Seán Crowe

In the past there would have been a signal that an amendment was not being accepted. The only signal we got was five minutes before the meeting. If we want the system to be more inclusive it would be helpful if we got prior notification that an amendment was not being accepted.

Chairman

It is an issue with the Bills Office. We only get word ourselves at the end. The Deputy raised the issue and can consider rewording it for Report Stage. I have already been generous with time so I will not have a full discussion of this. We cannot keep questioning the Standing Order. Everyone knows about it and while we might not like it, it still applies that an Opposition Member cannot introduce an amendment that would bring a charge on the State.

Deputy Seán Crowe

We do not like it but it would be useful for other legislation that will come before the committee if we could get some sort of prior notice. It helps the work of the committee, particularly Opposition Deputies.

Chairman

As soon as we get notice, we give it to Deputies. In some cases it comes a day or two early but that did not happen today. Regardless the Deputy still would not be happy; it does not matter when he was told. The issue would not change.

Question put and agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Deputy Sean Sherlock

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 4, before section 5, to insert the following new section:

5.—Section 7 of the Act of 1998 is amended—

(a) by substituting the following paragraph for paragraph (a) of subsection (4):

"(a) shall have regard to—

(i) the resources available,

(ii) the need to secure, as far as possible, that the education

system provides—

(I) best practice in teaching methods,

(II) value for money, and

(III) quality outcomes for students, by setting standards for those engaged in the provision of education, including the determination both of procedures and such other matters as are provided for by this Act,

(iii) the provision for education and training made by other agencies with funds provided by the Oireachtas,

(iv) the need to reflect the diversity of educational services provided in the State, and

(v) the practices and traditions relating to the organisation of schools or groups of schools existing at the commencement of this Part and the right of schools to manage their own affairs in accordance with this Act and any charters, deeds, articles of management or other such instruments relating to their establishment or operation, and",

and

(b) by repealing subsections (5) and (6) (inserted by section 40 of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004).”.

This is largely technical. In the course of the legislative process, the Office of the Attorney General raised a question as to what guidance the Minister has when making procedures for the appointment, suspension and dismissal of school staff under section 24 of the Education Act. There was a concern the sorts of considerations the Minister should have regard to in determining these and other procedures were not spelled out adequately in the Education Act. The office has advised there is a need to set out the principles and policies the Minister must take into account in determining procedures such as these under the Act. Amendment No. 4 will do this. Section 7 of the Education Act 1998 provides for the functions of the Minister for Education and Skills, and subsection (4) provides for the considerations the Minister must have regard to in carrying out his functions. The amendment being proposed adds a provision to that subsection requiring that in determining procedures, the Minister will have regard to best practice in teaching methods, value for money and quality outcomes for students.

Deputy Brendan Smith

Could the Minister of State clarify the meaning of section 5(4)(a)(ii)(III), which states, “by setting standards for those engaged in the provision of education, including the determination both of procedures and such other matters as are provided for by this Act,”?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

It is a checks and balances measure designed to ensure the Minister does not have a completely free hand in decisions.

Deputy Brendan Smith

The idea of "determination" in most people's minds would weigh it in favour of the Minister and Department. Perhaps this could be clarified before Report Stage.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Is the Minister proposing to consult or instruct the managerial bodies?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

With respect, is the Deputy's question related to this amendment or is she speaking in the wider context?

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

In the context of section 7(4)(a) of the 1998 Act.

Chairman

We are discussing ministerial amendment No. 4.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

I understand that in amendment No. 4, by inserting the new section, section 7 of the Education Act 1998 is being amended. Is it consultation?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

For the purposes of the argument that I anticipate the Deputy will put forward on the issue of consultation, I think it may arise later in the debate.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 5 deleted.

SECTION 6

Deputy Sean Sherlock

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 5, to delete lines 4 to 10 and substitute the following:

"(c) be responsible, together with the board, parents of students and the teachers, for the creation in the school of an environment which is supportive of learning among the students and which promotes the professional development of the teachers,”.

The purpose of amendment No. 5 is to remove a comma from after the word "school" in the third line and to insert it after the word "responsible" in the first line. This is to improve the readability of the provision and there is no substantive change to the provision. This is a straightforward amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 6, 7 and 13 are related and may be discussed together.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 6, to delete lines 5 to 11 and substitute the following:

"(2) The numbers and qualifications of the teachers and other staff of a recognised school, who are to be remunerated out of monies provided by the Oireachtas, shall be determined from time to time by the Minister after consultation with and with the agreement of bodies representative of patrons, recognised school management organisations and any recognised trade union or staff association representing teachers, or other staff as appropriate and with the concurrence of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform."

