I should like to thank the Chair for giving me permission to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 150 on yesterday's Order Paper. That question sought to establish the status and conditions under which the special class for speech and language impaired children, attached to St. Mary's National School, Belmont Avenue in Donnybrook operates. Unfortunately, the reply I received to that question was totally unsatisfactory. It was vague and, indeed, vacuous and for that reason I want to use the limited time I have this evening to outline the case and seek certain assurances from the Minister.
I should like to begin by giving a short history of what is involved. We are talking about a small group of children. I should like to say at the outset that one principle, and one principle only, should decide the way this problem is resolved, that is the well-being of the children and what is in their best interest. No other consideration should be allowed to stand in the way of that. The children concerned were initially diagnosed as being, in different cases, either mentally handicapped, autistic or emotionally disturbed. Arising from that assessment, they were placed in schools which cater for the needs of such children. Not surprisingly, the parents of all of those children were extremely unhappy with that diagnosis and, acting in the best interest of their children, they were obliged at their own expense to take them outside this country for what they regarded as another diagnosis and assessment. The parents could see that their children were being labelled as being either mentally handicapped, autistic or emotionally disturbed because they were being placed in institutions designed to cater for such children. They could see also, as parents can, that instead of improving their children were, in fact, regressing and that the conditions in which they were placed were not designed to meet their specific needs.
The diagnosis of these children, at the expense of their parents, was carried out by teams from the UCLA in the US and the Great Ormond Street Hospital in London and other centres. That diagnosis showed that the children suffered from language and learning impairment. This was established by highly qualified diagnostic teams. The parents were also informed that there was no suitable school in this part of the country which could cater for their needs — there are schools and units in Northern Ireland which can do so. In fact, at this stage the need for such treatment or such units did not appear to be accepted in principle by the Department of Education.
In September 1985 a group of parents came together to establish a unit, the Language and Learning Unit, in the community centre in Donnybrook, with a suitably qualified language teacher who also had signing skills. At that stage the parents, paying for all of this out of their own funds, acquired the services of a paediatric neurologist, Dr. Niall O'Donoghue, a distinguished person, and the services of a psychologist, Miss Criana Garvey, but they were unable to get the services of a speech therapist.
As early as 1983 the parents had been negotiating with the Departments of Health, of Education though without making a great deal of progress. It was in the summer of 1985 when Deputy Donal Creed was Minister of State — he was extremely sympathetic to the plight of these children and I should like to pay him public tribute for that — that the parents were offered facilities in St. Patrick's national school in Drumcondra. They were also led to understand very clearly that the teacher who would be assigned to the children would be a specified named teacher who had undergone specialist training in the US and who was the person the parents wanted and, more important, the person the children needed. Her superiors were willing to make her available for this purpose.
I was involved at that stage in those negotiations and it is my very clear and emphatic recollection that this teacher was the key part in this programme. There was a relationship of trust and confidence between her and the parents and, indeed, between her and the children. As far as the parents were concerned. indeed, as far as I was concerned, there was no point in the unit going ahead without this specified, specially trained teacher. During the course of that summer I had a fairly serious car accident and was not of circulation for a while but to my surprise when I returned to Dublin I found that the unit had not gone ahead as intended and that the parents were now obliged to make alternative arrangements, again on their own. The reason the unit did not go ahead as intended was because the Department of Education found it impossible to hire this teacher. The reasons given were that to bring her in would breach the arrangements with the teacher unions and would be a breach of the panel system. I found those arguments unconvincing then and I find them even more unconvincing now. No attempt was made to negotiate with the unions and I am quite certain that the unions would have been quite amenable if the panel system had to be breached in this case.
So, instead of the specialist teacher, another teacher was assigned, a good competent national school teacher but a teacher who did not have the specialist skills which these children require and which the unit was designed to provide. Not surprisingly, the parents refused to accept St. Patrick's unit. I should like to say at this stage that the lack of trust between the parents and the Department was greatly exacerbated by their experience in all of this. I feel strongly that the spirit of what was agreed by Minister of State, Deputy Creed, was not followed through in the way in which it was intended. Had that teacher been accepted we would not have the problem today.
