The Minister informed the House last night that according to the legal opinion available to her from the Attorney General, the Bill is flawed and inoperable. I thank the Minister for the courtesy she extended to me today in examining and discussing with her that legal opinion. During the day I also sought legal opinion on the Bill. While the discussion I had was quite detailed, it was not as considered as I would have wished, and we will be coming back with a more considered opinion on a number of issues next week. One of the points which came in the discussion last night in terms of providing reserved places for teachers and parents was whether the VECs should be extended from a membership of 14 to 18. The Minister's advise is that there would be problems with this. However, from my discussions today and my examination of the Bill, it seems that a simple amendment to increase the number of members from 14 to 18 would not create any problems.
I am not usually in favour of increasing the membership of committees. Smaller committees, by and large, tend to be more efficient and operate at a level which is more beneficial to the recipients of the service, in this case students in vocational schools and regional colleges. Having considered the matter again during the day I believe the extension of the membership from 14 to 18 would be a good idea, taking all the factors into consideration. As I said last night, there are people who have long served on vocational education committees in trade unions, chambers of commerce, churches and so on who have made considerable contributions to vocational education committees, to the education system generally and to the growth of services.
Two subsections in section 8 of the 1930 Act, subsections (1) and (3), could be amended to delete "14" and insert "18". That would get us past the first hurdle. A number of problems were mentioned last night regarding the method of election for parents, and I discussed this matter with the Minister today. However, having looked at section 8 (4) of the original Act I believe a simple addendum, to that subsection would get us past the second hurdle. The additional people could be taken on by way of election by the VEC. The section refers to a local authority electing persons to be members of a vocational education committee. If the section remains intact and the final election is carried out by the local authority it would be appropriate to include an addendum along the following lines, "but who must be employed within the scheme and two must be parents of students who are pupils within the scheme."
The next matter is the method of election. Several problems would arise in connection with second level schools in the vocational sector, for instance, there are one year courses such as secretarial courses, post-leaving cart courses and so on. Children on such courses in vocational schools may not necessarily have attended the vocational school during their second level education proper. In order that the register of parents who would be electors be as complete as possible it must be entered up on a specific date and the parents and guardians of all the children attending schools within the vocational education committee scheme should go on the register as of that date. Guardians should be included as well as parents. Those who care for children attending courses or schools within the scheme should have a say in who represents them.
Another important question is who will carry out the election, who will be the returning officer. That problem could be resolved by the election to the committee being carried out by the local authority, the local authority being directed by way of circular from the Minister on how to accept nominations for the four extra places, two for teachers and two for parents.
Last night the Minister dealt with the matter of other unions from within the vocational education sector. In the spirit of PESP, and of extended industrial democracy and worker participation, it is only right that all employees within the scheme should have a say in the staff representation. The de facto situation is that teachers in any vocational education scheme would have the vast majority of members who could vote, but it is only proper that all trade unionists within the scheme should have a say in who should represent them.
A point that has been made to me about semi-State bodies is that the going rate is one-third of the board. In justice and equity if there is to be worker participation then those who work within the scheme should have a say. The teachers would have the majority vote and, inevitably, it would be teachers who represent the staff, but others employed in the scheme should have their say.
The position of parents of children at second level is straightforward enough in that virtually all the children are minors. A different position exists in regard to regional colleges within the scheme. Students in those colleges — and the Minister alluded to this point last night — would in the main be 18 years of age or older. At that age people can vote, they can join the Army, die for their country and so on. There is an anomaly in the whole system in that people who are 18 and over are adults in every sense, but in the assessment of income for scholarships at third level institutions — not all students at regional colleges are in receipt of ESF grants which, unlike scholarships, are not means tested — the young adult's entitlement is based on his or her parents' income. The issue is taken further when one considers those students who finish their third level education and are then unlucky enough not to obtain employment. If they apply for unemployment assistance their entitlement is again assessed in terms of their parents' income. By and large, students at third level institutions are over 18, and the argument rests in favour of student representation on the VECs. I understand that university students already have such representation as of right. A small number of students at third level colleges will not be 18 years of age and their parents should vote for the parent representatives on their VEC.
I am approaching the debate in what I hope is a constructive way. The Labour Party will come back to the House next week with a more considered legal opinion and in doing so we will seek to resolve a problem that must be resolved now or within the next few weeks. As I stated last night, if the format is not changed now then the present position will continue for five to seven years. That is completely unacceptable considering undertakings for teacher representation given by the Minister to the TUI on several occasions. In recent times the Minister made very positive sounds about meaningful parental involvement in the schools at management level. There is parental representation on boards of management at various levels in education, but the VECs are the only solid administrative structure for schools in any of the areas. Just as teachers have a very important and unique contribution to make in the business of VECs, the same applies to parents. When there is a will to achieve something it can be done. This may involve further amendments, as I suggested last night.
If the Minister brings in any appropriate amendments or if other amendments arise which will achieve the objective of reserving places for teachers and parents, we will certainly go along with it. As a teacher who benefited a great deal in my career from parent support, I can say that parents are a great resource. At times there might be concern among teachers in relation to interference in their professional business and this is already covered in the legislation for VECs. I have not seen any real effort by parent representatives to interfere at that level. I have always found parent representatives on boards of management to be constructive and enthusiastic. They become involved to assist their own children and in doing so help all children.
From the industrial relations point of view it is important to have teachers there. It is important in the broad concept of social or industrial democracy which is a large part of the PESP philosophy which has found support on all sides of the House. The role played by public representatives on VECs has been constructive and there has not been a tendency to split along party lines on issues. They do not play politics and goodness knows, in the past few years because of cutbacks in education there has been ample opportunity for Opposition politicians to exploit the position politically. I am glad that has not happened and that we have recognised that there is a political arena in which to fight political issues.
In terms of the management of a scheme, such as the vocational education scheme, and the management of schools, schools must keep within their allocation in relation to teachers and so on. It is up to schools to fight their corner when looking for additional provisions. However, I am glad that debates on vocational education committees have not turned into circuses in my area.
The contribution of public representatives is a very important part of the vocational education scheme. We all know of many individuals who have contributed unselfishly to this scheme over many years. I alluded last night to the importance of the interface of industry and commerce with vocational education committees. As we move into the last decade of the century the scope then becomes even greater. Those involved in industry and commerce, whether at management or trade union level, have a good knowledge of the type of education, the type of courses necessary so that people in an area on coming through the system will have the skills and education to take up all positions in companies.
In the past there was a tendency to see vocational schools as schools taking students who were not high achievers. The advent of the community colleges, and the major changes in vocational schools over the past number of years, have highlighted this misinterpretation. The standard achieved throughout the country at vocational level, at second level, is tremendous. People often forget that vocational education committees provide a wide range of courses ranging from adult literacy through to degree level courses.
The Labour Party will come back with a more considered position next week. We are doing this in a constructive way. There is a high level of consensus in the House in relation to teacher participation on VECs and in terms of having reserved places for parents as well. Following legal consultation I am convinced that all things are possible if the will is there. It is very important to tackle this problem. The Minister afforded me the courtesy of showing me her legal advice in relation to this Bill and discussing it. The debate should not be conducted in the terms of breaking down opposition. There should be a constructive input from all of us so that the two important principles of industrial democracy on the one hand and meaningful parent involvement on the other can be achieved and put in place after the local elections when the new VECs are set up.