People feel strongly that the Department must engage in consultation with the stakeholders on the provisions of this section. Consultation with the stakeholders is not the same as a circular issuing on consultation from the Department.

Deputy Brendan Smith

When the representatives of the patron bodies appeared before the committee, they outlined the practical changes they would like to see incorporated in the Bill.

I have a number of brief questions. The Croke Park agreement is finite and refers to a specific time period. It would seem the Minister of State is incorporating the redeployment element of the Croke Park agreement through a legislative measure. I do not know whether there is a requirement to put redeployment processes and regulations on a legislative basis. My understanding from speaking to individual teachers and patron bodies is that the redeployment process has worked well. There is one difference in the application of the redeployment process in second level schools from primary schools. There is no review at primary level while there is provision for a review at second level. Will the Minister of State consider this anomaly? The patron bodies were very anxious to stress to members that they were not looking for a veto and that the process of engaging with the Department and the relevant stakeholders to reach agreement had worked well.

I think this Bill has the effect of centralising the employment provisions. I do not know whether the Department should occupy centre stage in the employment of teachers. The partnership process has worked and it should be continued, built upon and solidified, if necessary. A document on the new provisions was put up on a website. Will the relevant patron bodies be consulted prior to the passage of the Bill or after the implementation of the legislation?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

We are dealing with amendments Nos. 6, 7 and 13 together. The effect of the amendments will be to introduce a general requirement that the Minister must agree with the education partners any change in the numbers, qualifications, and terms and conditions of employment of teachers and other school staff. It also continues the requirement to reach agreement with all parties on appointment, suspension and dismissal procedures. These matters were discussed at length in the Seanad.

Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 introduce a requirement to consult and agree numbers, qualifications and terms and conditions of employment generally of school staff. This would set aside the existing provision, whereby the Minister for Education and Skills and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform determine the terms and conditions of employment. I am not accepting these amendments as they would diminish the existing powers in legislation given to the Ministers, and by extension the Government, regarding numbers, qualifications and terms and conditions of teachers and other staff remunerated from public funds.

In respect of amendment No. 13, the existing legal provision concerns three aspects of the terms and conditions of teachers and other staff, namely, appointment, suspension and dismissal. The provision is limited to the procedures that apply or are to be carried out in respect of the three aspects. The new provision ensures legal clarity in carrying out recruitment, suspension or dismissal as the procedures that apply in future will not be subject to a potential veto by one party withholding agreement. I am not accepting amendment No. 13 because it would maintain such a veto. I understand the concerns about substituting the word "consultation" for "agreement". These fears can be allayed outside the statutory provisions by using the existing well developed partnership structures. During the recent passage of the Bill through the Seanad my colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruarí Quinn, set out the context for and the background to the provisions of the Bill. There was clear affirmation of ongoing partnership within the school system. He reminded the other House "that "agreement" does not mean unanimity or veto and "consultation" does not mean diktat or imposition." He assured Senators that "following enactment of this Bill, my officials will engage in discussions with the education partners on having a general consensus around the extent and quality of this consultation and on how agreements are reached." He has also given a commitment to "utilising established procedures, such as the Teachers Conciliation Council, as a vehicle for these discussions." He has clarified that the Department of Education and Skills "will also engage directly with patron bodies which are not members of the council."

Deputy Seán Crowe

The preamble to the Education Act 1998 refers specifically to the shared objective of education being provided in a spirit of partnership between the various stakeholders. I suggest the Minister is writing this out of the legislation. He spoke about a "belt and braces" consultation agreement, but there is no evidence that this section of the legislation will require consultation. The Minister is moving away from what has worked in the past in this regard. That is a negative aspect of the proposal. There is a suggestion the European Court of Human Rights, the High Court and the Supreme Court have made pronouncements on the existence of constitutional human rights to property and livelihood. Some of the groups spoke about their concern that the Minister's absolute power to determine and vary fundamental conditions of employment could breach these rights and be impugned by the court in Strasbourg. They are worried about the amount of power being shifted to the Minister in this way. There is a concern that this could lead to court cases, although I do not pretend to know the detail of this.

Concern has been expressed about legal aspects of the powers the Minister is seeking in these sections. He has suggested they will be used in cases of emergency only. The fear is that the attributes of an employer that the Department of Education and Skills does not have will be transferred to it. Concern has been expressed about the effect this could have on boards. I am restating the worries about this section expressed by many of the groups which were here. People feel strongly that we are moving away from the system in place, even though it works. Many of the stakeholders have pointed out that consultation has taken place and agreement has been reached on many of these issues. They are worried about the changes that might happen under a future Minister, if not this one, if these measures are set in stone.

