Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 15 Mar 1990

Vol. 397 No. 2

Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Bill, 1989: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

I should emphasise that what is proposed is an enabling measure simplifying the procedure for promulgating superannuation schemes for teachers. I can assure the House that there will be no change in the statutory functions of the Minister for Finance, in that all schemes made under the Act as amended will continue to require the consent of that Minister.

I am also satisfied that there will be no diminution in control by the Oireachtas since the revised procedures provide that any scheme made under the Act must be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas.

The purpose of this Bill is to amend the provisions of the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, which provide that before they can come into statutory effect, all superannuation schemes for national and secondary teachers made under that Act must be confirmed by resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas. It provides that schemes will now be laid before each House and have immediate statutory effect, unless within 21 days on which either House has sat, a resolution annulling a scheme is passed, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder.

The Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, empowers the Minister for Education, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, to prepare superannuation schemes, in relation to any particular class or classes of teachers.

The classes of teachers in respect of which superannuation schemes have been prepared and effected under the Act are national teachers and secondary teachers, including teachers in comprehensive schools. I should mention for the information of the House that vocational teachers are not superannuable under this Act. Their superannuation terms are governed by schemes made under the Local Government (Superannuation) Act, 1980, for which my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, has responsibility.

As matters stand at present under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, each and every superannuation scheme made under that Act, including schemes which amend or revoke previous schemes, must be laid before the Oireachtas and be confirmed by resolution of each House.

By their nature superannuation schemes are very complex in form. Since 1929, when the principal scheme for secondary teachers was drawn up, a total of 32 schemes have been made and effected under the Act. These schemes comprise a principal scheme and 18 amending schemes covering the superannuation provisions of secondary teachers. The national school teachers' superannuation provisions are contained in a principal scheme, made in 1934, and 12 amending schemes. Deputies will appreciate that given the large number of schemes involved, any amendment to the teachers' superannuation code is a technically complex matter.

The last statutory amendments to the national and secondary teachers' superannuation schemes were made in 1972. Since then, the superannuation benefits of teachers have been improved in line with improvements which have taken place in the public service generally. These have been implemented by my Department on an administrative basis, in advance of the making of the necessary statutory schemes. I can assure the House that all teachers who have retired have been given the benefit of these improvements as they were implemented.

Work is currently proceeding in my Department on the drafting of the necessary schemes which will have the effect of updating on a statutory basis the superannuation terms of both national and secondary teachers. Six schemes in all are involved covering the superannuation entitlements of teachers themselves, their spouses and their children.

The procedures now proposed will simplify the making of these schemes and any future schemes which might be made. The Bill will enable the Minister of the day speedily to give statutory effect to changes in the teachers' superannuation code. These simplified procedures are in line with those obtaining for public servants generally. For example, until 1976 the superannuation arrangements for civil servants were contained in various Acts dating from 1834; amendments to the civil service superannuation code were made by amending legislation. Then in 1976, the statutory basis for the code was changed to enable the Minister for Finance to make schemes, amending the superannuation terms of civil servants, and having these schemes confirmed by the Oireachtas in the simplified manner now proposed for teachers. Similar statutory provisions were introduced for local authority employees — including vocational teachers — under the Local Government (Superannuation) Act, 1980.

In the case of the Defence Forces, the requirement of a positive resolution by both Houses of the Oireachtas to confirm their pension schemes was changed in 1975. In the wider public sector, semi-State bodies for example, the revised procedures are now standard.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. J. Bruton

On the question of superannuation generally, I have received representations from trade unions representing teachers who are particularly anxious that improved pension provisions would be introduced by way of amendment to the existing superannuation provisions to allow for early retirement by teachers obtaining a pension that would be pro rata to the contributions they made. This is a very useful and intelligent recommendation from the teaching unions in that such retirements would allow for the recruitment of young teachers. As we know well, there is a considerable problem of unemployment among well trained young Irish teachers who have recently been educated either in the national school training colleges or in universities, and these young teachers are having to work overseas in education and frequently outside education thereby not putting their talents, their education in the skills involved in teaching to good use here or elsewhere. That is a great waste. One way of creating opportunities for employment for such young teachers would be early retirement.

There is also a worry expressed by many in the teaching profession that because of the low level of recruitment of new young teachers into the profession in the last while, the age profile of the profession is rising. While it is extremely important in any school to have teachers with lengthy experience in education it is desirable also to have young teachers, to have a mix in the staff room and in the classroom. Both complement one another. The danger at the moment is that because of the restrictions on recruitment that have been introduced, for financial reasons that we all understand, and the worsening that has taken place in the pupil-teacher ratio, we see very few opportunities opening up for young teachers. The result is that it is possibly less easy for the Minister, or any Minister, to introduce innovations in that younger teachers recently out of training college are more likely to be receptive to innovations than people who have reached the stage of their lives where changes are not what they welcome. Unless we have an injection of new blood into the teaching profession to carry out the educational reforms which are necessary if this country is to keep pace with its competitors in the educational world of 1992, the world of free mobility of people and capital throughout Europe, these reforms will be more difficult to make than they ought to be.

For that reason I am hopeful that the Minister will be able to give an indication that she will improve the prospects for early retirement to allow more young teachers to be recruited. I acknowledge that there is another way of doing this, and from the point of view of all concerned, it would be a better way, namely, to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio. I am sure everybody in this House would ask the Minister to do this as soon as she can and would seek to influence the Government to have that done. I am anxious that this be done at primary school level where I am aware of classes of 40 or more being taught by one teacher in what is supposed to be a child centred curriculum. In addition there is a reasonable case to be made for the introduction of superannuation provisions to make early retirement more attractive.

