Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 20 Nov 1990

Vol. 402 No. 8

Private Members' Business. - Local Authorities (Officers and Employees) (Amendment) Bill, 1990: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a second time."

Mr. Cowen

Last week I adverted to the fact that there appeared to me to be some contradiction in terms in regard to the introduction of this Bill in the first place in that its mover, Deputy John Bruton — now Leader of Fine Gael in which position I wish him well — declared that in 99.9 per cent of cases he did not see any problem with the local selection committees of VECs in putting the best prospective teacher into any given post. Nonetheless he appeared to have a very serious problem with 0.01 per cent of cases. He reckoned this required us to change the whole system inside out to deal with what he regarded as a suspicion of political interference, or an idea in somebody's mind that he or she had not been appointed to a post because it happened that there were politicians on the relevant selection committee. I know that, when one is going forward in Leadership elections, one must pander to minority interests now and again but I contend that that was taking the matter to an absolute extreme. I find it difficult to comprehend why it is necessary to seek to change present procedures when one has problems vis-à-vis 0.01 per cent of cases only. I know that when somebody mentions 99.9 per cent of cases usually he or she is using a figure of speech. Nonetheless such comment does indicate that, to all intents and purposes, there is nothing wrong with the present system.

What is even more intriguing is to discover that, on looking at the Official Report of 30 October last, Deputy Bruton, in proposing this amending Bill — that of allowing the Local Appointments Commission to deal with the appointment of teachers — said at the end of his contribution that, if the Minister had any problems with the Bill, that is that the Local Appointments Commission would replace the Vocational Education Committee selection committees, he would be prepared to listen to amendments tabled on Committee Stage. We now find ourselves in circumstances in which Deputy John Bruton, the proposer of this Bill, in the first place says there is nothing wrong with the system in relation to 99.9 per cent of cases, then introduces a Bill to put the Local Appointments Commission in their place, then says, before concluding his remarks, it need not necessarily be a Local Appointments Commission but somebody else, anybody except a politician. Of course what Deputy Bruton selectively omitted to say was that there is a very senior official of the Department of Education who serves as a member of every Vocational Education Committee selection committee. Deputy Bruton also omitted to say that a chief executive officer serves in an advisory capacity and, in the case of some Vocationalo Education Committees, is a member of the selction committee.

That brings one to pose the question: what is the point in introducing this Bill in the first place? As I said last week, the big plus factor in Deputy Bruton's candidature as Leader of Fine Gael was the fact that he is an original thinker. If one puts forward the proposition that, in 99.9 per cent of cases there is no problem encountered but that nonetheless one wishes to change the whole system inside out on that basis, that is original, that bears the stamp of an original thinker; it might not make much common sense but is original if nothing else.

It is about time Fine Gael decided where they stand in relation to the democratic control of education. I contend it is very important that we have a Vocational Education Committee system allowing local representatives have a say on behalf of the people who should teach in their schools. It is a non-selective system, one which has given an awful lot to Irish education. I served as a member of that system at one time. As a local representative, I understand the importance of local decision-making. Indeed that lends credibility to appointments in that they are the local representatives, plus a senior official of the Department of Education, who decide who will teach in vocational schools. I fail to see how it would be in any way more democratic to have a centralised bureaucracy, such as is the case with the Local Appointments Commission, deciding who will teach in our schools when it is admitted by the proposer of the Bill that, in 99.9 per cent of cases, there is no problem encountered vis-à-vis such appointments.

The whole logic of this Bill escapes me. Of course people like Deputy Bruton and others on the opposite side of the House contend we should give more powers to local representatives, that we must democratise the system, decentralise it but, heavens above, we should not allow them appoint teachers to our schools. That is quite a contradictory position to adopt. Of course the impression is being given that, based on some suspicion, or on some figment of the imagination — since there is no hard evidence to suggest there is anything wrong with the present system; in fact Deputy Bruton states there is absolutely nothing wrong with the present system — the vocational education committee system is engaging in some type of time war, that they wish to retain some type of oblique patronage system which there is no evidence to suggest exists in the first place. In fact the vocational education committees, the IVEA in particular, brought forward a very progressive document for discussion at special Congress at the end of this month, seeking to further democratise the system, to bring about new local education authorities, not restricted merely to the vocational education committee system but to primary, second-level and any tertiary education that exists within the area of operation of any vocational education committee. In fact that proposal seeks to widen the representation in those local education authorities. It seeks to introduce representatives of trade councils, of parent councils, management associations, to deal with education on the ground on behalf of the people they represent.

I find it very difficult to listen to politicians who seek to equate political activity in the area of education as being in some way wrong or open to suspicion. It is about time politicians, at national level, began to trust local politicians who, let it be said, put them in here in the first place. It is about time national politicians, far from decrying their local counterparts, sought to back them up in the very limited area of activity in which they have discretion. The whole idea in so far as this party is concerned is to give more discretion and responsibility to local politicians. We must remember that, at the end of the day, they are not awaiting the cheque at the end of the month unlike their national counterparts. It is time politicians ceased to say of other politicians: if you become involved in this you will leave yourself wide open to any charge even though we agree that such charge is unjustified.

It is about time leading politicians, particularly leaders of political parties, began to practise what they preach and not come into this House seeking to take away the very limited discretions available to local politicians while on the other hand talking about decentralisation and increasing powers at local level.

My attitude to this legislation is one of contempt. It is claimed there is support among the TUI for such a change. Certainly I have not been lobbied by any member of the TUI to change the system, neither has it been indicated to me by any member of the Teachers' Union of Ireland that anything untoward has happened in my Vocational Education Committee area or in anyone else's. I am not prepared to change legislation or a long established procedure within the vocational education committee system on the basis of someone's suspicion or grievance because he or she did not get a job. I can name any area of political activity where such a grievance would exist. If ten houses are to be given out by a county manager and there are 40 applicants he can put only ten families into ten houses and there will be a sense of grievance somewhere. It is wrong to suggest that local representatives or the local selection committee will have any consideration other than the best educational reasons for appointing any teacher.

