Amendments Nos. 2, 21 and 25 are related to amendment No. 1 and they may be taken together by agreement.
Teaching Council Bill, 2000: Committee Stage.
Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 4.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 7, subsection (2), line 32, to delete "regulations made under section 10(1)(a) or”.
The purpose of this amendment is to ensure the Minister submits to the Dáil regulations relating to the first election. There seems to be no justification for not laying these regulations before the Dáil and having them open to Dáil scrutiny. It is only fair and proper that should be included. Similarly with amendment No. 2, which states: "In page 7, subsection (2), line 33, to delete "14(4),” the Minister should put all regulations before the Dáil, including orders under section 14(4) regarding pensions.
This is a group of technical amendments relating to the procedures which should be used in the making of certain regulations under the Bill. I am happy to accept amendment No. 1 proposed by Deputy Shortall. While the Minister originally considered that a technical nature of the regulations covered by this amendment relating to elections for the first council might not be of sufficient importance to necessitate formal Oireachtas oversight, nevertheless, we are happy to take on board the Deputy's view and we will accept that amendment.
In the case of amendment No. 2, I have no objection in principle to this but I would prefer if the Deputy would permit me to reconsider this issue on Report Stage. The reason is that these regulations are originally rooted in separate legislation, the Superannuation Act, 1980. I would be anxious not to provide for any mechanism in this legislation that may already be covered in the 1980 Act. I will, therefore, undertake that the House will be reported back to on Report Stage following the advice of the chief parliamentary counsel. Should no technical issue arise, I would be happy to give a commitment that the amendment will be moved by us at that time.
On amendment No. 21, I propose to accept it and I thank Deputy Shortall for drawing this to our attention. The provision, as drafted, requires the Minister to allow for Oireachtas supervision in making orders for change in the teacher education institutions which nominate members to the council. While it allows the Minister to amend such orders, it does not provide for like supervision of such amendments. It is clearly appropriate that similar supervision be maintained and, therefore, I will accept that amendment.
In the case of amendment No. 25, this amendment is already provided for in the Bill, as drafted. Deputy Sargent has proposed a similar oversight mechanism where in an exceptional case, the Minister appoints a person to take on the responsibilities of the council for a period of time. Such oversight is provided for in section 16(8) and, therefore, I do not think the amendment is necessary.
I thank the Minister for accepting those amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 not moved.
Section 4, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 5.
I move amendment No. 2a:
In page 8, subsection (1), line 7, to delete "as".
I would like to make amendments to section 5 and to the Long Title to the Bill. These amendments are simply to remove typographical errors in the Bill and I apologise for the short notice. Section 5, as currently drafted, reads at line 7 "or, in the English language, as the Teaching Council,". This should read "or, in the English language, the Teaching Council,". The word "as" is superfluous. Similarly, line 18 of the Long Title, as drafted, reads "or, in the English language, as the Teaching Council," and this should read "or, in the English language, the Teaching Council. Again, the word "as" is not necessary. It is simply a minor technical amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 5, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 6.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 8, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following:
"(b) to ensure that only qualified teachers be employed or work as teachers in schools,”.
The Minister will accept that this is a very topical issue at the moment. A very large number of teachers, particularly at primary level, are not qualified. The number stands at 1,500 at present. An objective of the council should be to ensure that only qualified teachers are employed. It sits very comfortably with the other objectives, which are to regulate the teaching profession, maintain standards and so on. If we are to ensure the standing of teaching and that the rigorous qualifications required at present continue in the future, it is important to state in this legislation that an objective of the council should be to ensure that only qualified teachers teach in our schools.
I broadly support the thrust of the amendment to section 6, as tabled by Deputy Shortall. All of us are only too well aware that there is a problem, particularly in the primary school sector, in terms of non-qualified substitute teachers being used extensively. I know the Minister might well say in his reply that steps have been taken to ensure a greater supply of teachers will come on stream in due course taking account of the additional training places. If this amendment was accepted, what would be the consequences for schools which can only operate by using unqualified substitute teachers? While that situation is entirely unacceptable, it might be preferable to one where classrooms were unattended. I am anxious to hear the Minister's reply to that.
