Education (Leave for Injuries) Bill 2025: Second Stage Seanad Éireann — 2026-02-18 ============================================================ Tom Clonan (IND), University of Dublin I am very grateful to Senators Harmon, Cosgrove, Stephenson and Noonan from the Cross-Party Group for tabling the Bill. I thank everybody here and our guests. I have been lobbied very intensively and very effectively by people, including Samantha O'Flanagan. In terms of my own interest in the Bill, a long time ago, more than 40 years ago, I went to Coláiste Mhuire in Marino, coláiste de chuid Choláiste na Tríonóide. Rinne mé céim san oideachas trí mheán na Gaeilge chun a bheith i mo mhúinteoir bunscoile. I went to Trinity College through the school of education in Coláiste Mhuire. I was a primary school teacher. I did my leaving certificate when I was 16 and the teacher training was a three-year course, so I was just barely older than the children I taught in a national school in Lucan called Scoil Mhuire in the Woodfield Heights and Airley Heights area. It was what we called a scoil leath-thumtha. We taught the core curriculum trí Ghaeilge and other subjects through English. I am familiar with Sophie's experience and journey. As a person who was a young teacher, I really appreciate the work that teachers do and that SNAs do. I had 37 children in the class at the time. We did not have SNAs back in the 1980s. I really appreciate the work they do. As a parent of a child with additional needs, I cannot speak highly enough of the SNAs who allowed my son to realise his full potential and allowed him to have his fundamental right to an education and participation in society. I commend the Bill and I commend the SNAs. I thank the Minister for not opposing the Bill. Without prejudice to the Cross-Party Group and the engagement they will have with the Minister, I take issue with some of the remarks she made. I am assuming the remarks were drafted for her. I would appreciate it if the Minister of State could communicate some of my concerns around this. The Minister stated regarding the Bill: I absolutely believe the intention of the legislation is good. However, having read the Bill, it would be remiss of me not to highlight a number of issues and unintended consequences that would arise if the Bill is enacted as it currently stands. So far, that is fine. It is an observation. We all know we are going to work together. The Minister, who I assume did not draft this herself and that it was drafted by her officials who, unfortunately are not here, raised concerns about negotiations taking place, IR processes and so on. This is the apparatus of State. It is the Executive and its outworkings. This is a Legislature. I am sure we are all familiar with the separation of powers. Senators Harmon, Cosgrove, Noonan and Stephenson are not trade union officials at a congress putting forward motions while the Minister sits and listens. This is Parliament. We are here to legislate. A lot of the concerns set out put the cart before the horse. It is this idea that people cannot legislate because there is a standard operating procedure in a Department. That is neither here nor there. This is vocational house and we try to make a positive contribution for the common good based on our life experience and our professional experience. We have had Ministers come in here with time delays that have no logic when the concerns raised could be dealt with in Committee Stage debates. These are technical measures that are taken to undermine the basic principle of the House. It undermines us but it also undermines the Government as legislators and people who have been elected and have a mandate to represent the people and the common good. As I say, this is not Liberty Hall. This is not the INTO headquarters. I was proud to be a member of the INTO at the age of 19. It is where I got all my stubborn pugilistic skills. This is not the TUI, INTO or ASTI congress, where the Minister comes and makes a speech and hears certain motions from the floor. In a situation such as that, some of the concerns might be appropriate to raise but not in the Parliament. There is a separation of powers between these Houses and the Executive. We are a priori and paramount. This is what my grandparents fought for in the War of Independence. It is why the Oireachtas, Dáil and Seanad were established. I ask the Minister of State to communicate this to the officials because I am assuming it was an official who drafted this. It is like something out of "Yes Minister". It is Civil Service-ese. We cannot be constrained in our aspirations by the workings of the apparatus of State. That is something that follows from the deliberations and the iterative process that is the passing of legislation which happens in these Houses. It is not a criticism of the Minister or the Minister of State but, as Government parliamentarians, some of these explanatory notes on time delays and such concerns really are non sequiturs . They have no basis in logic. I commend my colleagues and thank them. I thank the Government Senators for their very eloquent statements. I note they share our common positive interest and I thank them for not opposing the Bill. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-02-18/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:39+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-02-18