People power has forced the Government into a retreat on SNAs. That is extremely welcome. However, the underlying problem of the basis allocation of SNAs and the insufficient number of SNAs remains. This special school in Tallaght illustrates the problem precisely. It received a letter on 11 February saying its allocation would be reduced from the 2025-26 academic year. It was withdrawn on the same day, but the rationale presented is quite telling. It is based on primary care needs. That is the basis. In other words, it is primarily medical as opposed to other needs.

I quote, “based on the evidence presented at review, many references to multiple adult-to-learner ratios were noted. This is not in line with a rights-based, regulation-first approach,” the idea being that there were too many SNAs and staff members to assist these children, when these are children with profound difficulties who may often need multiple adults. I add to that that the environment is not a purpose-built space but a shared campus. There are 600 kids and students on this campus and many cars coming and going. I saw videos of buses arriving, kids trying to get off and cars pulling in and out. It is a dangerous situation where multiple staff members are needed to keep children safe. That needs to be taken into account.

I wish to look at one example in the same special school in Tallaght and the broader shift in the model of what we expect an SNA’s role to be, and the struggles that the school and staff go through on a daily basis. This school has a student with type 1 diabetes and epilepsy. The child has increasingly complex needs and seizures approximately every fortnight. The school is dealing with all of this. The student cannot wear a glucose monitor or an insulin pump as his needs are so complex. He is non-verbal. He has no communication device or access to CDNT services. He is completely reliant on staff. In this case SNAs monitor his presentation and bloods and the only way they can do that is by taking a sample and intervening themselves. SNAs routinely support children with diabetes and will monitor bloods. That type of supervision is not possible in this case. Staff are increasingly anxious about taking on responsibilities which would usually be given to nurses. They are involved in decision making when it comes to this child’s medical needs. There are serious concerns in the school about who is responsible and the school is looking for a nurse.

I thank the Minister of State for his presence tonight. I wish to focus in on one particular aspect as well, that is, serious concerns regarding the credibility of the review process that was initiated. In the absence of nursing provision in the school, the school engaged in what was an extremely detailed and arduous SNA review process in an effort to secure additional SNA support. Deputy Crowe referred to this. Parents were asked to complete extensive questionnaires outlining in detail the significant and complex needs of their children. These are families we know are already under enormous strain. That documentation identified as part of the review process was not considered by the review panel. It is still sitting in the principal’s office. Despite this, a determination was made to reduce that school's allocation. When it was challenged by the principal and pointed out it had made a determination without the full documentation, the decision was subsequently reversed. That alone really needs to be investigated. We all have a few other points to make in the second round.

I am always encouraged when we have cross-party Members bringing issues to the floor of the Dáil, and the sincerity of it.

At the outset, I know of the school the Deputies are referring to, and I have engaged with the principal previously on some issues. Deputy Lahart brought this to my attention last week as well. I will talk through the issues. I have a script that will be handed out, and Members can take that as read.

I want to talk through the issues. Deputy Lahart gave further information on an issue. Deputy Crowe mentioned 40 minutes between the taking and giving back of an SNA. I need further clarification from all of the Deputies on that. I want to understand this. We were in St. Michael’s House in Baldoyle this morning. I have visited many special schools and I know the enormity of the work they do there and the huge complex care and medical needs of children across the system.

The work that is being done there is second to none in regard to the school leadership, teachers and SNAs. A lot of the SNAs, as Deputy Ahern pointed out, are doing enormous work in regard to it.

While the SNA review has been paused, we need to get under the bonnet in regard to this issue. I need to get an understanding of it. I am really concerned that, when you have special schools and the complex needs that are being presented in special schools, the school the Deputies referred to and every other one are going way above and beyond the call of duty in regard to the administration of it.

If it is possible, and when it is convenient to all four Deputies, I might convene a meeting with them. I would ask them to bring as much information as possible on the matter. I can give the stock answer the Deputies have received there but that is not sufficient in terms of what they are looking for. As I understand it, the Deputies' concern is about additional SNA support but also a particular SNA or one who may have qualifications. They are non-medical but they would have qualifications.

I want to be very clear. We understand what the challenges and the issues are. In the Deputies' closing contributions, they might dig a small bit deeper until they get to the exact medical needs that were presented but were not taken into account. I might take it that, when the letter was issued on 11 February, the principal returned documentation by email to the NCSE at that point and then the subsequent letter was withdrawn 40 minutes later. The Deputies might confirm that for me and, if it is possible at a convenient time for all four of them, we could meet, try to thrash it out and try to come, first of all, to an understanding of what the issues are. I have no difficulty because I believe a part of my job that is very fundamental is that I should be out looking at what is happening in special schools, and I do not have any difficulty in visiting that school either. I have engaged with the principal previously but maybe if the Deputies expand on that point in the short few minutes they have, I will try to respond to it. Then we could have a further meeting to expand on that.

I thank the Minister of State and I would very much welcome the idea of a meeting. I also invite him to come and visit the school and meet with the principal, teachers, SNAs and so on.

On the bottom-line point, what happened in the 40 minutes between the letter removing the SNAs and the letter saying that no SNAs would be removed was that the principal contacted the NCSE to say that all the parents' questionnaires that the NCSE had asked the school to fill out, that the parents had gone to fill out, as explained, and that the NCSE had supposedly taken into account in making its decision could not have been taken into account because the school still had them and they were all still sitting there. We saw them when we visited the school. The principal still has them at this stage. That was what happened in the intervening 40 minutes, which raises a question about whether this applied elsewhere as well.

The other worrying thing is that I believe there is a parental consent form, and that was not taken up either. We can furnish the Minister of State with the information in relation to this case but it raises issues as to whether this is happening in other schools. I have never heard of this type of thing happening before now. What is worrying is the point Deputy Murphy made in relation to the idea that there were too many adults. We are talking about a special school and special circumstances. The replies that seem to be in the letter itself are really worrying. However, it is the wider issue: how many schools are impacted by the fact that the forms have not been collected?

I thank the Minister of State for his engagement tonight. We would be delighted to meet. Regarding this particular medical issue, there are concerns around a lack of training for SNAs in dealing with issues like this. My colleague, Deputy Eoghan Kenny, has brought in a Bill on emergency medical care training for SNAs but this is an ongoing issue. This is an emergency and something they have to deal with on an almost daily basis. There are concerns around liability if something goes wrong, and things will inevitably go wrong in these high-pressure, immediate, decision-making situations.

I thank the Minister of State for that and I would be very positive about meeting him. The first issue is the complex and high-risk needs of pupils, which were not considered by the review panel prior to the decision. That raises the credibility, transparency and integrity of the review process, unfortunately generally, because if it happened there, as previous Deputies said, where else has it happened? The school has been formally requesting access to nursing support since June 2025. During this time, the needs of the child in question have become more complex and safety risks have escalated. The board of management is not sure, for example, whether the school is covered from an insurance point of view because of the possible clinical needs of the student. That is it in a nutshell, along with all the other things my colleagues have said.

To finish, the Minister of State is very popular in the school. He did visit the school and following his visit, the school invested €2 million in the actual campus and this is one of the shames of the thing. That has not been forgotten by the school either.

In the few minutes available to me, I will say that I will meet with the Deputies and further engage with the principal as well because we did engage. I will go through that.

The worrying thing is that because there is one student or students within it - we will just say "students" - there is a medical need that is developing within the school and that has become more profound or needy. Is one of the issues that this was not taken into account? I will go back in relation to it.

I know that all the forms, including consent forms, are hard won in special schools because of the complexity of what has to be put on them. Parents have a lot of other challenges in regard to having children with profound needs and trying to meet those. That is something I will certainly look at.

Am I clear in saying that they are looking for a particular type of support within the school? When special schools are looked at, the ratio of staff to pupils is quite high because of the complex needs within the schools. The Deputies will know from working in their communities that some of the special schools are providing very high-end medical care as well within the school communities. It is not fair to say that there are ratios of 2:1. That can vary depending on the needs of the child.

What I will undertake is that I will meet with the Deputies. We could liaise with the principal and the school authorities as well during the meeting to get a sense of it. There is not much point in my standing up here, but we are committed to this and very serious about it. I am desperately serious about trying to do the right thing here and what I will do is undertake to liaise with the Deputies and the school community. I am glad to see they had the bit of investment but we have to continue that investment in the overall sense. To get an understanding of this particular issue, I will engage with the Deputies and we will take it from there.