asked the Minister for Education why the members of the Tipperary Branch of the Association of Secondary Teachers of Ireland have not been paid for correcting certificate examination papers in respect of examinations in June last.
18.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Correction of Examination Papers.
17.
asked the Minister for Education if he has made arrangements to pay the personnel engaged by his Department to correct the 1981 leaving certificate examination papers.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 17 and 18 together.
I have no information in relation to which teachers who were engaged as examiners at the intermediate and leaving certificate examinations in 1981 are members of the Tipperary Branch of the Association of Secondary Teachers. All examiners were paid by 9 December 1981.
Would the Minister not agree that these teachers who became examiners were unfairly treated in quite an unprecedented fashion? They were kept waiting for almost four months for payment for the duties they carried out so carefully and so diligently. Would he not agree that this habit has not been confined to South Tipperary, or Tipperary in general, and that it is a national disease which has affected teachers all over the country?
I agree that it was most unfortunate that there should have been such a delay in the payment of the examiners this year. I would hardly go so far as to describe it as a national disease. It is fair to point out that the delay was an inevitable consequence of the industrial dispute which occurred earlier in the summer involving some clerical officers and staff officers attached to the examination branch in Athlone. That dispute lasted for five weeks and, as a result, the entire procedure of the marking of the examination papers was delayed very much.
My Department and I were most anxious that the normal length of time should be given for the marking of the papers so that there could not in any way be any reflection on the standard of marking for the public examinations this year. As a result of that delay, which in the case of the intermediate certificate spilled over into the commencement of the academic year, the payment of the examiners was delayed to a considerable extent. I regret that very much, but I am afraid it was due to circumstances caused by the industrial dispute during the summer.
Does the Minister not agree it is unfair that the teachers should be penalised for the sins of others who were on strike? Would he give an assurance that this will never happen again? I have no doubt that he will not get any examiners from the teaching profession next year unless such a guarantee is given.
I want to give the House an assurance that anybody, from whatever quarter, who endeavours to interfere with the smooth operation of public examinations will not be in my favour.
Will not be in what?
Deputy Leyden.
Before Deputy Leyden asks his supplementary question, on a point of order, the Minister dropped his voice on the last three words and I could not hear him. Would he repeat them, please?
I was giving Deputy McCarthy an assurance that any individual or groups who would endeavour in any way to place the public examinations in jeopardy and to interfere with the future career prospects of young people could not expect to receive my support.
Would the Minister agree with me that payment was prompted as a result of Deputy McCarthy's and my question to the Minister, that only for our question being put to the House the payments would not have been made until after Christmas? Would the Minister accept a three months' delay in his salary? Would he think it acceptable to allow people to be kept waiting for three or four months for payment? It is a disgrace the way in which these people have been treated by the Minister.
Would the Minister agree that there has been a phasing of payments to certain examiners in relation to these certificate examinations, that some teachers were paid at a particular time and others were not? Further, would he say why this phasing of payments occurred in respect of examinations in particular subjects?
I might refer first to Deputy Leyden's question — unfortunately from his point of view and from that of Deputy McCarthy also I would have to point out to the House that the payments to the examiners were not in any way prompted by the fact that the Deputies——
Teachers in South Tipperary know who got them paid.
Deputy McCarthy is merely claiming South Tipperary. Deputy Leyden is claiming all of Ireland.
I am a national TD.
Is the Deputy old enough to stand for the Presidency yet?
The changed image, the little arrogance is coming through.
He is over four-and-a-half years of age anyhow.
The Minister should talk to his advisers again.
He might not be very far over the age.
In relation to the question posed by Deputy McCarthy, a number of staff were immediately assigned to payments once the strike had ended?
Not once the question had been put down?
It was decided that the staff should first deal with the claims from superintendents of examinations because that work had been done in June. Those payments were issued on 9 October last. It was not possible to put a greater team on payments because the Department had to concentrate on getting scripts out to examiners after the strike had ended and then afterwards on the processing of the results of the intermediate, leaving and day vocational group certificate examinations. When those results were issued extra staff were transferred on to the matter of processing the payments for the examiners. A certain number of staff also had to be assigned to deal with appeal applications in relation to results of the leaving certificate, so that those appeals could be processed and the results of the re-checks issued in that case without any undue delay. Because of time scales the question of making advance preparations for next year's examinations also arose.
I want to give the House an assurance that every effort was made to see that the payments were issued at the earliest possible opportunity. I should like to avail of this opportunity to express my regret at the fact that these payments to examiners, not salary payments — it would be wrong to describe them as such — payments to examiners for work they had undertaken——
Payments for work done, for services rendered. The Minister should not be so patronising.
Worth £150,000 less after the budget than before.
Such behaviour does not do the Minister justice. I presume the Minister believes in paying people for services rendered.
I would hesitate to endeavour to be patronising to Deputy Gene Fitzgerald.