I omitted to congratulate Deputy Creed on his promotion which is well deserved.
Eligibility for registration with the Teaching Council is outlined in section 30. Any person who before the establishment day is employed as a teacher in a recognised school and paid out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas or where he-she is not employed is eligible to be so employed and will be deemed to be registered for the initial period of 12 months. Within the 12 months period, existing teachers must apply to the Teaching Council to be registered and be issued with certificates of registration under procedures set down by the council. The council may also set down procedures for the registration of persons other than those already mentioned. These regulations may set conditions for registration which may include qualifications, teaching experience, medical fitness and evidence of character. Section 29 provides that a school may employ as teachers, paid as such from the public purse, only persons who are registered with the Teaching Council as registered teachers.
Untrained substitutes currently fulfil an important role in schools and it is the Government's intention that every assistance will be given to enable them to satisfy the requirements for registration with the Teaching Council. However, if registration is to have any meaning and if we are serious about the promotion of quality in the teaching profession, we must move to an all trained teaching profession.
Is the Minister accepting the amendment?
No. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that only those who are properly and fully trained will be eligible to be registered. If, as I understand it, there are circumstances where the Teaching Council feels it is necessary to register certain other categories of person — that is not immediately obvious and is not necessary as things stand — we are allowing it a certain amount of flexibility.
This is not about registration. It comes under the section dealing with the objects of the council. Just as it is an object of the council to regulate the profession, to promote high standards and so on, the teachers' unions feel it should be an object of the council to ensure that only qualified people work in the schools. That does not preclude unqualified people because the system depends on them at the moment due to the lack of planning. It is an object of the council to ensure all people are qualified. That is precisely what the Minister said, that is, that is what we should be working towards. That is why the teachers' unions want to include this as an object.
If one looks at sections 29 and 30 which deal with employment of registered teachers and registration, the objectives are clearly laid out. I take the point Deputy Shortall has made and our objective is basically the same. The point I am making is that the objective is already achieved but I will undertake to look at what the Deputy said between now and Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 6 agreed to.
SECTION 7.
Amendments Nos. 5, 9, 10, 11, 50, 51, 54 and 55 are related to amendment No. 4 and all may be taken together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 8, subsection (2)(b), line 37, after “establish” to insert “following agreement with the unions representing teachers”.
The objective of these amendments is the same, that is, to ensure that partnership about which we hear so much and which is so critical to the successful operation of the schools continues to be given effect in this legislation, that decisions are not taken on an arbitrary basis, that, for example, the Minister will not make arbitrary decisions in relation to codes of professional conduct. It should be done in agreement and following consultation with the teacher unions. That is the general principle underlying all these amendments. It is a safeguard to ensure that circumstances do not arise where matters are laid down by the Minister without prior consultation and agreement.
I tabled an amendment as a result of representations, particularly from the Teachers Union of Ireland. The request I received was for an amendment along the lines tabled by Deputy Shortall that following agreement with the unions this would proceed, but I felt that perhaps consultation rather than agreement would be more appropriate. As outlined in section 8, the council will consist of 37 members, 22 of whom will be teachers, which represents a majority. It struck me that the functions could be determined by the majority who are teachers. That raises the question of consultation or agreement with other bodies represented. I do not think anybody would like to envisage a situation where decisions would be railroaded through without consultation or agreement, whichever is more appropriate. I am anxious to hear the Minister's reply to these amendments.
These amendments go right to the core of the purpose of the Teaching Council and if we were to accept them, I am afraid we may well jeopardise that purpose. In the first instance, Deputies will note that the Bill has explicit provision for the teacher unions to have representation on the council, not to act as members of the union on board the council but rather as wider representatives of the teaching profession who, through their expertise and experience, will enrich the council as a whole.