The other bogey argument raised on Second Stage is that if a teacher had a certain political activity or political bent, that will deny him a fair hearing at a selection committee. That is an outrageous remark. Teachers at every level of the system, be it first or second level, are very much involved in politics. There are many teachers on all sides of this House who, of course, are members of political parties and I am sure they never felt their jobs were at risk because they were politically active. By the nature of Irish society teachers are very prominent, properly so, in every aspect of our public and local community life. It is totally a bogeyman argument to suggest that because someone has a particular political bent he will be denied the prospect of a job. It comes back to the argument that if one is involved in politics one is in some way tainted. No politician should come into this House and make such suggestions without credible evidence, and the proposer of this Bill, the Leader of the Opposition, has no evidence. He has mentioned a figure of 0.01 per cent of the cases; in fact, he has mentioned two cases out of I do not know how many appointments made. As a member of the Vocational Education Committee, at every meeting I can put forward five or six temporary appointments, part time appointments, temporary whole time appointments and permanent appointments and not once is any of them questioned. Never does any member of the vocational education committee question such appointments. It is outrageous to come into this House and say that there is a suspicion, that some poor devil did not get a job either because he was of some political persuasion or none. You cannot come in and seek to undermine the vocational education committee selection committee system on that basis. Come in here with hard evidence or do not come in at all.

The IVEA have put forward a very progressive document which seeks not only to widen the representation as regards policy decisions for local educational interests in any county but is proposing on the other hand to devolve even the power of appointment down to the local management committee of each individual school which again would involve representative vocational education committee management associations, teachers, etc.

I find it amazing that the "alternative Taoiseach", as he is now, has come into this House, proposed legislation to be changed, provided no evidence, accepts that in 99.99 per cent of the cases there is no problem, seeks to change the system inside out, then says at the end of his speech that he is not insisting that a local appointments commission would be the necessary mechanism by which this would be done, and finally seeks to involve a centralised bureaucracy which would not meet local needs. In my understanding of the Local Appointments Commission it could take months to get a decision. In the event of a teacher being absent or being required by any vocational school, are the Opposition going to wait for the Local Appointments Commission to make the decision or are they going to allow local representatives and the Department of Education officials to sit down and appoint a teacher which, in the words of the proposer of this Bill, in 99.99 per cent of the cases is the correct decision?

Mr. Lowry

I thank Deputy Cowen for his words of congratulation to our new Leader, Deputy John Bruton, however qualified they were.

Deputy Bruton brought this Bill before the House after giving it detailed and careful consideration. On the last occasion on which he addressed this House on this Bill he mentioned two instances where strong evidence was available to suggest that malpractice had taken place in the appointment of teachers. He mentioned those as examples of what is happening in the system and what can happen on a day to day basis within the present system, not as the only two examples but as two of what he considered to be very many.

I welcome the opportunity to express my views in support of this Bill. I would like at the very outset to state my position quite clearly. I together with my Fine Gael colleagues, urge all parties within Dáil Éireann to support this Bill introduced by Deputy John Bruton and supported in principle by the Labour Party, The Workers' Party, the Progressive Democrats and, I remind Deputy Cowen many members of Fianna Fáil, when first brought before this House in 1989. A clear mandate at that time was given in principle to this Bill and it appears both facile and superfluous that objections should suddenly appear in relation to a very obvious anomaly in our local authority legislation which has existed for over 50 years and has generated untold hardship, suffering and downright abuse in the last 30 years.

This Bill raises a very fundamental question: why should one section of our community be treated differently from another, when a local appointments commission does exist and is capable of dealing adequately with appointments in so many other areas and yet teachers in our vocational sector are treated differently and, I may say, unfairly in many instances? The reason for this is that teachers in the vocational sector are subjected to at times biased and often hostile appointments boards, who are neither impartial nor in many cases qualified to make judgment on personal skills or professional capabilities, yet an appointments commission exists which includes people who are trained and capable of selection within every other area of local government. As a former member of Tipperary North Riding Vocational Education Committee and of the subsidary appointments board I have a knowledge of the behind-the-scenes activity that takes place and the pressure placed on selection committees. I have, down through the years, witnessed unseemly rows where politicians were compromised, talented people rejected for spurious reasons, with accusations of patronage rife with the unfortunate outcome that students and the educational system suffered. The existing situation is invidious and grossly unjust. The major question remains as to what benefit the politicians have received. The answer is, nothing but abuse and confirmation for the public that the old colonial cliches of "pull" and "Jobbery" are alive and well in contemporary Ireland. Is this what legislative politics is about? Do we wish to be reduced to moral misfits whose only function is to "look after the lads"? Is that the kind of ideal we should be aspiring to as politicians? I firmly believe that we should not.

This amendment, though only a small issue in relative terms, is an opportunity for us to show people that we have the best interests of the public at heart. I therefore call on this House to uniformly support this amendment and bury any personal interests that may exist.

There are of course many other reasons why this Bill must be passed.

I should have said at the outset that I wish to share my time with my colleague from Tipperary South, Deputy Therese Ahearn.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is very desirable that such requests be made at commencement. The Chair usually likes to put these questions to the House to get formal approval for them. Otherwise it is taking the function of the selection of speaker from the Chair.

Mr. Lowry

That was not my wish. I beg your indulgence on this occasion, I will get it right the next time.

