 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dáil Debates & Questions
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
04 May 2011 Dáil Debates
Parliamentary Questions
DÁIL DEBATES Deputy Seán Crowe (SF): asked the Minister for Education and Skills his plans to review the allocation of special needs assistants in DEIS schools; Deputy Ruairí Quinn (Minister for Education and Skills): The Deputy will be aware that the special needs assistant, SNA, scheme provides additional supports for schools to enable them to support pupils with significant care needs. SNAs are allocated to schools by the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, through its network of local special educational needs organisers, SENOs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. This now includes a requirement for the NCSE to have regard to an overall cap on the number of SNA posts. Schools may apply to the NCSE for an SNA post to support students with an assessed special educational need who also have a significant medical need or a significant physical or sensory impairment. Students with an assessed special educational need who present with significantly challenging behaviour may also qualify for some SNA support. I have no plans to review the allocation of special needs assistants in DEIS — developing equality of opportunity in schools — schools, as SNAs are allocated to such schools on the same basis as other schools, including special schools, that is, on the assessed individual needs of pupils in the context of the resources available to a school. The programme for Government clearly states education will be a priority for the Government and that we will endeavour to protect and enhance the educational experience of children, young people and students. To that end, we will endeavour to protect front-line services in education. However, the fiscal position is extremely difficult. The country is effectively in receivership. It is necessary to ensure educational services are delivered within the resources available. I intend to prioritise and support special educational services. However, I cannot revisit the previous Government’s decision to place a cap on the number of posts available under the SNA scheme. That number is 10,575 whole-time equivalent, WTE, posts. That is a significant number of posts and, unlike other areas of the public sector, vacancies are being filled up to this number. It also represents continual increases in the number of SNAs in recent years. Additional information not given on the floor of the House. It is considered that with equitable and careful management and distribution of these resources there should be sufficient posts to provide access to SNA support for all children who require such care support to attend school in accordance with departmental criteria. The NCSE asked schools to submit all applications for SNA support to it by 18 March and intends to inform schools of their annual SNA allocations as soon as possible in advance of the coming school year. My Department and I will be glad to consider any suggestions from school management or parent representative organisations as to how the allocation of SNA resources can best be managed within the context of the overall limit on SNA numbers established. In that regard, I am committed to making whatever improvements are possible to the resource allocation system. We all must understand the legacy of economic mismanagement which the previous Government gave to this country. Deputy Seán Crowe (SF): The Minister will accept that there are particular demands on DEIS schools in terms of where children come from. I accept what he said, that he has an envelope for education services. However, there are particular demands on SNA support services in DEIS schools. In many cases there is a senior and a junior school operating in tandem. When the EPSEN Act was passing through the House we talked about the provision of seamless support for those with special educational needs. I am concerned that where a junior and a senior school operate within an area the SNA supports will be retained by pupils when they move to the senior school. Would it be possible for the Minister to examine this possibility, bearing in mind the special needs of such children? What is happening in the community is being reflected in the schools and as such, there is a greater demand on teachers in DEIS schools. We should try to retain supports for pupils at first and second level. The Minister should, therefore, examine the possibility of ensuring SNA supports are maintained throughout the education process. I accept there might be difficulties in stand-alone schools, but it would be one way to address the problem. What is evident in the schools reflects what is happening in society. The demands are much greater in DEIS schools which cannot seek funding from parents. They do not have the extra supports into which other schools can tap. I urge the Minister to examine the issue and revert to me. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: The Deputy is well aware that a DEIS school, in contrast to a regular primary or post-primary school, receives additional resources for the very reasons outlined, namely, the socio-economic background of the pupils, the lack of resources among parents that could otherwise be made available through a PTA in a middle-class or non-DEIS school. The difference between what the Deputy proposes and what is available is that the SNAs are tailored to the needs of individual students, irrespective of whether they are in a DEIS school or not. It is the individual need of the student, for whatever reason and as assessed by the SENO and as signed off for by the NCSE, that makes for an assessment of that individual student as requiring an SNA. I understand the sentiment expressed by Deputy Crowe, but what he is effectively saying is that where there are existing SNAs in DEIS schools, they should be kept there, even if the individual with the specific need that brought them there may have moved on to post-primary school. We have capped the number of SNAs at 10,575. We are looking at how that will play out and the points made by the Deputy will be taken into consideration. Deputy Seán Crowe: We have a trapdoor in the case where an SNA is shared between two schools. If the SNA is not based in the school, the child in need cannot move on, based on the envelope available. That is one way of looking at it. My proposal is radical, but it could work to solve the difficulties faced by schools. We have seen that positive changes are taking place, with smaller classes and so on. However, we are now talking about pulling away the foundation, the structures and the supports for those children.
Deputy Joan Collins (PBPA): asked the Minister for Education and Skills his views on his decision to maintain the cap on special needs assistants implemented by the previous Government. Deputy Ruairí Quinn (Minister for Education and Skills): The Programme for Government clearly states that education will be a priority for this Government and that we will endeavour to protect and enhance the educational experience of children, young people and students. We will endeavour to protect frontline services in education. However, the fiscal position is extremely difficult. It is necessary to ensure that educational services are delivered within the resources available. I intend to prioritise and support special educational services. However, I cannot re-visit the previous Government’s decision to place a cap on the number of posts available under the special needs assistant scheme. This number is 10,575 whole time equivalent posts. This is a significant number of posts and, unlike other areas of the public sector, vacancies are being filled up to this number. It also represents continual increases in the number of SNAs over recent years. It is considered that with equitable and careful management and distribution of these resources, there should be sufficient posts to provide access to SNA support for all children who require such care support to attend school, in accordance with departmental criteria. The National Council for Special Education, NCSE, is responsible, through its network of local special educational needs organisers, SENOs, for allocating resource teachers and special needs assistants to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. This now includes a requirement for the NCSE to have regard to an overall cap on the number of SNA posts. The NCSE has issued a circular to all schools advising of the allocation process for the 2011-12 school year. A key feature of the amended scheme will be to provide for an annual allocation of SNA support to eligible schools. The NCSE has asked schools to submit all applications for SNA support to them by 18 March 2011 and intends to inform schools of their annual SNA allocation as soon as possible in advance of the coming school year. My Department and I will be glad to consider any suggestions from school management or parent representative organisations as to how the allocation of SNA resources can best be managed within the context of the overall limit on SNA numbers established. In this regard I am committed to making whatever improvements are possible to the resource allocation system. We need to understand the legacy of economic mismanagement which the last Government gave to this country. We have in effect lost our economic sovereignty and every Member of this House continually needs to understand that. Deputy Joan Collins (PBPA): I thank the Minister for the standard reply. The last Government’s decision to cap the number of SNAs in schools was disgraceful. Even heretofore it was difficult to get their children assessed, to get them into schools and to get the SNAs that are needed. Now they are being told that because of economic constraints their children may not and will not have that support in the future. The Minister might put a cap on the number of SNAs but he cannot put a cap on the number of children being born every year who will have special educational needs in the future. I heard the Minister’s speech to the INTO conference, which did not mention resource teachers or SNAs once. An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have a question please? Deputy Joan Collins: The Minister has choices like everybody else. The cost of employing the required 2,000 SNAs would be €60 million, of which €40 million would be saved on social welfare payments. Really it would cost €20 million to employ 2,000 more SNAs, which is a drop in the ocean. The Minister should consider that alternative. The cost of subsidising private fee-paying schools teachers is €100 million. An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will not get an answer if she does not give the Minister a chance to reply. Deputy Joan Collins: Will the Minister not stop paying these teachers in private fee-paying schools and put that €100 million into employing resource teachers who are absolutely needed? Deputy Ruairí Quinn: The framework of spending for this year has already been decided, and implicitly and explicitly confirmed by this House. There will be no changes for 2011. I will consider what to do in 2012 in the light of what resources are made available to me in the context of where the country is at the moment. Deputy Joan Collins: I cannot accept that. The Minister has a choice and can stop paying teachers in fee-paying schools thereby saving the State €100 million, which could be put into providing badly needed SNAs and resource teachers. The choice is between protecting people and keeping privileged schools going. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: The programme for Government makes no such proposal. We are operating in very constrained circumstances and we will work within that framework and not outside it. Deputy Catherine Murphy (I): Does the Minister accept that the growth in SNA numbers has happened because children are now educated in mainstream schools as opposed to special schools? An Ceann Comhairle: Does the Deputy have a question? Deputy Catherine Murphy (I): Yes. The SENO system does not appear to provide cover for maternity leave and I am concerned that children are not being properly assessed. I asked the Minister about St. Raphael’s and am still awaiting a reply. An Ceann Comhairle: Sorry—— Deputy Catherine Murphy: Is there any scope for covering maternity leave in order that there can be an adequate assessment? Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: A number of parents of children with special needs are in the Gallery today. Can the Minister give them any hope? Some of their children have very severe special needs requirements. One child, Aisling McEniff’s five year old son, is unique in the world. He has been in intensive care eight times and has had two heart operations. He has Down’s syndrome and—— An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will not get a reply if he does not—— Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: He has been approved for a special education place but because there is no sanction for another SNA, her child cannot get into school. Can the Minister offer them any hope or is he telling them there is no hope because we have to pay off the IMF? Deputy Brendan Smith (FF): Special schools such as the Holy Family school in Cootehill in my county or St. Raphael’s in Celbridge, which has already been mentioned, cater for pupils with very complex and severe physical and intellectual disabilities. Are those schools exempt from the cap on their total SNA allocation? Deputy Ruairí Quinn: The National Council for Special Education is the professional body which through its locally based SENOs assesses individuals referred to it and comes to a professional conclusion whether a particular child qualifies for support. It is not the function of the Department of Education and Skills in order to prevent it becoming open to manipulation and abuse as we have seen in the past with other schemes. The professional assessment is not made by politicians or by civil servants who have a generalist education and do not have the necessary expertise. The number of SNAs has increased by almost 1,000% since they were established. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: They are needed. An Ceann Comhairle: If the Deputies ask a question they get an answer. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: The growth seemed to be exponential. The previous Government against the background of economic constraints, which still exists, decided to cap it at the level I mentioned and investigate ways in which some degree of internal prioritisation can be made. It would be easy for me to tell Deputy Boyd Barrett that I would review the specific individual application, but I will not discuss individual cases in the House as it would be wrong.
Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh (SF): asked the Minister for Education and Skills the date on which he will publish a plan for the full implementation of the EPSEN Act 2004. Deputy Ruairí Quinn (Minister for Education and Skills): The programme for Government sets out that education will be a priority for the Government and that we will endeavour to protect and enhance the educational experience of children, young people and students. To that end, we are committing — during the tenure of the Government — to the publication of a plan for the implementation of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004 to prioritise access for children with special needs to an individual education plan. The priority will be to move to a system where necessary supports follow a child from primary to second level and to achieve greater integration of special needs-related services. The Deputy will know that a number of sections of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act have already been commenced. As required under the Act, the NCSE made recommendations regarding the implementation of the provisions of the Act and suggested additional investment over a period of years of up to €235 million per annum across the education and health sectors. My Department’s opinion is that the level of investment required would be greater than that envisaged in the NCSE report. In the light of the very difficult economic situation and these significant costs, the previous Government deferred the full implementation of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act. It is my intention to prepare a plan to implement the Act in line with the programme for Government, subject to the serious financial constraints which we have inherited from the previous Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government. All parts of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act, which have not been commenced to date, will need to be considered during this process. The Deputy will appreciate that commencement of individual aspects of the Act in isolation is difficult because of linkages across the various sections. Given the extent of the considerations required and also requirements to consider a number of other priority policy areas regarding the education of children with special educational needs, it is not possible to advise a specific date for the publication of this plan at this early stage of the Government’s term in office. Deputy Seán Crowe: Many parents are concerned that they are not getting speedy assessments. When the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act was passed by this House it was supposed to provide supports for those families, but we increasingly find that the families need to make up the shortfall. We have no timescale for when the Act will be fully implemented. I listened to what the Minister said about difficulties with funding and so on, but these families and their children are suffering. Does the Minister not accept that families will need to go back to the courts again to try to get the resources and supports needed for their children’s educational needs? It was very positive to move children from special schools into mainstream ones, but without those supports there is no alternative for families. Increasingly, families must make up the shortfall themselves. It is a case of them borrowing from the credit union or other families and communities having to organise fund-raising functions because the State is not supplying the basic resources to which children are entitled under the Act. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: I share the Deputy’s concern and acknowledge his genuine commitment in this area. The reality is that when the EPSEN legislation was introduced, no one appreciated fully the extent of support that would be required, or the cost of that support, as indicated in my initial reply. Therefore, it is understandable the decision outlined was taken. When the level of growth had expanded by virtually 1,000% in ten years, there had to be a review. There is a cap. This area has not been subject to a reduction in numbers, as is the case in other areas of the public service. Officials are considering ways to maximise the effectiveness of the very substantial resource already in place. Deputy Seán Crowe: Let me give an example based on the predicament of a family in a certain school. The child in question is being dismissed from school because, from 21 February to 11 March, there was an unmet requirement to supply psychological support, psychiatric support, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy and social worker support. The family is supposed to come up with the goods in the knowledge that the child will be dismissed from the school if it fails. That is the pressure families are being put under owing to the lack of resources. What does one say to a family whose child faces dismissal from school? The chances of having the child enrolled in another school are nigh on impossible. That is the pressure that has been placed on just one family in recent weeks. This is crazy. I do not know how the State can respond. I outline but one example; I do not know how many others there are. What I have outlined is a microcosm of what is happening to other families. I may revert to the Minister on this case. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: As I do not know the details of the individual case to which the Deputy referred, I will not prejudice any outcomes. Clearly, the response from the school is one that the family should query with the special educational needs organiser with a view to determining why the school is adopting what seems to be such an extraordinarily demanding stance to which an ordinary family must respond. I do not know if the special educational needs organiser was involved in mediation between the school and parents in this case. If the Deputy has the details, I will certainly examine the case, but I cannot make any commitment.
Deputy Michael Creed (FG): asked the Minister for Education and Skills when the review group established to evaluate value for money in the school transport system was established; the reason no representative of school patrons, parents or teachers was included in the review group; if he considers it an acceptable or desirable outcome that arising from its accepted recommendations that individual members of the one family may be obliged to avail of school transport to different schools; Deputy Sean Sherlock (Minister of state with responsibility for Research and Innovation): I am responding on behalf of the Minister of State, Deputy Ciaran Cannon. The review group was established in January 2009. The review was carried out as part of the 2009-11 round of value for money reviews approved by the previous Government and conducted in accordance with the criteria for such reviews set out in the Department of Finance’s Value for Money and Policy Review Initiative Guidance Manual. The emphasis in such reviews is on the efficiency and effectiveness of the programmes under examination to assess value for money in their delivery. The composition of value for money review committees can vary. In this instance, membership of the steering committee was drawn from my Department and other relevant Departments and included an independent chairman, namely, Mr. Willie Soffe, former county manager of Fingal County Council, and two independent experts. All external stakeholders, including school patrons and parent and teacher organisations, were given an opportunity to make their views on the school transport scheme known. The process included a call for submissions on a range of specific issues which resulted in 85 submissions. In addition, following an assessment of these submissions and in order to give stakeholders a further opportunity to present their views, a day-long consultative forum was organised in October 2009 by the steering committee with a combination of individual sessions and an open forum discussion with the chairperson and committee members. In this way, it was considered by the steering committee that all stakeholders were afforded a further opportunity to make a meaningful contribution to the review process. I am taking it that the Deputy is referring to the issue of the cessation of the closed school rule, CSR, as it relates to primary school transport eligibility. This change was announced in budget 2011 by the previous Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government and derived from a recommendation in the published value for money review of the scheme. To put the matter in context, the review showed that the unit cost of primary school transport was €1,020 per child. Furthermore, the four year national recovery plan requires savings of €4.5 million to be made through operational efficiencies and other savings measures in the school transport budget in 2011, rising to overall full-year savings of €17 million by 2014. The aggregation of the measures being implemented arising from the value for money review will be an important element in achieving these savings. It is important to stress there are a number of dimensions to the cessation of the closed school rule. The first of these which will be implemented from September involves the uniform application of the distance criteria to all pupils travelling under the primary transport scheme, including those travelling under the closed school rule. This means that children residing less than 3.2 km from the school of amalgamation will be deemed ineligible for school transport. In such cases, the children concerned may apply for concessionary transport. Additional information not given on the floor of the House. The second element of the change is scheduled to take effect in September 2012 and will apply only in the case of pupils commencing their primary education from that date. This second element will restrict school transport eligibility for those pupils entering in September 2012 to pupils who meet the distance eligibility criterion and are travelling to their nearest school. Available statistics, based on sampling undertaken as part of the value for money review, indicate that the impact of this change will be limited as the majority of pupils categorised under the closed school rule are, in fact. attending their nearest school. Therefore, the majority of these families will not be affected by this change. Before implementing this second main change which is proposed for 2012, my Department has requested Bus Éireann to conduct a detailed analysis of the on the ground impact for individual schools and the rural communities they serve. This analysis will be based on the most up-to-date information available on current school transport usage patterns and I expect to have the information available to me this summer. I will then have an opportunity to carefully examine the likely effect of this change well in advance of the 2012 implementation date. Deputy Michael Creed: The Minister of State is correct that this is a legacy issue. The devil is in the detail. I urge the Minister of State, in consultation with the Minister and his colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Ciaran Cannon, to tread very carefully. On the alleged savings, while the Department has stated the impact will be minimal in terms of pupil numbers, there will be a disproportionate impact on small schools in respect of two matters. The first concerns the change in the number required for the establishment or retention of a school bus service from seven to ten. In small schools which are predominantly but not exclusively to be found in rural areas increasing the number from seven to ten to retain or establish a bus service will in many circumstances mean that from 20% to 40% of pupils will need to be using school transport. This will have very severe consequences for the viability of the schools in question. The second matter is that the closed school rule could mean that members of families will be sent in two directions. I suggest a solution that the Minister of State might consider. The catchment area of a closed school should be treated as a single catchment area for the future. Therefore, the entitlement would relate to the central school—— Acting Chairman (Deputy Joe Costello): The Deputy is eating into the Minister of State’s time. Deputy Michael Creed: I ask the Minister of State to consider this matter in greater detail before proceeding. Deputy Sean Sherlock: I concur absolutely with the points the Deputy is making on the basis that I have received representations from families who are fearful they will be split as a result of the implementation of this mechanism. I am aware there is a further review taking place and that it will conclude at an unspecified date some time this summer. It should take a deeper look at exactly how many will be affected. I am also aware of the potential for certain parishes to be affected adversely, whereby an amalgamated school may, ironically, have reduced numbers in the future. There is no question but that a number of issues arise from the implementation of the initiative. However, I ask the Deputy to give us some time pending the outcome of the review which will result in a closer examination of the exact effect on families. I hope it will give rise to a further set of public utterances by the Minister on how some of the issues could be tackled.
Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett (PBPA): asked the Minister for Education and Skills the number of children, that have been recommended by the National Educational Psychological Services, that are being denied access to resource hours due to the current review being carried out under the Employment Control Framework for Education; Deputy Ruairí Quinn (Minister for Education and Skills): I wish to advise the Deputy that the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, is responsible, through its network of local special educational needs organisers, SENOs, for allocating resource teaching hours to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. It is not the practice of National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, psychologists to recommend specific numbers of resource teaching hours. NEPS psychologists assess children’s needs. The SENOs determine the hours to be allocated in accordance with departmental policy and taking account of reports such as those provided by NEPS psychologists. In respect of the allocation of resource teaching hours, the Department of Education and Skills is required to ensure that the overall allocation of teaching posts does not exceed the targets set out in the Government’s employment control framework. The Department had planned for a certain amount of increased growth in teacher numbers across the school sector in 2011 in line with increased demographic growth. In respect of resource teaching hours for children with special educational needs, allowance was made for growth in 2011 over and above normal demographic increase levels. In 2010, the total number of whole-time equivalent, WTE, posts provided for resource hours teaching — including under the general allocation model — was approximately 9,600. By comparison, approximately 9,950 WTE posts have been provided for 2011. The Deputy will note that this represents an increase in the number of WTE posts available for the year 2011. My Department requested the NCSE to provide data on the numbers and rate of application for additional resource teaching hours to date this year so that this information can be considered in the context of the Department’s employment control framework obligations. The NCSE has also been asked to pause sanctioning additional resource teaching support hours to allow for collection and consideration of this data by the Department in conjunction with the NCSE. It should be noted that this is a temporary suspension of the allocation process in order to allow for consideration and analysis of this issue prior to any decisions being made. The NCSE issued a circular to schools advising them that the final date for submission of any outstanding completed applications for resource teaching supports is 13 May next. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: The Minister wrote to schools in March and instructed them to stop allocating resource hours to pupils on foot of the review of the numbers employed in the area of education which was demanded by the IMF. This means that children who have been lucky enough to receive assessments from NEPS and who are obliged to wait months for such assessments will not now get what they are due. The stress that parents and children undergo while awaiting assessments and in dealing with the results thereof will be further exacerbated by the Minister withdrawing children’s rights to resource hours. The Minister stated that it is child abuse not to read to children. Is it not even worse abuse to deny some of the most vulnerable and needy children in society the educational resources they require? It is estimated that approximately 400 additional resource teacher posts will be needed by the end of the year and that 300 of these could go unapproved at a cost of approximately €13.5 million per year. I understand the Minister has recently been made aware that the costs associated with dealing with parents who are fighting legal cases relating to their children’s entitlements amount to €14.5 million. Acting Chairman (Deputy Joe Costello): The Deputy must conclude as the time for questions is exhausted. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Would it not make more sense to give these children the resources they require? Deputy Ruairí Quinn: I will direct that an inquiry be held in respect of the points made by the Deputy. I will consider the results of that inquiry and revert to him in due course.
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS
Deputy Michael Healy-Rae (I): asked the Minister for Education and Skills in view of the fact that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was ratified by Ireland in 1992, clearly states that Ireland’s children are entitled to a minimum standard of education, the reason there are parents involved in the CITCAAT campaign seeking these same rights. Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Deputy will be aware of my Department’s commitment to ensuring that all children, including those with autism, can have access to an education appropriate to their needs in school settings. This facilitates access to individualised education programmes, fully qualified professional teachers, special needs assistants and the appropriate school curriculum with the option, in line with each child’s ability, of full/partial integration and interaction with other pupils. My Department’s policy is to provide for children with special educational needs, including autism, to be included in mainstream schools unless such a placement would not be in their best interests or the interests of the children with whom they are to be educated. Some children may be supported in a special class attached to a mainstream school. These students have the option, where appropriate, of full/partial integration and interaction with other pupils. Other children may have such complex needs that they are best placed in a special school. Students with special educational needs have access to a range of support services including additional teaching and/or care supports. In special schools and special classes, students are supported through lower pupil teacher ratios. Special needs assistants may also be recruited specifically where pupils with disabilities and significant care needs are enrolled. The Deputy will be aware that the establishment of a network of autism-specific special classes in schools across the country to cater for children with autism has been a key educational priority in recent years. In excess of 430 classes have now been approved around the country at primary and post primary level, including many in special schools. My Department has put in place a training programme for teachers in autism-specific interventions including Treatment and Education of Autistic Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH), Picture Exchange Communications System (PECS) and Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) through the Special Education Support Service. The Deputy will be aware that the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs), for allocating special needs resources