When we talk to people about the insurance industry and how it has conducted itself in recent years, they have many things to say. Comments that are made regularly to me are that it is a law unto itself, it is beyond reach, reproach and sanction, and it is unaccountable. Who pays the price for that? It is paid by the businesses struggling to find any kind of affordable insurance cover at a time they are under severe pressure. It is paid by the childcare facilities struggling to secure insurance, many of which are g…

We are at the stage where our society and economy are beginning to reopen. Enormous credit is due to the people of Ireland for their efforts in that regard. It is important to acknowledge the enormous work the staff of our health services and the HSE have done over the past 14 or 15 months. I also acknowledge the huge work that is going on in the health service at this time. Family members and I have had to engage with the HSE in the days since the cyberattack. It is remarkable how many services are continuing even…

Aviation affects us all because it has such an influence on industry, investment, leisure, people's holidays and so on. The people about whom we must be most concerned are the tens of thousands working in the industry. I have raised this issue with the Minister. There is a view among those workers that the response of the Government has been sluggish at best and has verged on the disinterested at times. As far back as last summer, I raised with the Minister in the Dáil my concerns over Cork Airport. We have written…

As Deputy Burke outlined, nursing home care and care homes will become a more considerable issue politically and socially in the years to come, undoubtedly because of our growing and ageing population. The Deputy outlined that there are challenges in this regard. Undoubtedly, there are but it is important that we acknowledge that it is good that people are living longer. What is important is ensuring that if we live longer, we live a life of good quality, be it at home or in a nursing home. The pandemic highlighted…

I move amendment No. 2: In page 5, line 24, after "appropriate" to insert "(taken as a whole and not any one individual('s) result)". I expected there to be debate on amendment No. 1. I flag to Deputies who are leaving the Chamber that I am likely to push amendment No. 3, which is coming up very soon, to a vote.

Yes, I have moved amendment No. 2. The purpose of the amendment is fairly straightforward. It is a concern that has been relayed to me by a number of students. A commitment was previously made that the collective junior certificate data of the cohort or year group would be used to determine the accredited grade, not any individual's performance. This is possible and, as I understand it, was done last year. Even where there is churn within a cohort, it is possible to unify the individual results and therefore to tre…

I am not pressing the amendment. I appreciate the Minister's response. Overall, I am broadly reassured by it that the results of the cohort will be used rather than the results of individuals. I am not entirely convinced that it makes sense for an individual student who is an out-of-school learner and who is not part of a cohort to have his or her junior certificate results used. I have in mind circumstances in which somebody had a bad experience at a school, went through a difficult time and did a poor junior cert…

I move amendment No. 3: In page 5, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: "(iv) be set out in writing and published by or on behalf of the Commission prior to the issuing of results to each candidate;". I will be pressing this amendment. It is an important amendment. There was an awful lot of controversy last year and much of the discussion was about standardisation. We are trying to identify potential flaws in the legislation but we support it and want to see it progressed. We will support it on Final S…

I find that difficult to comprehend. This process has already started, the company has been engaged and the Minister is recruiting another company for additional scrutiny, which I welcome. It is 19 May and we have June, July and into August for this to take shape. I do not understand why the Minister suggests this work will never be done until the results are out. I find that very difficult to comprehend. Surely, there has to come a point where those who are responsible for drafting the formula, and who have given …

To be clear, I appreciate there is no bad faith or anything like that in not publishing this. I appreciate the Minister is not deliberately concealing anything. However, the fact remains that this formula and the process connected to it will not become public until after the results are issued. It is different from marking schemes, when we take into consideration the controversies here and elsewhere over the past 12 months and the difficulties that have become very apparent with standardisation and the risks that e…

I move amendment No. 4: In page 6, to delete lines 10 to 12. Amendment No. 4 relates to the appeals mechanism. As the legislation is drafted, the mechanism operates only on the basis of how grades are transmitted to the Department. The mechanism is technical, limited and unlikely to make any difference for the vast majority of students if there is an error or problem with accredited grades. The amendment is to allow for a more substantial appeal, which many students were seeking last year. They wanted an opportunit…

I move amendment No. 5 In page 7, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following: "(b) Where a review is carried out, the Commission shall afford the candidate an opportunity to be heard.". These amendments relate to where there is false information or wrongful communication. It is important that there be protections and very severe sanctions but we must be confident that, where the sanctions apply, the person deemed responsible is responsible. Given the significance of the consequences, whereby grades can be wit…

I am broadly willing to accept that. I will make a general point and then return to the specific issue. There is a bit of a difficulty with this Bill that has arisen regarding other Bills over the past year. I am referring to where regulations that follow the passage of legislation are of a significance that goes far beyond the usual significance of regulations. The regulations under discussion are important. In ordinary circumstances, it is fair to insist that they be made available before a Bill passes into law. …

I move amendment No. 6: In page 7, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following: "(7) The Commission shall not decide to withhold all or any of the accredited grades as provided for by subsection (5) , where it can be shown that the candidate had no knowledge of the communication that was made for his or her benefit by the first-mentioned person. (8) Where a communication is made without the candidate’s knowledge as prescribed for in subsection (7) , the Minister shall make regulations providing for the first-m…

I will be pressing that amendment.

Siri does not agree. Siri does not have a vote. We discussed this matter on Second Stage. It is an important amendment. The point was perhaps misunderstood. To clarify, there should be no toleration of canvassing or interference. There has to be a clear message to everyone, including students, parents and anyone connected with a student, that teachers and school staff are off limits and that they should not seek to put them under any pressure. I am thinking of teachers living in our communities, especially smaller …

I do not agree with the Minister's interpretation of the legislation. I refer to section 4(5)(b), which states, "The Commission may, following a review referred to in paragraph (a), withhold all or any of the accredited grades comprised in the Leaving Certificate 2021 in respect of any candidate by whom, or for whose benefit, the communication concerned was made." That is the only sanction envisaged in the legislation. It states clearly "for whose benefit", as it would potentially be, even if they had no benefit or…

I am more concerned now than when I first submitted the amendment. All the Minister has talked about is the review that happens afterwards and the procedure. I am sure that they will be heard and have a chance to make their case, which is why I withdrew the previous amendment. There are only two potential interpretations of what the Minister is saying. She has not been clear on which is correct. If there is a third, she should tell me. The first is that somebody is unaware of lobbying or canvassing on his or her be…

The Minister is not being clear. Yes, it states "may" and there is discretion, but if that discretion is not used and the Minister is saying that it may be the case, where it is only fair to the student that it not be used, she has not provided any other sanction. The Minister has not provided for any sanction for the parent or the person connected to the student, which may be another teacher. Who knows what kind of person might be involved? It is immaterial. The point is that the student is not involved. The Minis…

My final contribution will be a question. If a review finds that lobbying happened or, to give a particular example, if it finds that a parent lobbied, and if the review accepts that the student did not know, there will be no sanction for the student. What is the sanction for the parent? Is there any?