Another matter in the field of superannuation that has been brought to my attention is job sharing in teaching. I have received representations from a number of teachers who are anxious to share their jobs. These would probably be married people with family responsibilities who wish to spend more time exercising those responsibilities and would be able to do so if they could share their job with another teacher in a similar situation. I understand the idea is that if teachers were working half time they would qualify for half the pension entitlement and their contributions would be adjusted pro rata. However, at the moment, I understand that within the superannuation scheme such arrangements are not possible. It would appear on the face of it at least not to involve any additional expenditure to introduce such an improvement. I hope the Minister will be able to deal with that in her reply. It is related to the subject matter of this Bill which is superannuation.

In the Teachers Superannuation Act, 1928, the word "teacher" includes a person who was a secondary teacher on 1 January 1927 and ceased to be such a teacher after that date before the passing of the Act. It also includes a person who was formerly a teacher and while he was a teacher was appointed to a pensionable post in the Civil Service, etc. The interesting thing is that that is not a definition of "teacher" at all. It tells you that "teacher" includes certain main categories but it does not tell you all of those who are composed in the definition of "teacher". I would like to ask a few questions about this because we should have a definition of "teacher" for the purpose of the Bill which we do not have. For instance, does this include staff who may be recruited as teachers' aides in special schools? Are they covered by superannuation? It appears they are working in the classroom, they are not qualified teachers in the conventional sense but it has been decided and is well established practice that teachers' aides are allowed to and do play a very useful role in special education.

If we move, as I think we will and as it is the policy of the Department of Education to move, towards integration of the handicapped into the ordinary classroom, for it to be possible for the class teacher to cope with the additional responsibility of having a child who has a learning disability in the ordinary class, a teacher's aid, as well as the teacher, may have to be appointed in the conventional classroom. I visited a primary school in Harrow, London, in the last few months to look at the way they coped with the integration of a handicapped child in the primary school. There was a class of around 25 pupils of whom one had a handicap, so in addition to the class teacher there was a special teachers' aide whose responsibility it was to look after the handicapped child but to join in any other activities as well to give some additional help to the teacher. If we are going to proceed with the integration of the handicapped in the ordinary class system, we are going to see much more of that sort of thing in this country.

Are such people covered by superannuation or will they need a separate superannuation scheme? If they are not covered would it not be sensible to use this legislation to insert a definition of "teacher" which would include such people, giving them the right to be covered by a superannuation scheme made under the legislation? It might not be the same superannuation scheme because a variety of schemes are made under this, not all being the same, but at least it would enable them to be covered for superannuation if they are not already covered for it. I ask the Minister to refer to that possibility and the possibility of having a definition of "teacher" which encompasses all those who work in the classroom whether in special schools or otherwise.

Another question I would like to raise concerns the transferability of pension entitlements. The principal Act makes it clear from the quotation I have already given that it is possible to transfer pension entitlements from the teaching profession into the Civil Service and that is obviously very necessary from the point of view of the recruitment of inspectors from the teaching body. However, there is no reference in the principal Act to transferability into other parts of the State sector. As the Minister is aware, an extensive scheme of transferability of pensions rights for semi-State bodies has been evolved and to the best of my knowledge most of the State companies have become members of this transfer scheme. Somebody moving from the ESB to Bord na Móna take their pension rights with them. I think there are one or two exceptions to this rule. One or two bodies have not for some reason subscribed to the scheme. Do the schemes made under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928, involve transferability to these schemes in the scheme of transfer I have referred to in the wider public service? Is it possible for teachers to move to a private company have a pension scheme and to transfer their pension rights into the private scheme? Can their rights be converted from being rights under a public service scheme into pension rights approved for tax purposes by the Revenue Commissioners in the private sector?

It is not correct to say that because these are private sector schemes the Minister has nothing to do with them. To qualify for tax relief for pension contributions they have to be approved by the Revenue Commissioners, which means the Minister for Finance has control over what private schemes are recognised and what are not. If the Minister wished to insert transferability as between the private sector scheme and this scheme, her colleague, the Minister for Finance, has the power to do that. It is desirable that teachers be able to carry their pension rights into private employment. For example, some teachers, especially commerce teachers, who wish to go out into business to work in a company should be encouraged to do that by pension transferability. Equally that should apply in the opposite direction, and people who have the relevant qualifications who have been working in pensionable private employment should be encouraged to transfer into teaching. One way of allowing that to happen would be through a scheme of transferability. Does such apply here?

The Minister's speech, a very truthful speech, reveals quite an appalling situation in terms of the accountability of the Department of Education to the Oireachtas. The Minister, to her credit, made no effort whatever to gloss over this or to conceal it, and I compliment her for that. Under the law, as it stands, a superannuation scheme may not be revoked or amended other than by means of an order approved by the Dáil. However, the Minister said that the superannuation scheme for teachers had been extensively revoked and amended during the seventies and eighties and that it had never come before the Dáil. She admitted — again to her credit — that her Department, even for their own purposes, have not drafted the alternative amendments, let alone introduced them in the Dáil. The Department have been operating a new system of superannuation without statutory authority.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Deputy was in Government for part of that time.

Mr. J. Bruton

I was about to say that, although I was not involved with this matter at any stage. I was about to say that there were Coalition Governments of different compositions and a single party Government of the Minister's party in office throughout this period so I am not making a party point. It is highly unsatisfactory that the law should be ignored by a Government Department and that is what happened because these superannuation changes were made by administrative actions in defiance of the law of the land.