It also has an effect on public and professional morale. In the light of recent political events, it is vital that we restore credibility to the political process. As a body, we must be seen to do the right thing and there have been many examples during the past 30 years where appointments have been controversial to say the least. The most recent that comes to mind was the appointment of the vice-principal to St. Kevin's Community College, in Clondalkin. As long as politicians remain on these appointment boards, controversy will continue. All local authority officers are appointed by an independent non-political commission. Why can this not exist for Vocational Education Committee teachers? Vocational teachers at second and third level are appointed by an interview panel consisting, in the main, of politicians. There are verifiable cases of political interference in appointments and bizarre examples of promotions. Appointments and promotions are surrounded by rumours which all too often are accurate predictions, and very few Vocational Education Committees operate the "canvassing will disqualify" rule. Stories, however accurate or inaccurate, verifiable or unverifiable, circulate of unfortunate answers, slips or gaffes made by applicants at interviews. Teachers have the right to expect professional standards of interview and confidentiality. Since they have lost confidence in the system surely considerations of morale alone should ensure a change in the appointments system.

Teachers in our society have been subjected to much abuse in recent years. Accusations of inefficiency, malpractice, lack of sensitivity and corporal punishment have had the effect of dehumanising the teaching profession in Ireland. Teachers seem to be fair game for parents, the media and the law courts. The Vocational Education Committee appointments system only further accentuates the low profile of teachers and demeans their status in our society. Even where an appointment is scrupulously fair, as in the vast majority of cases the suspicion still exists that influence may have been brought to bear, given the nature of the system. This is demoralising for both those appointed and disappointed and undermines the vocational education system both at second and third level. I know, from talking to teachers, the anger they feel as professionals to be treated in such an unprofessional manner when seeking appointments or promotion. Many do not bother to apply as they feel it would be a waste of time. I can fully understand and appreciate their predicament and their cynicism. It simply is not good enough.

Irish people today demand professionalism at every level of human activity, whether it be from politicians, or publicans. Teachers are expected to be even more so. They must be able to teach, be sensitive, act as parental guides, counsellors and mentors for today's youth. If this level of professionalism is demanded publicly, then we as legislators must show the same professionalism in appointing teachers. Let those who are qualified and less susceptible to outside influence or prejudice appoint the guardians of our youth.

The present system is damaging to local democracy in that it gives credibility to the view that it exists for jobbery and subverts the true importance of local democracy and decisions made by local representatives. I have long been an advocate of the view that politics at a local level should not be reduced to getting planning permission for one client or water rights for another. These rights that people should have irrespective of what influence is brought to bear, are enshrined in our Constitution. Ordinary people at local level should not have to depend on local politicians for things which they are entitled to anyway. The same principle applies to this amendment. The structures are there and it is neither necessary nor desirable that politicians should have such a direct influence over the mechanisms of democratic process. The present system is additionally unfair to scrupulous local politicians in that it puts them in the invidious position of having to listen to representations by or on behalf of those seeking appointment or promotion who feel that in the light of the prevailing practice it is expected that they should make such approaches to politicians.

Politicians are often accused of poor judgment. It is indeed the yardstick by which we are measured as a body. If we say or do the wrong thing we are quickly censored. Yet, as a body, we sit in judgment on others in areas where we are unskilled and in many cases incompetent. Interviewing and appointing teachers requires skills of a high order. It requires training for the interviewer in interviewing techniques, analysis of capabilities required, the applicants' capacity to fulfil those requirements, the applicants' ability to cope with added work stress, a knowledge of personality types and their implications, a professional understanding of the teaching profession, school and college administration, discipline, curricula, responsibilities, priorities, the nature of the job to be undertaken and so on.

In my own experience, as a member of a vocational education committee appointments board, there were times when I felt inadequate and under-qualified in the above areas, and on occasions it was quite obvious to me that the applicant in front of the interview board was quite aware of the shortcomings of the interview panel also. It devalued both the exercise and the applicant.

The expertise can be, and is, available through the Local Appointments Commission. It is certainly not provided in the unskilled, non-professional and reactive type interviews provided by local politicians. A perfect example of the incongruity of this system is explained by the fact that, although a chief executive officer is appointed by the commission, a principal of a vocational technical college or a large school where salaries are similar to that of a chief executive officer must be subjected to the rigours and insanity of a politically dominated committee. On national terms this reflects my earlier point about individual injustice and subversion by local democracy. It has also been noted on a broader level that the ESRI identified the vocational education committee appointments and promotions procedure as one of the main reasons for the failure to get community colleges accepted within urban centres, as distinct from community schools which are not controlled by the vocational education committee. This is also damaging to public sector education and local democracy.

On a national level this Bill has many implications. First, it highlights the vocational education committees and focuses attention on the negative side of public sector education. When employees distrust a promotions procedure or any management mechanism, the natural human response is to become alienated from the system, and indifferent to challenges and responsibilities within it. No system can afford to allow itself alienate the confidence and enthusiasm of its workers due to real or imagined malpractice. This is particularly true of the educational system where challenges and responsibilities are rare and where financial incentive is not a major motivator. Cynicism in the teaching profession is a terminal disease. The level of cynicism in society is also the politician's measure of his own success and credibility. Most people who do not vote, for example, have lost faith in our political system and belief in the word and promises of our politicians. Cynicism is the politician's real enemy. This Bill, if passed, would restore credibility and reduce that level of cynicism in one key sector of our community.

Second, on a national level the vocational education committees have failed to develop any system of criteria on factors which indicate the route to promotion or employability. This failure has resulted in a major loss to the system in terms of productivity because genuinely ambitious but scrupulous teachers could not see the route to promotion which would serve to encourage greater effort.

Thirdly, this is an issue which, as I have said, has been evident for 30 years, with many incidents countrywide. It is not, therefore, a local issue. There are, as may be argued, good and bad vocational education committees but this is not the haphazard way in which we should be moving. A local appointments commission would by-pass individual problems and seek the general good. This type of activity only encourages the catch-cries of jobbery and patronage and leaves us continuing with a procedure set up by the English administration for the purpose of controlling appointments on religious grounds or otherwise. Is this the policy we wish to inherit? Is this the colonial legacy we choose to inflict on our fellow countrymen and on future generations? I do not believe so, and I am convinced that the Bill merits the support of the House on those grounds.