Deputy Brendan Smith

There is a concern that the contracts of employment of thousands of people are being changed. That is one of the issues that have been raised.

Chairman

Does the Minister of State wish to add anything?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

I do not.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Perhaps the Minister of State might help me with something on which I am not quite clear. Who will be dismissing teachers? Will it be the Minister, the Teaching Council or the inspectorate?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

The board of the school will remain as the employer.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Who will inform the board? Will it be the principal to whom we have given so many duties? I cannot get it into my head that it is not clear. Who will be responsible?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

Is the Deputy suggesting there will be a change in the status quo as a result of this Bill?

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

I am suggesting I do not know, even though I am a former school principal. I am suggesting thousands of other staff and school principals do not know who will be in charge of dismissing teachers. Will the principal be responsible? We have just given extra duties to principals in staffing matters. We have given the Teaching Council extra functions. I am asking a simple question. Who will be responsible for the dismissal of teachers? The Minister is now-----

Deputy Sean Sherlock

As a former principal, the Deputy will be aware that disciplinary procedures have been in place since 2009. That should answer her question.

Chairman

Nothing is changing here today.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Four people-----

Chairman

The Minister of State is clarifying the position.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Okay.

Chairman

The Minister of State is clarifying that the Bill will not change these procedures.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

No, it will not.

Chairman

That probably answers the question. If further clarification is needed by existing principals-----

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

It is.

Chairman

-----that is another day's work. This Bill will not change the procedures.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor

Clarification is needed in advance of the next Stage. The Minister should point out who will be responsible at every step.

Chairman

It is important to clarify that the Bill will not change the procedures about which the Deputy is concerned. If people are not aware of them, that is another argument, with which we can deal.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 6, line 17, after "Minister," to insert the following:

"after consultation with and with the agreement of bodies representative of patrons, recognised school management organisations and any recognised trade union or staff association representing teachers, or other staff as appropriate and".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Chairman

Amendment No. 8 is out of order and cannot be moved.

Amendments Nos. 8 and 9 not moved.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I move amendment No. 10:

In page 7, line 13, after "and" to insert the following:

"an up-to-date online register listing of available teachers provided by the Teaching Council, and".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 7, line 38, to delete "may" and substitute "shall".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 8, lines 31 and 32, to delete "in a teaching position" and substitute "in place of a registered teacher".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 9, line 3, after "with" to insert "and with the agreement of".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Amendment No. 14 not moved.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 9, between lines 40 and 41, to insert the following:

"(15) The Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007 shall not apply to the dismissal of a person employed in place of a teacher in a school where the dismissal follows directly from the cessation of the remuneration of that person out of monies provided by the Oireachtas.".

The concern that underpins the amendment relates to special schools or second-chance education projects such as Youthreach, where staff members might not be registered teachers - they could be craft workers, or have the relevant expertise - but are nevertheless doing an excellent job. We need clarification in relation to their long-term contracts. We need to make sure they are okay from the point of view of their future employment status.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

This matter was raised in the Seanad. The provisions of the Bill, combined with section 30 of the Teaching Council Act 2001, prohibit the payment of a person employed as a teacher in a school unless he or she is a registered teacher. The only exception is where, due to urgent, temporary or occasional staffing needs, it is necessary to employ an unregistered person. Therefore, the pay of a teacher is stopped if his or her registration lapses.

The Bill does not provide for a direction to dismiss a teacher who is not registered. Protection for schools against an unfair dismissals claim along the lines being advocated by this amendment would be arbitrary and disproportionate. It would mean that a person whose registration lapses for even one day could be dismissed summarily and without recourse to the Employment Appeals Tribunal. The circumstances which may arise may be as varied as a teacher allowing his or her registration to lapse for a small number of days due to a circumstance where an individual does nothing about getting registered. Where a person is unregistered for a small number of days but then becomes re-registered, he or she should be able to return to his or her job. Where there is a longer period during which the unregistered person is prevented from being paid by the State, he or she may wish to avail of unpaid leave, such as a career break, to gain the necessary qualifications to become registered with the Teaching Council. Under these circumstances, no termination of the employment of the unregistered person takes place. He or she simply cannot be paid from Oireachtas funds while he or she remains unregistered. If a teacher allows his or her registration to lapse and absents himself or herself from school without approval, established grievance and disciplinary procedures may be followed to resolve the matter. Even in this scenario a person should still expect to have the normal law protections, including access to the Employment Appeals Tribunal for an unfair dismissals claim.