Deputies should also consider a further point, that is, that of the relationship between the teacher unions and the Teaching Council. This point was considered at length by the report of the steering group on the Teaching Council. That group came to a clear conclusion on this point and it is worth mentioning its views. The group stated that while there will be many areas of common concern to the Teaching Council and the teacher unions, it will be important to have a clear distinction between the responsibilities of both organisations in relation to the representation of teachers' concerns and that a teaching council would be solely concerned with the qualitative and professional aspects of education while negotiating on conditions of service, salaries and pensions will continue to be a major concern of teacher unions. It further stated that the work of a teaching council, as an independent statutory agency, will complement the ongoing efforts of teacher unions to promote the professional concerns of their members and will set standards of practice and ensure the competence of its members and that the teacher unions will continue to have the right to represent their members in all areas, particularly in relation to disciplinary issues.
That is the correct and appropriate distinction. We are concerned that these amendments would blur and even remove that distinction. I am, therefore, satisfied that there is adequate provision for teacher representation on the Teaching Council. The teacher unions will continue to carry out their important duties in the related areas of industrial relations. These amendments would disturb that balance, therefore, I cannot accept them.
The amendments seek to ensure that distinction. The teachers' representative on the Teaching Council will not act in a trade union capacity, but surely the trade unions would be at least notified where decisions are taken regarding codes of conduct, standards or whatever. What may be agreed at the Teaching Council may or may not be acceptable to the trade unions.
I see the Minister's point, but none of us is so naive as to suggest that the teaching members or the union nominees, who will presumably be former teachers, will sit on the council without an agenda. It would be understandable and acceptable for them to have one. That is why they are included. As members of the council they are at least one step removed from being union members. In view of this it might be possible to accept the recommendation that there should be consultation with the teachers' unions. This would mean that while they do not have the right of veto they will have the right to be consulted. Will the Minister consider this?
The majority of the members of the Teaching Council will be teachers. The new codes of conduct, standards etc. will only be decided by a body, the majority of which comprises teachers.
The argument is that they will be members of the council rather than union members.
I do not believe that when they become members of the council they will abandon previous life experiences and become part of a cocoon that ignores what happens around them.
Similar to becoming a Minister of State.
I am never in that position. The Teaching Council will be concerned with disciplinary matters, investigations etc. and there is provision where people can be represented by their union. No code of conduct or discipline or other such matters are likely to emerge from the council if they are contradictory to what the teaching profession as a whole wants. Apart from the fact that the majority of members of the council will be teachers, it is unlikely that anybody will seek confrontation on issues that are unacceptable to the body of teachers. In practice there will probably be consultations with the unions. I do not know if it is necessary to specifically include what is sought in the Bill, but I will consider the matter further for Report Stage.
In view of what the Minister of State has said I will withdraw the amendment.
There is a danger the council will be damaged if it is used to deal with industrial relations matters. In the absence of a council the Minster, in deciding on new regulations, generally consults with the unions. It is certainly good practice to do that. The teachers' representatives on the council should not be used as a sounding board. A second mechanism is required. The purpose of the amendments is to safeguard the separate role of teachers' representatives on the council as opposed to union representatives engaged in industrial relations work. I welcome the Minister of State's undertaking to reconsider the matter and I will withdraw my amendment.
This legislation was introduced following detailed consideration by the relevant steering group. It brought a wealth of experience to bear on its task. This is the kind of mechanism it recommended. It considered that, on balance, there should be a clear distinction between the role of the unions and the role of the Teaching Council and that the two roles should not overlap except to the extent that teachers comprise the majority of the council and will, almost by definition, be members of unions. Consultation is always a good thing and I am sure it will take place at some level between the council and the unions or at least between the Government and the unions before the code of practice emerges. I am not sure if it is necessary to include it in the legislation, but I will consider it.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 5 not moved.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 8, subsection (2)(b), line 37, after “establish,” to insert “publish,”.
This amendment will ensure that the code of conduct to be prepared by the council will be published. Although this is implicit in the purpose of such a code, to illustrate the standards of behaviour proper to the members of the profession, it is worthwhile to ensure that this is made clear. I hope the amendment will do so.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 8, subsection (2)(b), lines 38 and 39, to delete “, which shall include standards of teaching, knowledge, skill and competence”.