I am not saying that the improvements in superannuation were not eminently desirable and I am not criticising the changes. However, I am criticising the fact that the Department of Education, under several Ministers, broke the law in introducing amendments to the superannuation scheme without complying with the clear provisions of the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1928.

I do not know whether the Department of Education had a problem with drafting legislation but it seems they had. Of all Departments they are more shy of the Dáil and Seanad, in terms of legislative proposals, than any other Department. They are very meticulous in answering parliamentary questions about other functions in relation to the Oireachtas, they provide a very effective form of accountability but, in terms of introducing legislation to statutorily justify, underpin and enable them to do what they are doing, they seem to want to ignore the Oireachtas. That is not good enough. Indeed, if anybody were to have challenged the superannuation schemes and taken a court action to, for instance, challenge the deductions made from their salaries to contribute to the superannuation schemes, and if these deductions involved a matter referred to in some of the administrative changes which Ministers made without the sanction of the Oireachtas, I believe that the superannuation scheme would have been struck down as illegal.

Regularly in this House we prescribe fines of £10,000 as a penalty for breaking the law and yet we have evidence that a Government Departments have been doing just that. It is not satisfactory. I am glad the Minister has brought it into the open and my comments are not a criticism of her because she has revealed it publicly. However, she has not indicated when she will do anything about it. Given that the Minister made such a startling admission, she should have been able to state that the relevant new regulations will be introduced by the end of this year — or at some specific date. It is not good enough to come in here and say that her Department have been breaking the law and will continue to do so and that she cannot say when it will stop. I hope that the Minister will be able to go a bit further in response to this debate.

Specific changes are recommended by the Minister in this legislation allowing her to make amendments to superannuation schemes by means of laying an order before the Dáil which will take immediate effect unless it is annulled rather than having to come in with a specific proposal and having it approved. I have no objection to that beyond one point which I will raise later. It would be wrong to pretend that the reason superannuation schemes have not been made legal is that the Minister had to get the approval of the Dáil. The fact is that the Minister admitted they had not even drafted the changes yet so the Dáil is not the obstacle, it is the responsibility of the Department.

There should be an in-depth investigation as to whether there is proper statutory authority for many of the things that go on in education at present. I have called in this House on a number of occasions for a comprehensive education Act which would put our educational system on a proper statutory basis. I acknowledge that it is a mixed system involving publicly provided education and denominationally provided education with public support. I do not want to change the system in any material way, just to provide a proper statutory basis. Is there statutory authority for not just the superannuation payments to teachers but the payments to teachers themselves? Is there any legislation which enables the Minister to pay the salaries of teachers in private educational institutions? Is there any law under which she does this?

I have been inquiring into the position concerning second level education as distinct from vocational education. There is no such problem in the area of vocational education because the Vocational Education Act, 1930, is comprehensive and provides very full statutory authority for virtually everything that is done. The relevant seminal legislation for the payment of secondary teachers — and for secondary education generally — is the Intermediate Education Act, 1878. I have gone through the Act carefully and it provides the Minister with authority to operate examinations, to set subjects in examinations and to pay the salaries of civil servants responsible for looking after secondary education. However, it does not provide statutory authority for the Minister for payment of salaries.

If such a gap exists — although I hope the Minister will be able to say that it does not and that my concern is not well founded — it should be quickly filled because we cannot afford to have our system of education challenged as not having an adequate statutory basis. I asked the same question on the position in regard to national teachers. Prior to the 1928 Act there was statutory provision for the operation of a pension scheme for national teachers. Indeed this dates back to an 1879 Act for improving the position of teachers in national schools which contains extensive provisions in section 3 and other sections for superannuation. While that legislation provides for superannuation it does not seem to provide for payment. It provides for residences for teachers but it does not provide for payment——

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): That is why salaries are so low.

Mrs. O'Rourke

How could they get superannuation unless they were paid?

Mr. J. Bruton

Because you do something subsequently on an assumption that it is legal you cannot infer that it is. I am not a practicising lawyer, nor do I intend to become one. At the same time you cannot say in matters of law that if you have superannuation and statutory authority for it that, by reverse logic, you have statutory authority for payment. I do not think that is the way courts would look at it if it was put to them. I think they would say you must have statutory authority for the payment and for the superannuation. There is statutory authority for superannuation and there is statutory authority for payment so far as vocational teachers are concerned but is there statutory authority for payment in regard to national and secondary school teachers?

National and secondary school teachers are employed in private institutions. They are not employees of the State; they are not civil servants. The State pays them but they are employed by institutions which have private management. That applies to national schools as well as secondary schools. To pay the salaries of somebody else's employees is something for which one would require authority. Obviously you have authority to pay your own employees but in the case of secondary and primary teachers you are talking about paying salaries of people who are not your own employees.

Of course it is desirable that we should have the present arrangement. I am a supporter of our present system in that it has a mix of different types of education. I am a supporter of denominational and multi-denominational education. We need to have options in every area so far as possible. We should not force people into strait-jackets as happens in the United States. The system should operate on the basis of a clearly established statutory authority. I ask the Minister to answer my question.

I would like to raise one technical question with the Minister. A new subsection (5) is being inserted in the Principal Act, under section 2 of the present Bill. It says that a superannuation scheme may be revoked or amended by a subsequent superannuation scheme made in the like manner as the original scheme. The existing superannuation schemes have all been made under the Act of 1928 and the provision "in the like manner" in that case is an affirmative motion in the Dáil. It would appear that the meaning of the new subsection (5) is that in the case of any amendment or revocation of an existing scheme made prior to today, under the 1928 Act the existing procedure, that is an affirmative motion in the House, would apply. My understanding is that that is precisely what the Minister wants to avoid. She is seeking to have a situation where it will be possible to make amendments and revocations by order — the passive rather than the affirmative form of order making — but it would appear that the new subsection (5) does not achieve that objective, if I am reading it correctly, because it refers to schemes made in the like manner as the original scheme.

If that is the case and the Minister wants to ensure that any future amendments can be made by the 21 day order procedure, as soon as this legislation is passed she will have to introduce a complete new set of superannuation schemes under this legislation. I do not think that is what she intends. Certainly if her Department have been unable to produce amendments in a form that is satisfactory for changes that have been made as far back as 1972, she will hardly want to introduce a whole new set of superannuation schemes simply to be able to avail of the provisions of this Bill from the point of view of subsequent amendments. That is a technical query. If my assumptions about this matter are valid we may be wasting our time with this legislation because we will not achieve what we are seeking. Apart from raising these queries, I have no objection in principle to this legislation but I would like to hear the Minister's answers.

Mr. O'Shea

Since I became spokes-person on Education, this is the first legislation that has been introduced in the education area. I would have preferred to see a longer Bill but having read the Bill and checked with the teachers' unions, I have no problem with it. It seeks to bring the procedures for teachers' pensions into conformity with the Civil Service Superannuation Act and, as I said, I have no problem supporting it.

Deputy Bruton dealt with some of the points I had intended raising and I will not waste the time of the House going over them. The Minister will be responding to the points made by Deputy Bruton.

There is one area regarding pensions on which I would like to lay particular stress. One of the Labour Party Deputies put down a Dáil question recently on the provision of a pension scheme for school caretakers. I understand that the maximum number of school caretakers was 350 but the number is now down to 250. I also understand that school clerk typists have a pension scheme and therefore it is grossly unfair that school caretakers who carry out very important work in our schools and receive salaries from the Department of Education should be excluded from a pension scheme. I would ask the Minister to have a look at that and see whether it is possible to introduce a provision in that regard in a Bill like this.

Deputy Bruton dealt with the definition of teacher and said it is not altogether clear. He also dealt with the transfer of pensions. This is an area that will become more important as time passes. The practice where a person spends a lifetime in a particular career is diminishing to a large extent. My generation were a lot more concerned about the permanent pensionable job than the present generation seems to be. There are reasons for that. In my day if you got a good leaving certificate it virtually guaranteed you a job that is not the case now.

As a national teacher who has been on leave of absence since 1987 when I was elected to the Seanad, I believe a break from teaching gives one a better perspective. If one is at the coalface all the time there is a tendency not to see a lot of significant points because of the pressure of the day to day teaching in the classroom. If teachers could spent time in industry, for example — this is something to which Deputy Bruton alluded — it would be a help to them. People who went through secondary school, teacher training and directly into the school environment would be helped by exposure — for the want of a better word — to what happens in industrial concerns, commercial life and so on. That is very important. We should be flexible and provide for people to do this. Leave of absence is available, but that does not carry pension rights during the time people are away from teaching.

Another area that needs looking at in the general context, and which relates to pensions more or less in the same way as to school caretakers or clerk typists, is the situation in national schools where teachers have responsibility for providing supervision for the children during the lunch hour break. This has the effect of keeping teachers on the job during the lunch hour. I believe it is good to get a break from the school environment at some stage during the day. It is to the benefit of everybody when that happens. It relieves people from the pressure of being in-house if they can go away and have a meal in a relaxed atmosphere. They will be all the better for it. The Minister should look at the possibility of providing extra staff in this area. Again, there would be pension implications for these ancilliary staff. Deputy Bruton dealt at great length with this and I do not intend going over the same ground again.

However, with regard to pensions, I believe that teaching has become a much more stressful occupation. I found in the later years of my teaching career that I was more physically and mentally tired in the evenings when I had finished work. This has a great deal to do with a subject which I have raised with the Minister on a number of occasions: the question of school discipline. Corporal punishment has been abolished. It has gone and it will never come back, but the fact that no effective sanction has been put in its place has had a detrimental effect on discipline in schools. I am not underestimating the difficulty of coming up with a workable code of discipline which allows teachers to come to grips with what is a deteriorating situation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It would seem to me that we should not extend too far from what is proposed here.

Mr. O'Shea

May I have another minute? I am tying up this point to extra pensions.

Mr. J. Bruton

The extra pensions to compensate him for the problems.

Tomás Mac Giolla

Just some introductory remarks.

Mr. O'Shea

I will return to the subject under discussion in a sentence or two. My proposal is that schools need school welfare officers, another pensionable category. The Minister feels I am bending the rules.

Mrs. O'Rourke

If the Deputy keeps saying pensions, he is all right.

Mr. O'Shea

This is a very important area. With the growing number of emotionally disturbed children in our schools, which is creating a much more stressful atmosphere, job satisfaction and morale among teachers is much lower now than it was during my teaching lifetime, which goes back over 20 years. The idea of reducing the eligibility limits for full gratuity and pension among teachers is something we need to look at because of this stressful environment. However, in terms of getting the service right in general I believe school welfare officers are vitally important for the pupils who are causing stressful situations for the teacher in the classrooms and, more importantly, preventing effective and efficient teaching going ahead. Whatever legislation follows this Bill should be brought in in the context of providing a pension scheme for ancillary staff.

The areas dealt with by Deputy Bruton regarding an education Act and the legalities of a lot of what has happened since the founding of the State regarding the statutory basis for circular letters and other communications from the Department needs looking at and I ask the Minister to refer to that.

In conclusion, and staying to the subject, I have no problem with the Bill before us. It is an enabling Bill which will move us into an area where we have further developments in the pensions scheme.

Tomás Mac Giolla

Tá sé an-deacair bheith ag caint ar ábhar amháin, pinsin, i leith na Roinne seo. Mar a dúirt an Teachta O'Shea, seo an chéad Bhille faoi chúrsaí oideachais a tháinig os ár gcomhair ní amháin ó tháinig an tAire í féin isteach sa Dáil ach le blianta fada anuas. Tá sé deacair gan bheith ag caint faoi chúrsaí oideachais, mar tá go leor le rá againn go léir faoi sin.

I found Deputy Bruton's remarks very interesting. Although he is not a lawyer and none of us is, thanks be to God — we have had enough of them on various other Bills — he honed in on a point that is quite touchy. The Minister said in her statement that the Department have been proceeding daily for 18 years totally ignoring the Acts which exist. There are not that many education Acts in existence but whatever exists has been totally ignored for 18 years, since 1972.

Mrs. O'Rourke

There have been improvements in the pensions scheme.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I am talking about a departmental attitude that exists. I wonder if that exists in other Departments? We cannot go through every Bill to see what regulations are absolutely required. Is there anybody monitoring the situation? Perhaps it was somebody outside the Department of Education who suddenly discovered this and said they had better do something about it.

Mrs. O'Rourke

We found it.

Tomás Mac Giolla

That is very good, Minister. It is worrying when a matter such as this is raised as Deputy Bruton has raised it. Whether there is a statutory basis for the payment of teachers is something that never struck me before, but it raises the whole question of an education Act and the need for clear statutory lines for what we are doing as well as a clear philosophy of education, which we do not have. We have one education Act, as Deputy Bruton pointed out, the Vocational Education Act, 1930. This is absolutely excellent legislation and is still absolutely flexible and bang up-to-date.

Mr. J. Bruton

It was Cumann na nGaedhael legislation.

Tomás Mac Giolla

The good old days, as they say. This is an excellent Act which is still not outdated. The problem seems to me that this Act is being phased out by the Department or by the Minister. Chief executives officers are not being reappointed and there is a whole stack of vacancies and in a series of ways they are being run down. There was a policy to amalgamate some VECs but that seems to have been dropped and there is now no policy; it is just a matter of drifting along more or less ignoring them.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Would you like to amalgamate them?

Tomás Mac Giolla

If the Minister brings that in I will have my own ideas on it. Let the Minister proceed in whatever way she thinks. Apparently that idea has been dropped. I would now like to know whether the Minister intends to amalgamate them or not.

It is absolutely essential that we introduce some legislation which the Department will adhere to as the way in which they have been ignoring us is a negation of democracy. This phraseology is now used in every Bill. Since I first came into this house, when this negative phraseology has appeared in legislation I have put down amendments seeking to change it. I have argued that if a Minister wants to change something they should lay the regulations before the House when we would have an opportunity to say whether we agree with them or want to throw them out. The practice is that if no one introduces a resolution seeking to annul them within 21 sitting days they are passed. As I understand it, a resolution seeking to annul regulations has to be introduced in Private Members' time. We have not yet had an opportunity to avail of Private members' time. Therefore I have had no opportunity since last October to bring in a resolution seeking to annul regulations. Other Deputies in the House who may wish to bring in such a resolution find themselves in the same position. I would be quite happy if the Bill stated such a resolution may be brought in in Government time, but as the Bill stands it is a negation of democracy in that Deputies are not allowed to exercise their right to bring in a resolution seeking to annul regulations.

Mrs. O'Rourke

What about section 30 which is frequently evoked?

Tomás Mac Giolla

That is not adequate either.

Mr. J. Bruton

The Minister is thinking of what tricks she can use when she is next in Opposition.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I hope that is a long time away.

Mr. J. Bruton

The Minister is working along those lines.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Mac Giolla should not address the Minister in an encouraging, tantalising or provocative way. If he addresses the Chair he will not be interrupted.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I have no intention of tantalising the Minister, whatever about encouraging her. I encourage her to make it easier for Deputies to bring in such resolutions. Because of the difficulty individual Deputies face, I have, as I said, attempted on other legislation to introduce wording similar to that used in the 1928 legislation which is more democratic. At that time if a Minister wanted to change something by way of regulation they had to lay those regulations before the House. However, they need not now come before the House. I hate to see this stipulation being removed from legislation as I believe it should be inserted in all legislation.

Where does the difficulty lie? It is a very simple matter to have them dealt with on the Order of Business when they can be dealt with in one or two minutes. If a Deputy wishes to oppose the regulations they can outline their reasons for opposing them. I do not see any difficulty about inserting a provision stipulating that no superannuation scheme should come into force unless and until it has been laid before each House of the Oireachtas and has been confirmed by a resolution of each House. This is done regularly in the House and it does not take any more than one minute or two.

I am just wondering whether someone went through all the legislation to see if this positive clause is contained in any other legislation and is making an attempt to have it removed from all legislation to ensure that the other negative procedure is adopted which is, as I said, much more undemocratic. Therefore I wish to oppose this change, as I do not think it is necessary. Since 1972 the Department have ignored the Oireachtas and they consider that the best way to keep ignoring it is to carry on regardless unless someone wakes up and goes to the trouble of seeking the support of other Deputies for a resolution seeking to annul regulations. That is most unlikely to happen in respect of these regulations but it is quite possible that it will happen in respect of regulations made under other legislation.

In some cases the regulations made under legislation are even more important than the legislation itself. Such regulations control the way in which people act and have to be adhered to. We are gradually reaching the stage where we will be governed by regulations which, if not adhered to, could result in the imposition of fines or terms of imprisonment, yet these regulations can be brought into being without ever having to be passed by this House. If individual Deputies or the smaller groups wish to change them they have to go through this difficult procedure. Therefore I object to the change proposed in the Bill for the simple reason that it is a less democratic procedure than the existing one.

Mr. Deasy

I am surprised to find that the Act governing teachers' superannuation and pensions goes as far back as 1928. I note that the Minister in her speech pointed out that a total of 32 schemes have been effected since that time and that there have been 18 amending schemes. It is hard to believe that so many changes could have taken place. Perhaps what is needed is a new Bill similar to the one introduced in respect of vocational teachers back in 1980.

I want to dwell on two specific points. First, in relation to the retirement age, under the present Act a national teacher can retire at the age of 55 on full pension, whereas a secondary school teacher cannot retire on full pension until they reach the age of 60. It is an obvious anomaly and I do not know why it exists. Primary teachers can retire on full pension at 55 years of age while secondary teachers cannot retire a full pension until they reach 60 years of age. That is crazy. The least the Minister might do is to introduce an amendment to correct that anomoly. In fact, the Minister should go a lot further and take into consideration the stress and strain teachers must endure in classrooms.

We have a new ball game since the age limits were introduced in the regulations in 1928. A high percentage of teachers, primary, vocational and secondary, suffer severe mental stress because of present day demands. They are working in a different type of society. Some allowance should be made for teachers to enable them retire at an earlier age. I understand that in the public service those with onerous jobs, such as personnel in the Army, the Navy and the Air Corps, have an option to retire as early as 40 years of age. Members of the Garda Síochána have the option to retire as early as 50 years of age but a secondary teacher must have 40 years' service in a classroom and be 60 years of age before being entitled to a pension. That is ridiculous and the Minister should do something to rectify it.

Two years ago when the voluntary retirement scheme was introduced there was an avalanche of applications from teachers in the three sectors, primary, secondary and vocational, and while many teachers in the primary sector were allowed to avail of the scheme only a handful, if any, of secondary teachers were allowed to avail of early retirement — I understand that only one or two secondary teachers were allowed to avail of that scheme. I should like the Minister to give us details of the scheme. That speaks for itself because those who were opting for early retirement would be taking a sum that would be a lot less than they would have received if they had remained in service until they were 60 years of age and had 40 years' service. They were prepared to suffer a financial loss because of the pressure that they and their families were being subjected to. Teachers in their droves opted for that scheme.

All Members recognise that teachers are subjected to great pressures. The pace of life has speeded up and contributory factors such as the elimination of corporal punishment have added to the problems that have to be faced by teachers.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not know whether there are kindred spirits coming from Waterford but earlier I had occasion to remind the Deputy's constituency colleague, Deputy O'Shea, that we would have to endeavour in this debate not to move beyond the terms of what is proposed in the Bill.

Mr. Deasy

The Chair, as a teacher, will know what I am talking about.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As the upholder of Standing Orders in the House I have to know differently.

Mr. Deasy

I was expecting a little poetic licence from the Chair but I will not dwell unduly on the issue. I am anxious to make the point that the stress and strain in the classroom has increased considerably. The regulations determining superannuation and retirement should be changed accordingly. They should not be left as they were framed in 1928. That is a clear message and an understandable request. Those who are subjected to exceptional strain should be given special consideration. I am a secondary teacher and virtually all Members in the Chamber are teachers, with the exception of Deputy John Bruton.

Mr. J. Bruton

I am a student.

Mr. Deasy

A mature student.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Improving rapidly.

Mr. Deasy

We recognise the difficulties involved. We have seen the pressures increase in our time as teachers. The teachers' job has become immeasurably more difficult in recent years and we should do something to introduce some sanity in regard to superannuation and retirement for them. The clamour for voluntary redundancy speaks for itself. There should be an option to retire at an early age without teachers having to retire for health reasons. Any doctor will give a teacher a certificate to the effect that they should retire on health grounds. Teachers can make a case for mental strain and being overburdened.

The second point I wish to raise concerns teachers' entitlement to pension rights for service abroad. I do not know if that is covered in the amendment referred to by the Minister but I doubt it. Three months ago when I tabled a parliamentary question concerning that issue I was told that such service would not be recognised. A teacher with service in what is known as an underdeveloped country, such as the African countries, Nigeria and so on, will have that service recognised for pension purposes. However, a teacher with service in Britain, or West European countries, will not have that service recognised for pension purposes. That is discrimination. It appears that we are out of touch. It is my view that we are in breach of EC Regulations in regard to that.

Mrs. O'Rourke

That will change in 1992.

Mr. Deasy

Can the Minister imagine a person teaching for ten or 20 years in Britain and returning to Ireland with a wealth of experience and knowledge not being entitled to have that service recognised for pension purposes? That is another serious anomaly that the Minister should rectify. I am grateful to Deputy Browne for permitting me to contribute to the debate before him. I hope the points I have raised will be taken on board.

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): Chreid mé go raibh Bille gairid anseo agus go mbeadh díospóireacht ghairid air. Tá ocras chomh mór sin orm anois go bhfuil baol ann go dtitfidh mé anseo ar mhullach mo chinn; dá bhrí sin, má tharlaíonn aon rud ná bac, is cuma.

I was pleased to be able to accommodate my colleague who has made the speech I intended making. That is another bit of ciall ceannaithe I have learned — that it is not wise to allow another Member in before you. I feel like Oisin i ndiaidh na Féinne. I have 32 years' teaching experience and I am glad to be able to report that I am not a burnt out teacher, a phrase that is quite common today. It appears that there are many burnt out teachers. However, if political fate so decides that I will have to go back to the classroom, I do not think I will have any major psychological or other upsets. I would still enjoy the challenge of teaching. There are many people who do not enjoy that challenge.

Those of us who entered the teaching profession 30 years ago faced a completely different set up. There were lines of desks in the classrooms and I should like to tell the Minister that, despite all the changes, I managed to keep lines of desks in my room. Some teachers could not adjust to the child centred curriculum with children talking and so on.

It was very difficult to adapt to that change. I have patience but I found it difficult to adjust to the noise in the classroom. While there is noise in the classroom it is hard to think that people are working and it is doubtful if the same amount of work is taking place. I can accept readily that I am obviously causing discord. I accept that children can enjoy learning at their own pace and trickacting around the place but I do not know whether it is a great idea. I will not go into detail in case the Leas-Cheann Comhairle tells me I am rambling. It all leads to a complete change of scene. The whole concept of discipline has changed. Thirty years ago if I told somebody to sit down I was assured of obedience. I have to admit — and this is probably why I am not burned out — that I was teaching in a lovely paradise called Bennekerry in Carlow. I can assure the Minister that this is a very good school. In case my deputy here would get any leeway with the Minister about the legality of paying salaries, for goodness sake he has not a hope of getting back the salary he got for the past 30 years; if there is anything wrong with it please ignore him.

Mr. J. Bruton

It is all spent.

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): I like the idea of being generous. The legal part of it is only an aside. The Deputy asked the Minister to define a teacher.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Please tell us.

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): While I was sitting here starving I decided that the following qualities would be invaluable to a person standing in front of a class at present. He would want to have the bravery of a lion tamer, the skills of a psychologist, the stamina of a marathon runner, the appeal of “Zig and Zag”, the patience of Job and the skills to teach. Anyone who possesses all those qualities would be well qualified to go in. Times are changing, it is a difficult and tough time. We are discussing superannuation but it is of no benefit if one does not continue teaching until retirement age. Many teachers are genuinely burned out, they cannot cope at present, they do not want to retire on disability as they may not qualify for superannuation and they would like to opt out. It is unfair to them and above all — and this is probably more important — it is unfair to the pupils they are teaching. Children get a chance of going to school once and they get a chance of doing an extra year at second level and if they have a teacher who cannot cope — as there are people in other professions who cannot cope — who is highly strung, has lost interest and feels that the children nowadays are no longer the type of children he set out to teach he should be given the option to resign. I know that money is involved and I can accept that no matter where the Minister's heart is, her purse strings are tied. It is so serious that it is beyond the question of the personal interest that teachers may have in early retirement.

Those of us who have children and who walk around can realise that there are certain teachers who have gone beyond their endurance and if they could they would opt out. That is something the Minister should seriously consider, not only for the sake of the teachers but for the sake of the children. That would mean that we would readily agree to the scheme being introduced by the Minister.

I do not want to talk about large classes, etc. As Deputy O'Shea said if one is innocent enough to walk into the House on a topic that deals with education in a broad sense, one could be here for a number of weeks because we are all experts. I appeal to the Minister to consider the effect that teaching has on many of the older teachers who entered in a different era and who would like to continue teaching as they were, but times have changed and they find they are not able for it. As a result, children under their care are not getting a fair crack of the whip. That is my one request and one message to the Minister.

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

Before I reply to the various points which were raised I wish to set out again the context of the legislation and emphasise again what I said in the opening sentence. This is an enabling measure, simplifying the procedure for promulgating superannuation schemes for teachers. Put against that context the Bill before us is, of course, a relatively easy matter. It did evoke, as does any education measure or announcement of any kind or even a whisper, a very lively debate. That is to the credit of the House and it is clear evidence of the standing of education within the country that the word "education" is enough to set off frissons throughout the system and so it has been here in the House. With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I know I will be straying beyond my brief too in answering the points which were raised so I preface my comments by saying with your permission I propose to answer some of the points which were raised.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Tá cead agat.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Tá cead agam. Go raibh maith agat. The Deputy Leader of Fine Gael and spokesman on education, Deputy Bruton, pointed out that there should be an early retirement scheme which would be commensurate with the contributions and bearing in mind the desirable mix of teachers of age profiles within schools, both experience and youth and vigour together, it made for the ideal staff profile within a school. He spoke of the difficulties of qualified young teachers obtaining positions. In that context I will be returning to the whole question of early retirement, which ran through all the contributions, but I would like to point out that this autumn there will be 250 new jobs in primary schools and more in post-primary schools in accordance with the arrangements made under the Programme for National Recovery and the vote last month.

The Deputy also raised the issue of job-sharing. This is a question that has been talked about very much in schools. It is a question that comes up frequently. While it is easy to visualise how it could be done in some schools, with subject teachers in a second level school I do not know if it would increase the serenity of the students to have a teacher changing and there would be time tabling difficulties. It is a point that has been put to me and it is one with which I would have a measure of sympathy. The Deputy asked if a superannuation scheme could be tailored, because it should not have any financial implications, to the needs of job-sharing. That is something that could be looked at. The Deputy referred to the definition of "teacher" and also referred to teachers' helpers in classrooms, or various such appellations, particularly in the integration of handicapped pupils of varying degrees into the "regular" classroom. As the Deputy is aware, that has been one of the ongoing tenets of education and one in which we in this country have been to the forefront. During the six months Presidency of the Education Ministers one of the resolutions which we hope to pass with the European Commission is the strengthening of the integration of handicapped pupils into classrooms. For the purposes of this Bill, teachers are defined under the regulations but it is something that will come up as developments occur in education.