We must also look at the Bill within the European context. How would our European colleagues view such an archaic and unprofessional anomaly in our appointments system? If we are serious in our role as legislators we must support the Bill and show our European colleagues that politicians in Ireland are committed to democracy at national and local level. I have outlined a very considered case in favour of supporting this legislation. I am aware that there are objections to it and I would like to deal with these briefly and indicate how they can be refuted.

Some people may argue that the Local Appointments Commission are too slow and cumbersome. This point can be contested on three levels. First, due to the educational cutbacks the number of appointments is small and could be handled adequately by the commission. At present the commission have no mechanism for the appointment and promotion of teachers but they are prepared to establish such a mechanism and consult with the employers and unions about the setting up of such an apparatus. If the House can agree in principle to the Bill on Second Stage this would mean removing appointments from the political arena. Discussions could then begin between all interested groups before Committee Stage.

There are also those who argue that a change in the appointments system will weaken democratic control of education. However, local democracy would be much better served if the Bill is passed. In terms of education, the appointment of one teacher over another is not a matter of public policy. Public policy is what local government is all about. The only criterion for appointment is suitability for the job. This is a matter for experts, not local politicians. As I have clearly stated, this Bill will strengthen local democracy by enhancing the image of community colleges and by removing the whiff of jobbery that clings to the system.

Finally, any objections made at this point on the basis of party allegiance or otherwise would indeed be sad considering that almost all parties agreed to the Bill in principle in 1989. While Fianna Fáil did not agree, they did not oppose the Bill. I urge all Members to support this Bill which represents a step forward.

Every Bill presented to the House must be given equal value and consideration. Democracy is only served when vigilance is guaranteed at every level of our society. If we wish teachers to promote democracy in our schools we are obliged to provide an appointments mechanism that is equitable and fundamentally democratic.

Such a mechanism would benefit the working of our system at a local level, free politicians to do other more valuable work, end the individual elements of pull and patronage in our system, and encourage the evolution of local democracy in a more open and free manner. It would give politicians more credibility and allow skilled people appoint vocational teachers, a group of professionals who play a vital role in our community. On a national level, it would generate a positive attitude among people towards the body politic and undermine the cynicism that exists. It would give greater status and morale to the teaching profession and encourage incentive for promotion and success among teachers generally. On an international level, we would be seen in a rightful role as legislators, providing structures for the healthy development of democracy at all levels here. Finally, this anomaly in our system must be eliminated simply because it can and does lead to biased and discriminatory activity and has consistently done so for more than 30 years. That is too long and it is time for such colonial legacies to end.

Mrs. T. Ahearn

I wish to thank Deputy Lowry for sharing his time with me. The Bill is not an attack on vocational education committees, or an attempt to undermine local democracy. It is not, as claimed by Deputy Dempsey last week, aimed at casting a slur on teachers appointed by the present system to our vocational education committee schools. I was a vocational school teacher, I am a member of the Teachers' Union of Ireland and I am also a member of South Tipperary Vocational Education Committee. Therefore, I speak not only with personal interest but also with practical experience. My unique position allows me to state, without fear of contradiction, that there is enormous unease and dissatisfaction among vocational education committee teachers with the present system of appointments. Furthermore, I know, as do the Members who are opposing the Bill, that the majority of interviewing boards are politically loaded. Based on this fact is it any wonder that so much doubt, suspicion and fear exists among applicants for vocational education committee positions, having regard to the possibility that political rather than educational factors will determine an appointment?

The job of the vocational education committees is to ensure democratic control of education. The members' role is to act as a watchdog for the public and ensure that the best possible education is available to all who attend our vocational education committee schools. Their job is not to administer and should not be to appoint teachers.

The chief executive officer, and staff, administer the local vocational education committee system, based on guidelines agreed by members of the vocational ducation committee, just as the county manager and staff do in a local authority. Why then should a vocational education committee have the authority to appoint when no such powers belong to a local authority? Vocational school teachers are the only group of officers in the local authority service still to be appointed by politicians. We, the Members of the Oireachtas, do not appoint the civil servants to the various Departments. We decide the policy and the Civil Service administer that policy.

The same principle should apply to vocational education committees. The members should decide policy but, as in all other areas, they should not appoint staff. Most members of vocational education committees are good at working for the general good of the public and in ensuring that good, sound education is provided for students, but the majority have no special training or expertise to deal with the appointments of teachers. They have no training in interview techniques and little or no knowledge as to whether an individual applying for a teaching position has the required skills for the job. Applicants for teaching positions always have the educational qualifications to do the job, but there are many other qualities necessary to be successful.

As well as subject knowledge, a person needs skills of communication, inter-personal skills, ability to discipline, and control, to motivate, stimulate, coax and uplift. Above all they need to have the stamina to face a full and, more often than not, over-crowded classroom every day, year after year, classrooms of students who are full of energy.

There are vocational education committee appointment committees round the country who do not have even one member, apart from the chief executive officer and an inspector, who has ever stood in front of a class, were not in front of a classroom for 20 years. How can they be expected to know the calibre of a person needed to cope with teaching today? Under the Vocational Education Act, 1930, vocational education committees have the right to co-opt members to the committee with special expertise. I am sure it was visualised that they would have a role in the appointment of teachers, but we all know what happens. Solid party people — usually men — of the political party which controls the vocational education committee are appointed as a sort of thank you for services rendered. This, of course, totally undermines an admirable principle that was part of the Vocational Education Act.

The appointment of teachers must be an educational, not a political matter. Furthermore, interviewers should be actually involved or have practical experience in education.

For my own part — and from my experience in a vocational school — I believe the principal of any school should have a role in the appointment of teachers. The principal is a person who knows the type of student in the school; the principal is a person who knows the type of character to inter-mix with the rest of the staff; the principal is a person who could determine what applicant is best for the education in the school. Unfortunately, in the present system, the principal does not have a role.