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that section 7(2)(b) will provide that, among its functions, the council will “establish, review and maintain codes of professional conduct for teachers.” It is important to distinguish between codes of professional conduct which deal specifically with conduct, as opposed to standards of teaching, knowledge or competence. They are separate and there should be no reference in this part of the Bill to standards of teaching, knowledge or competence. They are properly dealt with elsewhere. Conduct should be dealt with as a separate issue.
The words Deputy Shortall proposes to be deleted, "standards of teaching, knowledge, skill and competence", are central to establishing the context in which the conduct and standards of behaviour of a teacher must be judged. Without such a context it is impossible to make such a judgment. If the legislation was not to contain such a description, in all likelihood the council would have to create that context to give any meaning to the concept of a code of professional conduct.
The alternative would be a code of conduct so detached from the reality of the teaching profession as to be meaningless. It would serve little purpose in acting as a quality assurance mechanism, either for the public or the profession. I cannot, therefore, accept the amendment.
Does the Minister of State accept my point that there is a distinction between the code of conduct and standards in teaching? I have no objection to a provision to the effect that it should be an object of the council to maintain standards in teaching, knowledge, skill and competence, but it should not be included in the same subsection as that dealing with codes of conduct.
I find it difficult to see how one can be separated from the other. The professional conduct of a teacher will depend to an extent on whether he reaches the required standards and demonstrates the required knowledge, skill etc. If the amendment is accepted the council will draw up its rules for the aspects proposed to be deleted. In view of this it is as well to include them in the legislation.
This is an important point. I would prefer to see a distinction between the code of conduct and standards in teaching.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 8:
In page 9, subsection (2)(d), line 2, after “registered” to insert “following the coming into effect of this Act”.
Section 7 (2)(d) states that, as one of its functions, the council shall “determine, from time to time, the education and training and qualifications required for a person to be registered”. Is it possible that the council could retrospectively apply these criteria to persons already employed in a teaching capacity who may not be in a position to attain the qualifications etc. to which this paragraph refers? Is there a need for or merit in suggesting that some form of amnesty should be available to people who are currently employed in such a capacity but who may not meet criteria which the council may, at a future date, lay down as the “education and training and qualifications required”? It is for this reason I thought it might be appropriate to draw a line in the stand and stated that certain levels of education and training and qualifications would be required “following the coming into effect of this Act” but that people who are already employed in a teaching capacity should be allowed to continue with their work.
I thank Deputy Creed for tabling this amendment because it is important to elucidate on this matter. However, I do not believe the amendment is necessary. The role of the Teaching Council can only be to set out the standards and qualifications which will apply to those teachers who, in the future, will seek to become registered with the council. It will not be the role of the council, not would it be empowered, to retrospectively apply new standards to the existing body of teachers. In any event, the legislation explicitly provides that all teachers employed in a recognised school or eligible to be so will be automatically registered with the council on the establishment day. In this way, their right to register with the council on the basis of their existing qualifications is explicitly provided for and protected in the legislation under section 30.
I must point out that the council will have a proactive role in promoting the value and importance of continued in-service training by teachers. As the Deputies will be aware, continued in-service training is an essential part of the teaching and other professions and it allows its members the opportunity to remain familiar with new developments in the field of theory and practice. This duty is provided for in section 38. I would like to see this proactive and promotional role act as the means through which the council will ensure that continuing high standards of professionalism are maintained in the profession, rather than the imposition on a retrospective basis of new standards and criteria.
We believe that the concerns expressed by Deputy Creed are adequately dealt with in the legislation. However, I will discuss the matter with the parliamentary counsel to see if it is necessary to have the wording suggested by the Deputy, or some variation on it, explicitly stated in the Bill.
The Minister of State was able to list the sections of the Bill which underpin his argument that the amendment is unnecessary. However, I am concerned that a person who is already employed as a teacher would not find themselves in a position where, arising from standards that will be applied from the establishment day, their right to continue working in that capacity would be impacted upon. I will withdraw the amendment if the Minister of State gives a commitment to consider the matter further and return to it on Report Stage.
We will clarify the position before Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.