Interposing the Minister in the employment contract by essentially permitting the immediate dismissal with impunity of a teacher who has allowed his or her registration to lapse runs counter to the concept of equal treatment and fair procedures. A one-size-fits-all approach would be unjust. Giving employers a licence to dismiss teachers without scrutiny must constitute an indiscriminate attack on their employment rights. For these reasons, I do not propose to accept the amendment.

Deputy Brendan Smith

Will the Minister of State clarify prior to Report Stage the employment status, once the legislation has been enacted, of people who work in training centres, Youthreach centres or special schools who have been in a teaching position for many years but may not be in a position to register with the Teaching Council? He will be aware from his work of the types of well-qualified, hard-working and diligent people who are in such employment positions. Perhaps the Department is making provision to ring-fence existing employees from the point of view of protection. I would like clarification on this matter before Report Stage, if possible.

Deputy Seán Crowe

A concern arises in the case of the Department deciding to decline further remuneration of an unregistered teacher as the school in question may not have sufficient funds available for remuneration purposes. In such a scenario, will the school or Department be sued? This is the concern about the section. Representatives of employers, including the body representing school principals, have expressed concern about the impact of the legislation on teachers in such circumstances. People are concerned about the potential for court cases.

I accept the Minister of State's point on the implications of removing access to unfair dismissals legislation. While I may be reading too much into the Bill, I could envisage a scenario arising in which the Department decides it will no longer pay a teacher on the basis that he or she is unregistered but the school still has a contract with the teacher. This could create difficulties. I presume the Parliamentary Counsel has examined this issue. I ask that legal experts consider the potential scenarios arising from the legislation because some of the organisations which addressed meetings of the joint committee on the issue expressed concern about its legal implications.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

To respond first to Deputy Smith's point on further education, section 30 only applies to teachers in recognised schools and does not apply to teachers in further education settings that are not, if one will, recognised schools. I hope that addresses his point.

On Deputy Crowe's point, while we can examine some of the scenarios that could arise, to be honest there is no ambiguity about the manner in which we have responded to the amendment tabled by Deputy Smith. As I stated, interposing the Minister in the employment contract by essentially permitting the immediate dismissal with impunity of a teacher who has let his or her registration lapse would run counter to the concept of equal treatment. The Government is cognisant of the rights of employees and I hope Deputy Crowe and his party will give due regard to this issue, as they are doing to a certain extent. While I do not see how the scenario the Deputy described could arise, if he foresees certain other scenarios arising, perhaps he will notify them to the Department and we will respond accordingly.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I have expressed some of the worries voiced by a number of the groups which appeared before the joint committee. One scenario they raised was where the Department decides it will not remunerate an unregistered teacher and the teacher in question's school is caught in a bind, as it were, because it has a contract with the teacher. What would be the next step given that the decision has been taken by the Department rather than the school? I may not be explaining the issue very well but that is the sense I had from the meeting.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

While I do not wish to open a discussion on this matter, if someone is dismissed, he or she is potentially dismissed with good reason, having gone through all the machinery or architecture of the State. I am still a little unclear as to what exactly the Deputy has in mind in this regard. I understand his position in terms of ensuring the legislation is watertight, and the bona fides of his point are secure in that sense. If there are specific scenarios-----

Chairman

It is obvious that Deputy Crowe has a particular scenario in mind.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I am articulating the view expressed at a meeting of the joint committee, although I may not be doing so very well. I will revert to the Minister of State on the matter.

Chairman

I may examine the record of the meeting. If the Deputy wishes to correspond with departmental officials before Report Stage about the scenario he has in mind, I presume the Department will be pleased to clarify the matter on Report Stage. The concern will need to be notified to officials.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 6, as amended, agreed to.

Section 7 agreed to.

SECTION 8

Question proposed: "That section 8 stand part of the Bill."

Deputy Brendan Smith

The Minister gave a firm commitment that he would commence section 30 of the Teaching Council (Amendment) Act without any amendment to other legislation. It is for that reason I oppose the section.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

Section 8 provides for a minor change to section 30 of the Teaching Council Act 2001 to cross-reference the amendment of section 24 of the Education Act 1998 provided for in section 6. Section 30 of the 2001 Act has not yet been commenced. I plan to proceed with section 8 as outlined earlier. There is no question of abolition of the Teaching Council and, therefore, this section should stand.

Chairman

Does Deputy Smith wish to comment further?

Deputy Brendan Smith

No. I just wished to raise it because of the commitment given to commence section 30 without any amendment.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 9 to 11, inclusive, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments.