Where does that leave us?

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I do not think I did so earlier. The background to this issue is that special classes in mainstream schools combine the benefit of a much-reduced teacher: pupil ratio and special needs assistant, SNA, support with opportunities for children to engage with inclusive learning practices during the school day in mainstream classes with their friends and peers. I acknowledge that if we look at the barometer of progress in this area, the National Council for Special Education…

I agree with Senator Carrigy's sentiments. The origin of this debate lies in the unacceptable situation of a lack of school places for nearly 100 children in September, but there is a process that has to happen for everything. If I ring a board of management and tell it that it should provide a special needs class, it will ask me who I am, whether I know a class is needed, whether the resources are in place and whether there is a gap in the area. Processes exist for everything in order to ensure that things are don…

I understand that Senator Carrigy has said that section 37A exists but should not have to be used and something quicker should be possible. He may well be right about that. My understanding is that is what the streamlining of section 37A is all about. If there is a need then let us call it an emergency process, call it section 37B and make it clear that the new section is separate from section 37A. My problem with this legislation is that it is not at all clear that what is being proposed is some kind of bypassing …

This legislation would amend section 37A of the 1998 Act, as amended.

This relates to an amendment of section 37A. My point is that surely it is where the action should be taking place. It is not yet clear to me that there is not some other power that cuts across section 37A being given or some other obligation that cuts across section 37A being placed on patrons in circumstances where they do not have the necessary role in order to ensure compliance. I am asking, therefore, that the whole thing be brought into conjunction with the new amended section 37A of the 1998 Act, as amended.

I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I am very clear about her intentions, which seem very sensible. What I am less clear on is whether the legislation as drafted or presented to us entirely expresses her clearly stated meaning in line with what she has just said. I note the Minister of State said co-operation is not ever 100% binding. She is making it clear to me that whatever way this is interpreted, there is no non-compliance save non-compliance with the section 37A process. She is saying the patron shal…

The Minister of State will get no argument from me on that point, nor from most people involved in education, including patrons. This series of amendments are really all the same but they relate to different processes. As she noted, they relate to the provision in another section regarding admission statements. The provision is not that the patron shall co-operate in regard to the provision of a special class or classes. The legislation does not say the patron of the school shall have an opportunity to engage with …

I am becoming a little confused. If it is shameful that section 37A would ever be invoked, why is it there at all?

Why is it needed? If we are creating an earlier obligation on patrons and boards to provide, then we need simply provide for sanctions. We would just move to the sanction stage if they are in breach of the requirements. The only reason for a 37A process is if it is somehow a rational thing. It would not be there unless it is a legitimate process. If a process such as this is being put into legislation but it is meant to carry some kind of badge of shame if it is ever invoked, I do not know of any precedent in legis…

This seeks to make the word of the NCSE law on this matter. Once the NCSE looks for it, it has to happen. What Senator Seery Kearney is basically saying is that section 37A is merely the process by which it will be made to happen if the patron does not comply with the obligation to ensure co-operation by the board of the school in providing the requirement or fails to ensure that co-operation. If the patron fails to ensure co-operation by the board of the school with a request by the NCSE to provide a special needs…

I would appreciate the Minister of State responding on that point.

On the specific question I asked-----

I asked the Minister of State about the dissolution-----

As the Minister of State rightly says, it is the few. Unfortunately it is the few we have to legislate for. My problem is that the Minister of State is putting the patron under an obligation to ensure something they do not have the power to ensure without dissolving the board. This is prior to the section 37A process. Leaving section 37A aside, if a board of management is not complying with the patron's attempt to ensure co-operation and the patron moves against the board, will the Minister of State support that mo…

That is not the question I asked.

What is the problem with my amendment?

I appreciate the Minister of State's efforts but she has not responded to my specific question. She says she is not seeking for the patron to seek to the dissolution of the board where it fails to comply. That is not my question. Given that she is putting a legal obligation on the patron to ensure something which the board may not comply with and which may, in turn, trigger a section 37A process, would the Department stand in the way of a patron dissolving the board? It is a very different question from the one the…

He will find something.

It is not bad for a part-timer.