The Bill proposed by Deputy John Bruton will remove not only the suspicion but also the possibility of any political influence. The present system, whereby teachers seeking promotion to principalship, vice-principal and indeed to those nameless posts just called A and B, appointment to which, in the final analysis, rests with politicians, is unhealthy. Indeed, much can be judged from the fact that those interview committees, as selected by the Vocational Education Committee, proceed to interview for posts of responsibility where the nature of the post is not known by the applicant or indeed by the interview board. That must be changed immediately. It is not possible — and indeed it is inconceivable — that an applicant for a principalship of a large vocational school can be interviewed by members of an interview board who never stood in a classroom, who know nothing about the environment of school life and who are unskilled in requirements for inter-staff relationships, never mind appreciating the needs and requirements that such decisions require.

The real contradiction lies in the fact that the appointment of the CEO is not made by the local Vocational Education Committee. If, as the Minister asserted in her speech, the present appointment of vocational teachers is the essence of local democracy why then does she not extend it to the appointment of the CEOs? The present system is unhealthy but the Minister does not have the courage to change it. Surely everybody, even those opposing this Bill, must admit that it is distasteful to see highly qualified graduates driving round the countryside and visiting the interview panel in order to state their case? Any system that leads to, or worse still, encourages this type of canvassing is wrong and that is what the present system encourages.

I am glad that the majority of appointments to Vocational Education Committees are correct and above board but, unfortunately, there are unpleasant examples as outlined by Deputy Bruton in introducing the Bill. Deputy Cowen said that perhaps 99 per cent of the appointments are correct but surely he must agree that even one appointment made on any basis other than on merit is a grave injustice to the applicant?

The appointment of vocational teachers must operate under rules, procedures and criteria laid down by an independent, non-political body. The most important factor in all this is that the teachers have lost confidence in the system. Because of the excellent education they have imparted over the years they deserve a fair and independent method of appointment. On those grounds, I urge the House to support the Bill.

Mr. Tunney

Ba mhaith liom cúpla focal a rá ar an gceist tábhachtach seo. Bearing in mind that he is the originator of the proposed legislation, one must immediately congratulate Deputy Bruton on his elevation to the leadership of the second largest party in the House and wish him well in his efforts to improve the lot of the people. Having said that, I will return to the legislation.

If, on the basis of this legislation, Deputy Bruton intends to proceed as leader of his party he will fail because, on his own statement, the standard of excellence which he requires is not possible. Here I take slight issue with Deputy Lowry who said that Deputy Bruton gave two of several examples. He gave two specific examples, details of which, he said, were available. One referred to 1987 and the other to 1979. If Deputy Bruton is sincere and concerned that there should be this excellence which he thinks is possible, there was an obligation on him to move earlier and to deal in another way with the Bill before us. It does not require legislation because, in the presentation of this Bill before the House, he is affronting and doing a disservice to one of the greatest elements in our educational system, vocational education. It exists, not for teachers or politicians, but for students. Can anybody here demonstrate that in that area of education the students of this country, who before that had been left aside by the prevailing system, did not get value from it? I was a part of that system as a school principal, appointed by a Fine Gael committee, but they did not appoint me because of my political persuasion, they appointed me because they knew I would do my best to serve the system.

What is the perception of Deputy Lowry and Deputy Ahern of education? Why would they dismiss people from contributing to it who had been elected by their neighbours, thousands of people? Are they saying that their contribution would reflect on the quality of the voter, that they would return a person devoid of an opinion as to the suitability of a teacher under the system? It is not the politician who gives qualifications to the teachers, teachers are already there, having graduated from our third level institutions. The obligation on the public representative is, as far as he or she can, to adjudicate on the general suitability of the candidates before him or her.

In the words of Deputy Bruton himself, the system has been 99 per cent successful but he would now jettison it because he asserts there is a possibility that the public are distraught about the manner of the appointments. By their fruits you shall know them. The fruits of that system are there to be viewed by everybody. I have become cynical over the years, not with public representatives but with public representatives who seem to indulge in self-denigration. There is nobody more important than the person who comes before us as the elected representative of the people. While every other profession is prepared to laud its virtues and to admit its omissions, will we perpetuate the cynicism outside the House that politicians are fit for nothing and not capable of making a decision without being influenced by political considerations? We condemn all when we condemn one.

I ask Members to consider their remarks in respect of their own profession, not as teachers but as politicians, especially in view of the fact that in vocational education there was an awakening and an awareness which had not been manifested anywhere before. I do not accept that the interpretation of what is educationally suitable is the preserve of the academic. For far too long we have seen what has happened and that academics, if they had their way, would substitute a new type of capitalism for education and would charge the maximum for giving it. That applies to all professions. Here we have a type of education which has benefited the vast majority of children of PAYE taxpayers. We are now throwing cold water on this system because of the fact that there is a type of a "dúirt bean liom go ndúirt bean eile" that there was somebody appointed, whether in Tipperary or somewhere else, who was friendly with the politician. What politician in his or her senses would agree to the appointment of a teacher on his political affiliations? I would say that there is not anyone in the Fine Gael Party, not anyone in The Workers' Party or the Labour Party and I would be very disappointed to think that there was anyone in the Fianna Fáil Party who would do it. Imagine a member of a vocational committee — and this is the assertion — who would place the presumed interest of his political party ahead of the interest of the students who should be the beneficiaries under the system.

If I were to operate in the illogical fashion that seems to be the purpose of Deputy John Bruton, I would endeavour to introduce legislation here that would provide against a situation that occurred in my constituency during the recent election when a teacher at primary level told students to go home and tell their parents not to vote for a certain candidate because he told a lie. I do not condemn all teachers because I am aware of one teacher who did that, but I will tell the House I will pursue that to the point where, having assembled the evidence, I will take whatever action I can against a particular teacher. Do I introduce legislation because of a situation at a personal or private level, when my daughter who is attending a convent school here, during the times when circumstances in our party were not dissimilar to those which existed in the Fine Gael Party some weeks ago, is asked by a teacher, a political activist for some other party, "now what does your daddy think of Mr. Haughey?" Was I expected to run in here and look for legislation rather than go to the school and insist that my daughter be taken from that class?

I have given time to the House to think about what we are doing. What we would presume to do here is on the basis of rumour, on the basis of catering for some presumed cynicism that exists. If we give way we are perpetuating the feeling outside. We should ask for the evidence. I, too, am a former member of the Teachers Union of Ireland and I know them as well as anybody else who speaks for them. We have all been defeated at different levels and we naturally take refuge in some form of consolation and will say "I would have got it only for ....". Is that the basis of this legislation? I am afraid it is.

It is appropriate to talk about education and to define what it is. Is it that which I referred to earlier, a new capitalism, which I am afraid it is. Is it free as we claim it is? It is not. That is a fallacy. Exposing students to the same curriculum does not guarantee equality in education. Is there a return for the investment we make in our graduates? Is that what education is about; the new-found, new fangled idea of making education relevant and presupposing that we do nothing except produce specialists in certain areas and that we leave aside the humanities? Is that what we are talking about?

Here again, I yearn for and want the retention of the public representative who will guarantee that education is what it should be, and that we are not concerned about academic pursuits alone but about preparing our young people for life, for their occupations and for leisure time which everybody knows is increasing at a dramatic rate. Here again, I see the importance of having on committees of selection people who are not academics but who are well rounded people, people like Paddy Donegan, a former trade union official who served with me on the Dublin City Vocational Committee. He would not claim to have been a graduate, a professional, but there was no better man in deciding on the suitability of any teacher to serve the purpose, to serve the great needs of the young people of this city and indeed students who came from elsewhere. Would we dismiss him because he had been invited on to the committee by the Labour Party as their representative? Would we say to him or to the late Jimmy O'Keeffe and other great people of that time, "while you were there you were a party to the appointment of teachers on a political basis?" I hope this great House will be here to interpret real needs.

I regret I have to keep looking at the clock. With the permission of the Chair and the agreement of the House I propose to share my time with Deputy Michael Kitt.

Acting Chairman (Mr. M. Barrett)

Is it agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Tunney

I gather that Deputy Durkan will give the House the benefit of his views. I have heard the views of Deputy Brian O'Shea, a man for whom I have great respect. Are these Deputies convinced that because of facts known to them it is essential now that we jettison or bring discredit to a system of education that has served our people so well? I do not want to do their thinking for them but if they look, as great statesmen before them have done, into their hearts they will have to agree that there is not the need to do so. If they are privy to information and details on which they can base a better case than Deputy John Bruton, they should let the House or the Minister have it, but they should not take away from that aspect of education, the important ingredient which it has, different from all others, the voice of the people, vox populi, there to interpret, better than I see it and more idealistically than any academic or anybody else, what education is about, and the need it should serve. The proof is there in the countless number of students, the products of that system of education who responded to the system. They were guided by the teachers appointed under this system, now belatedly discovered by 0.01 per cent of the people as being defective and which it is said should be jettisoned. That is the basis on which this proposal is before the House. Is it a sound basis? If we accept it as being sound, think of its application throughout society and every other area because that is the decision, as I would see it, the Deputy is being asked to make and that is the basis on which it has been brought before us.

Apart from the loss, which is the whole purpose for my breaking with tradition and coming in to address the House, the Deputy should think about what he is going to do to that aspect of education which is at the moment and has been flowering. Is the Deputy going to blight it by saying "a whole lot of things were wrong because public representatives, good lay people, were involved in the appointment of teachers"?

My first concern is for education and students and my second concern is for public representatives. I have said and continue to say that until politicians establish an institute for themselves we are going to have a perpetuation of this system when in response to a whim a politician thinks he is serving his cause or his party's cause and would then presume to be serving the cause of education or the people he represents by denigrating himself and his colleagues.

Mr. M. Kitt

First, I too wish to congratulate Deputy John Bruton on his election as Leader of Fine Gael. Along with Deputy Bruton, I have been a member of the Council of Europe for the last year and he has certainly done very well as rapporteur on the Culture and Education committee. Indeed, he has done far better than in bringing this Bill before the House. I totally oppose this Bill and it is only right that I should say here that teachers in the vocational education system are of the highest calibre. There has always been keen competition in relation to appointments within the vocational educational sector and we have excellent teachers as a result.

These teachers were appointed following an interview with a committee comprised not only of politicians elected by the people but also of Department inspectors and representatives of the IVEA. No reference has been made to this interview system by many of the speakers in this debate. This system was introduced by the late Donogh O'Malley in 1967 and amended by Deputy John Wilson in 1979. It is not as time-consuming as the one operated by the Local Appointments Commission. Local knowledge is required, which representatives on the committees have.

In my own county there are vocational schools on the Aran Islands and Cornamona. In each of those areas a specialist teacher of the Irish langauge is needed and I am not sure if the Local Appointments Commission could select the person needed by those schools. The teachers, the committee and in particular the selection committee have been unjustifiably castigated in this debate during the past two weeks. The selection committee select a candidate who is appointed by the VEC having undergone a fair interview.

I should also make the point that there are six members of the TUI on the County Galway Vocational Education Committee, one of whom was chosen by the TUI. That is a very good example of local democracy and the work that needs to be done. They have to appoint principals, vice-principals, full-time teachers, temporary whole-time teachers and part-time teachers. I wonder how the Local Appointments Commission could deal with all those appointments and cope with the number of appointments which have to be made given the manpower shortages in the LAC. It is also worth noting that people have to live with the appointments they make in contrast with the position under the bureaucratic LAC system. I have great faith and confidence in the vocational education system.

As the Minister said last week, this motion is extraordinarily selective, referring to 6 per cent of schools in Ireland. To her credit the Minister has always stated that she wants to devolve as much responsibility as possible in the educational process to local managements but this motion asks us to do the very opposite.

I would like the House to consider the nature of appointments. Vocational education committees may not know what their requirements will be for a particular year until close to the start of the new school year. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of students repeating their leaving certificate and we also have the very popular VPTP schemes. Other vacancies may arise during the course of the year. For example, if the B post teacher gets the A post, there will be a vacancy for a B post teacher. Likewise, if the A post teacher becomes vice-principal there will be a vacancy for an A post teacher. If the vice-principal is appointed principal there will be a vacancy for a vice-principal and so on. The Local Appointments Commission would not be able to cope with the large number of vacancies that arise during the course of the school year.

No reference has been made either in this debate to some of the other fine work being done by the vocational education committees, namely the adult education courses. Teachers work long hours on those courses, in the process providing a great service for the community along with the work they do during teaching hours with students.

What I find objectionable is that Fine Gael have brought in this Bill at a time when they accuse us, as they did last year, of running away from the local elections. They said we were afraid to hold the elections and criticised us for not holding the elections in 1989. That can now be seen for the hypocrisy it is. We have stated we believe in local democracy and local knowledge in relation to the appointment of teachers by vocational education committees, yet they are now saying that this process should be centralised and they are not in favour of allowing the vocational education committees to continue to hold the powers that they have. They have been shown up as hypocrites in relation to the statements they made last year and they are beginning to make the same ones again.

I ask Deputy Bruton, does he want to give any responsibility to local bodies? That is the reason we oppose this Bill. It is against local democracy and is moving towards a centralised system, this at a time when we are trying to promote decentralisation of Government Departments. Deputy Bruton must not trust local politicians because he has certainly undermined their confidence in bringing forward this Bill. In his contribution last week he talked about the 0.01 per cent of cases and went on to give two examples. Deputy Lowry said there were many examples he could give but, in fact, he mentioned only one case; that was in Clondalkin. I make the point that the VECs can do the job of appointing teachers better than any other body. That is the reason I suggest that the status quo be maintained. We must remember that the facilities are being improved all the time in vocational schools and I give credit to the Minister for Education, Deputy O'Rourke, for what she has done in my county of Galway, where all 14 vocational schools now provide a leaving certificate course which was not the case up to 1980. Extensions have been built to these schools and transport arrangements and so on are being improved by the committees. The message from Fine Gael seems to be that while the VECs pay the salaries, provide the materials for the schools, arrange school transport etc., they should not be given responsibility for appointing the teachers.

I would make the point that on County Galway VEC there are very fine members of Fine Gael and that while they are represented on the selection committee and on the TUI, they have never raised this matter at VEC level. Certainly they have never contacted me as a local Deputy on any concern they might have about the present system of appointments. Indeed the members of the TUI have never approached me about their concerns in the matter of the appointment of teachers.

I believe this Bill is doing a great disservice to vocational education and I hope Deputy Bruton would reconsider what he has put before us. He has been an excellent rapporteur on the culture and education committee but he has made a serious mistake in putting forward this Bill.

I thank the House for listening to my contribution. I hope this will be the last we will hear of this Bill and that we will revert to local democracy, responsibility and accountability of local committees and that the great work of the committees will be maintained.

Mr. Durkan

I propose, with the permission of the House, to share my time with my colleague, Deputy Paul McGrath.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Durkan

I think everybody in this House recognises that the vocational education school system has been extremely good and efficient and has many good points. One of the main things is that the system has come within the reach of virtually every boy and girl in the country regardless of their background and of their political affiliations. That is as it should be. The VECs have done a great deal to embellish the educational system in Ireland but particularly on the technical level. This is something for which we should all be grateful having regard to the need for those with technical qualifications, a demand that will be even greater in the future.

However, any system that has been in operation for a number of years is entitled to be reviewed. That does not necessarily mean that in the review we are either denigrating the system as it has existed or denigrating ourselves when we suggest a change. I refute entirely the suggestion by Deputy Dempsey last week that the bringing of this motion before the House was a slur on the VECs and on the appointments made by them, in other words, the teachers appointed by those committees. I would not consider that to be the case at all nor do I think the proposer of the Bill intended any such slur. The intention was to bring to the attention of the House the views of a political party having regard to the views expressed by members of the teaching profession and by parents, and in the interests of the students. It is legitimate that an issue such as this should be discussed in the House and that we should examine both the merits and demerits of the existing system and, perhaps, of any anticipated system. We should examine the strengths and weaknesses of the system that has prevailed up to now and ask ourselves if there are ways and means by which we can improve it. We must always strive to improve and embellish any system with the objective of ensuring, first that it is fair and equitable, that it is seen to be such and that it is above and beyond reproach. To achieve the perfect is the ultimate but we are all human and regardless of whether it is a local appointments commission or any other body who makes appointments, there will always be somebody who will be disappointed and who will say afterwards: "Had it not been for the system I would have won out". Notwithstanding the fact that our present system has worked exceptionally well for a number of years, some instances have been alluded to in the course of this debate which would indicate that there may have been miscarriages of justice.

I have never been a member of a VEC so I speak with second-hand information on these matters. However, potential applicants for teaching posts in various schools have approached me and asked how the system works, on what basis, etc. appointments are made. What amazed me when I began to delve more deeply into this aspect of it was how it was possible to achieve the single decimal point of a unit in favour or against a particular applicant. I know the people who are carrying out the interviews have done so with the very best of intentions but I must say I would be worried about my own ability, if I was sitting on such a board to determine whether one applicant was 0.01 of a point ahead of another. It is only when you multiply the number of differences by the number of people on the board that you arrive at an answer. What is even more difficult to work out is that when there would almost be a tie between two or three applicants for a particular post the position could be determined by——

Mr. Cowen

A computer.

Mr. Durkan

——by a single decimal point, or a tenth of a decimal point as to who will be the successful person.

Mr. Cowen

Get a computer.

Mr. Durkan

As a politician I find that would be a very difficult position in which to be. If I were asked who was the most qualified candidate I would have to say that when we get down to the very narrow evaluation of qualifications — on the basis of a tenth of a decimal point — I would have to ask myself whether I was qualified to determine if that was the way to proceed.