The parents were then obliged to form their own unit in St. Mary's school in premises rented to them by the parish priest. During the academic year 1985-86 a unit was formed in this community centre. I should stress at this stage that the teacher, this specialised teacher, was funded by her own Order. The expenses associated with it were borne entirely by the parents, as was the cost of paying for the help of a teaching assistant. The unit operated successfully throughout the year 1985-86. Indeed, the Minister will remember visiting the unit with Minister of State, Deputy Barrett, and myself. All of us were highly impressed, indeed deeply moved, by the quality and the commitment of those involved. We were impressed with the obvious progress the children were making.
At this stage attempts were made to formally establish the unit in Donnybrook and bring it within the educational system. A number of meetings were held. Agreement was reached in principle and this year the special class — I should say that by now the term used by the Department was "class" and not "unit"; something that has important implications — was formally set up and began in September. That should have been the end of the matter and, at this stage, the parents, myself and others were deeply grateful for what had been achieved. It was not what we wanted as a final solution, but it was an enormous advance. Since then, however, serious doubts have arisen about the attitude of the Department to this class and it is these doubts, legitimate, persistent and worrying doubts, which I want to tease out in the few moments available to me.
The first and most basic doubt is the one that is most difficult to pinpoint. I am referring to the simple question of goodwill, of whether the Department of Education really want this class to continue and really want it to succeed or whether the Department are waiting at the earliest possible moment to bring it back into something more directly controlled by them. I do not say this lightly; I believe I am a fair-minded person but from what I have seen in recent months the doubt I have is a very real one and I must express it today. I should like to ask the Minister if the goodwill which the parents and I assumed was there for this class still exists. I should like him to spell this out because there are doubts. First of all, there is the question of the speech therapist. The provision of a speech therapist is the business of the Eastern Health Board but that health board can only act in the case of classes or units approved by the Department of Education. It was for that reason that I asked the Minister yesterday in my question if his Department had recommended to the Department of Health and the Eastern Health Board that every effort should be made to provide a speech therapist for this class. The reply I received from the Minister stated:
My Department have been in communication with the Department of Health and the Eastern Health Board regarding the question of speech therapy services...
I asked for more than that. I asked if the Department had stated that this was a recognised approved class and if the Minister would positively recommend that this therapist be provided. The Minister's reply falls very short of that. The information I have, and the parents have — information that has been confirmed to me at a very high source — is that a negative recommendation was made by officials of the Department of Education based upon their perception of the qualifications of the teacher and of the suitability of the school, and based upon that recommendation the Eastern Health Board did not feel any great obligation to provide a speech therapist.
If the Minister says to me this evening that his Department made a positive recommendation then I accept his word, but I want it put on the record of the House that a positive recommendation has been made to the Eastern Health Board that every effort will be made to provide a speech therapist for this approved school and an appropriately qualified teacher. There are other worrying aspects. In the course of his reply yesterday the Minister informed me that inspectors of his Department have been involved with this class since its establishment and that they will continue to monitor its operation and will review its progress at regular intervals. To date, no single inspector has called to the school. The principle of the school, St. Mary's national school informed the teacher concerned that no contact has been made, either verbally or in writing, with her from the Department of Education. In spite of assurance given to me, and to the parents, that Professor O'Donoghue and Miss Garvey would be involved in the assessment procedures — and these assurances were given in my presence — no approach has been made to them by the Department of Education. Even on small matters, like the provision of a roll book, there was inexplicable delay.
I was at a meeting some months back when this question was raised. We were told the roll books would be sent out straight away. They arrived this week, and only after I had kicked up a row on the matter.
There is then a very worrying question of the future of the class. We are informed that its activities are being monitored on a regular basis, whatever that means, I am not sure. But there is one fundamental point in all of that and that is that the essential services of a speech therapist have not been provided so far in this school, even though one-third of the year has gone. Yet, at the end of the year, the school and its pupils will be monitored as if these services had been provided.
I know that the Minister, himself, is deeply concerned with the one thing that counts in this case, and that is the well-being of the children. I know that he, and his predecessors, have given this case a great deal of time. So have I and so have Deputy Seán Barrett and other Deputies. We have done so because we are deeply concerned about what is happening. I am not imputing bad will to anybody. I am just asking from the Minister an assurance that this can be sorted out openly and clearly and with urgency.