Mr. J. Bruton

Can teachers' aides be included now under the scheme?

Mrs. O'Rourke

No, not under this scheme.

Mr. J. Bruton

So the Minister would need to amend the principal legislation.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Yes. This is strictly for the definition as laid out under the 1928 Act when such desirable innovations had not taken place. The Deputy asked about the transferability of pension entitlements, as exists in the Civil Service and in semi-State and private industry. This scheme is confined to an enabling measure. One way or another, Minister for Finance approval would have to be obtained for such a desirable initiative. The Deputy referred to the long delay and the fact that the position has been highly unsatisfactory since 1972. It would be wrong of me to dwell on that matter in any greater detail. The Deputy has made his statement and in my speech I have made my statement in that regard.

The Deputy referred to the question of drafting legislation and why the Department are so shy and modest in the legislative arena and he said that it would have been open to anyone to have taken court action to challenge any of the various changes in the superannuation scheme. The point I am making, which is not a point of principle, is that all the changes were improvements. The Deputy referred to the introduction of an education Act. The primary review board are considering that. I, too, have been giving some thought to that. Under that heading the Deputy asked if we had the right to pay teachers. I am sure Deputy Browne, Deputy O'Shea and I agree that not alone have we the right to pay teachers, but that we should pay them more. The Intermediate Education Act, 1878 and the National School Teachers Act, 1879 will be considered in my consideration of an education Act in the broadest sense.

Mr. J. Bruton

Is there statutory authority at the moment?

Mrs. O'Rourke

To pay teachers? I should think so.

Mr. J. Bruton

What is it?

Mrs. O'Rourke

Whether or not there is we will continue to pay them.

Mr. J. Bruton

I know that, but does the Minister know if there is statutory authority?

Mrs. O'Rourke

I am not able to give that information across the floor, but I expect that the matter has been fully attended to.

Mr. J. Bruton

I will ask a question on it.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Deputy referred to section 2 (5) and I do not accept the interpretation that the Deputy puts on the words. It is a technical matter and perhaps it is a drafting matter.

Deputy O'Shea spoke about the need for broader education Bills and that will come into the general debate on the need for an education Act. The Deputy also referred to the need for a pension scheme for school caretakers. That is not embraced by this Bill. The Deputy also referred to transfers and I dealt with that in dealing with Deputy Bruton's point. I accept that it is a good thing for teachers to have a break from the classroom and to plunge themselves, not necessarily into leisure, but into different types of work. Exposure to other professions and the option of mixing with other types of people can give a teacher a different perspective on his work and a teacher will be refreshed going back into the classroom to the benefit of both the teacher and the pupils. As a result of such break, teachers often change long held notions. The Deputy also referred to the supervision of the school playground and the fact that teaching is now more stressful.

Deputy Bruton referred also to the need for a school discipline code and his party have put down a motion to be taken in Private Members' time with regard to school discipline. At the moment I am in consultation with parents, teachers and management on this issue. There are diverging views between parents, teachers and management on the issue of school discipline and we are seeking concensus in this area. School discipline is a difficult matter because we must have regard to the varying needs of children and the different personalities of teachers in varying environments and so on. A code of discipline depends to a large extent for its success on the interaction between child and teacher. At the moment we are trying to reconcile different points of view on it. Deputy Bruton also referred to the need for school welfare officers and that issue is also included in the Private Members' motion, so in time we will come to deal with it.

Deputy Mac Giolla worried about 18 years of non-implementation and praised the VEC Act of 1930 as being very flexible and a good education measure and suggested that its powers were being eroded. I assure him that they are not. The Deputy said that they opposed this Bill because of the lack of time which he and other members of his party were given to raise the matters in relation to this in Private Members' time. That is a broader issue. The Deputy stated his objection not in the particular, but in the general sense.

Deputy Deasy suggested that there should be an early retirement scheme for teachers and said that it would be of enormous benefit not alone to the teachers but to those following. The Deputy said that over the years the strain in this job has increased greatly. He also referred to teachers' entitlements to have service abroad included in pension entitlements here. This will be addressed within the European context in relation to the comparability of qualifications. This matter will be cleared up in the 1992 context. Deputy John Browne spoke of his 32 years as a teacher. He looks happy and the ravages of it have sat lightly on him.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

He did say that he was teaching in a rather special school.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The school has been good to him but he has been good to the pupils in his care. I, too, remain happy about teaching after all my years at it and if the electorate decided, I would happily go back into it with the benefit of having been in this House and having been exposed to other traumas and challenges. The Deputy felt that there was a genuine need among a specific number of teachers who felt that they had unwittingly stumbled into the wrong job and found the strains and stresses too much.

I thank all the contributors to Second Stage of the Bill. This is an enabling measure simplifying procedure for promulgating superannuation schemes for teachers. If there are some queries which need to be addressed I will address them and give the information to the Deputies.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is the question: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time" agreed to?

Mr. McCartan

No, The Workers' Party wish the question to be put. As Deputy Mac Giolla indicated, we believe the principle of incursion on parliamentary privileges is represented in the Bill, and for that reason we oppose it.

Question put and declared carried.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Mrs. O'Rourke

Now, with the permission of the House.

Mr. J. Bruton

I would not be happy with that arrangement. I raised a technical query with the Minister and I should like to have the opportunity of putting down some amendments.

Mrs. O'Rourke

We can take Committee Stage on Tuesday week, subject to agreement between the Whips.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 27 March 1990.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We find ourselves in the unusual position of having ten minutes between now and Question Time. I propose that we adjourn for ten minutes. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Sitting suspended at 2.20 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.