Mr. Cowen

Make a decision, be decisive.

Mr. Durkan

We heard from Deputy Kitt of the value of local knowledge. I agree that this is something that has always been beneficial to politicians in that they know their own terrain and the people in it. I do not mean to cast any aspersions on what Deputy Kitt has said but imagine a situation developing where two or three applicants tied virtually on a part of a percentage point. How then would the local knowledge come into play and how would it determine who was to get the position?

Mr. Cowen

Administration.

Mr. Durkan

If I were an applicant for one of those posts and I suddenly saw, sitting across from me on the interview board, a political opponent — which could happen in certain circumstances — could I honestly say to myself that, although I was equal to all the others, I would be equal when the interview was over? I am not saying that to in any way denigrate the people who have done this job for years but it is a possibility and it is something we should take into account and try to avoid in case it arises in the future.

Let us look at another point that troubles me a little, and this is something of which I would have some knowledge. It would apply regardless of who actually carries out the interviews. There is what is known as a short list system. Many difficulties can arise within that system. Anyone who sits down to short list a group of, say, 100 applicants, and this can happen in the case of a number of appointments to any board and, in particular, the appointment of teachers to VEC schools in any constituency——

Mr. Cowen

Who does it?

Mr. Durkan

I am not suggesting that I accept it but I would have to say that by determining the short list one can ultimately determine the outcome of the interview. That is a fact and there is absolutely no getting away from it. By simply determining who is going to be interviewed and having regard to the qualifications, experience and so on required of the successful applicant, one can determine who will be the successful appointee.

I know from discussions with colleagues in various constituencies who have been on VEC boards that there are times when they believed other people should have been interviewed. Going through a whole series of interviews is a very tedious job — Members who are more enlightened than I and who have spent years doing this job will readily admit that it is almost an impossible job — but in the context of this Bill I should like to see some improvement in the short listing system.

I know that the CEO can take advice regarding the short list but I will not go into that matter too deeply at this stage other than to say——

Mr. Cowen

He should get a computer.

Mr. Durkan

——that a system will have to be devised which will show that one is doing things fairly, and is seen to be fair. A system will also have to be devised to determine who should be on the short list. Otherwise everybody will have to be interviewed, which will be a mammoth task.

When the Leas-Cheann Comhairle was on the other side of the House he said that by denigrating each other politicians denigrate themselves. I do not think this Bill was intended to imply that we were putting ourselves on a lower level. In fact, it tries to ensure that politicians at this level are seen to be endeavouring to introduce something new which will be an improvement on what existed. There was no question of any aspersions being cast on the political system or on politicians in this House.

Various problems can arise in regard to appointments at local level where people know each other. I am not saying that problems do not arise in the case of the Local Appointments Commission, but it is the system which has been set up by the State, it has worked well, it has been seen to work well and it is accepted as being above and beyond political reproach. Some Members have suggested that the proposed changes envisaged in this Bill are a slur on VECs. I reject that. Those suggestions could also be construed as a slur in some ways on the Local Appointments Commission. I do not think a slur was intended or that it is applicable in any event. However, I have to say that there are inherent dangers in a system where an applicant, coming before an interview board, faces a person he or she knows well — perhaps he or she has worked or is working with that person, or Lord forbid, he or she is a political opponent. It could well be suggested in certain circumstances that an appointment was made because the person was a political opponent—in fact, that suggestion has been made from time to time. That could be either an indication of the fairness of the system or an indication of its weakness.

I want to emphasise again that there is an inbuilt danger in the interview boards being in the hands of people who appoint people, not for any reason of alleged conspiracy or corruption but simply because of their familiarity and their local knowledge to which I referred.

Mr. Browne

(Wexford): God forbid.

Mr. Durkan

It can also make it very difficult for the interviewer and the interviewee. For that reason I do not think it is any harm for all Members of this House to examine the possibility and the merits of improving that system by way of the changes envisaged in this Bill.

I support this Bill and call on all sides of the House to support it for the reasons put forward and not to cast aspersions on what has happened heretofore. It has been suggested that there have been slight errors made in the past—I would have to admit that there were — but would it not be better to eliminate the possibility of errors rather than to have at some stage in the future the prospect of some difficulty arising whereby both politicians and the general public could point the finger and suggest there was some miscarriage of justice? I have agreed to share my time with Deputy Paul McGrath.

Mr. McGrath

There seems to be a discrepancy between the clocks in the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is, indeed, Deputy. The clock facing me is incorrect. Endeavours are being made to rectify matters. At present I am using my own watch and you will have to bear with me.

Mr. Durkan

The interview board would have a hard job trying to determine which was right.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has two minutes left of the time available to him.

Mr. McGrath

I should like first to refer to some of the contributions made when this Bill was previously before the House. Deputy Dermot Ahern spoke at considerable length but much of what he said was not relevant to the Bill. I should like to take issue with the Deputy for saying that the Local Appointments Commission were slow and cumbersome. It was very disappointing to hear a Deputy of his stature — indeed, he is very ambitious and expects to move up the ranks in Government circles — cast aspersions on the Local Appointments Commission. On the other hand, Deputy Cowen used the opportunity——

A Deputy

Go easy, he is your neighbour.

Mr. McGrath

——to attack Deputy John Bruton as the instigator of this Bill. It was very inappropriate of the Deputy to use his time to do that. However, I must compliment him — I think we can respect him for this — for saying that he has never made, and hopes never to make any overtures to anybody on VECs about the appointment of teachers. That was a very positive statement and I commend him on it.

Like my colleague, Deputy Durkan, I congratulate the VECs for the marvellous work they are doing. The County Westmeath VEC have to be commended for their enlightened approach not just to mainstream education but to the wide range of subjects covered in night classes, in day courses for the disadvantaged, etc.

This Bill deals with only a minute part of the work of the VECs. I welcome the Bill which proposes to improve and update section 23 of the Vocational Education Act, 1930.

Debate adjourned.