to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. The NCSE will continue to support schools, parents, children and teachers and special needs assistants will continue to be deployed to schools to meet children’s needs in line with my Department’s policy. SENOs with their local knowledge and expertise are a valuable resource to parents in sourcing an educational placement. The Deputy will also be aware that my Department provides grant aid under the Home Tuition Scheme to provide early education intervention for pre-school children with a confirmed diagnosis of autism or to parents of children with autism who are awaiting an educational placement.The Deputy may wish to contact my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children or the HSE directly in relation to the reference to children awaiting assessments, diagnosis and Early Intervention services in the details provided with his question. Similarly the Deputy may also wish to contact the Minister for Social Protection regarding the reference to issues surrounding the Domiciliary Care Allowance and the Carer’s Allowance. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh (SF): asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress made to date towards making a direct payments system available to those persons with disabilities who would prefer to be the direct employer of their personal assistant rather than contracting this role to a service provider; if he will report on the experience of the trials undertaken to date; if he will make the introduction of a direct payment option a priority; and if he will indicate a timeframe within which a direct payments system will be rolled out as an option. Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): The Government’s central policy objective for people with disabilities is that people should be supported “to lead full and independent lives, to participate in work and society and to maximise their potential”. In line with this policy, the Government’s Programme for National Recovery 2011-2016 contains a commitment to “ensure that the quality of life for people with disabilities is enhanced and that resources allocated reach the people who need them.” Research, both international and national, confirms that the needs of people with a disability are most appropriately met and provided in their home and community and that this provides a more sustainable model for the provision of care. The Government’s commitment to people with disabilities is one whereby the focus of any supports should be based on individual need as much as possible and, while there is no “one size fits all” solution, the focus of supports should favour the individual rather than an organisation or service provider. A review of the efficiency and effectiveness of disability services funded from the health Vote is currently underway and will be completed later this year. As part of this review an expert reference group was established to review current policy in relation to disability services. Although it is important not to pre-empt any recommendation that may arise out of this process, a key theme emerging is the need for a shift in funding from organisations to individuals. This might or might not involve the transfer of actual funds to the individual. While direct payment may be considered in the future, a shorter term goal would be the transfer to the individual of choice and control over support and care decisions through the mechanism of individualised budgeting. I understand that the Health Service Executive is supporting a direct payments model for two people with a disability in the Cavan-Monaghan area. In addition, my Department through the Genio Trust is supporting a new innovative initiative for five individuals to manage and direct their personal assistant supports by receiving direct payments to purchase the supports they decide they need. The evaluation of this initiative will inform the implementation of the policy proposals currently being developed. Deputy David Stanton (FG): asked the Minister for Education and Skills further to Questions No. 207 of 24 March 2010, Nos. 640 and 641 of 2 February 2010 and No. 1123 of 19 January 2010, the current status of the Special Education Appeals Board; Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Programme for Government states that education will be a priority for this Government and that we will endeavour to protect and enhance the educational experience of children, young people and students. To that end, we are committing during the tenure of this Government to the publication of a plan for the implementation of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004 (EPSEN) to prioritise access for children with special needs to an individual education plan. The Deputy will be aware that a number of sections of the EPSEN Act have already been commenced, principally those establishing the National Council for Special Education and those promoting an inclusive approach to the education of children with special educational needs. The EPSEN Act also provides for the establishment of the Special Education Appeals Board to hear and determine appeals under the Act. The appellant sections of the Act have not yet commenced. Three members were appointed to the board for a three-year term in April 2007 in advance of the then expected full implementation of the EPSEN Act. Board members developed the processes and procedures which would be required to allow for a smooth appellant system once the relevant sections of the Act, which would allow appeals to be undertaken, are commenced. Once the sections in question are commenced, the board will have specific statutory functions and responsibilities under the EPSEN Act. In the interim there are no grounds for any appeals to be made to the Special Education Appeals Board. Accordingly, once the initial period of office of the members of the board elapsed, the previous Minister for Education and Skills decided not to make new appointments for a further term. Deputy Simon Harris (FG): asked the Minister for Education and Skills the role of the special needs assistant within the education system; the criteria on which special needs assistants are appointed; the number of special needs assistants currently employed; when the pause in recruitment will be removed; Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I wish to advise the Deputy that Special Needs Assistants (SNAs) are allocated to schools to enable them support pupils with an assessed special educational need who also have a significant medical need or a significant impairment of physical or sensory impairment. Students with an assessed special educational need who present with significantly challenging behaviour may also qualify for some SNA support. The qualifying criteria for the allocation of SNA support is outlined in my Department’s Circular 07/02. The National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs) for allocating resource teachers and SNAs to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support, which now includes a requirement for the NCSE to have regard to an overall cap on the number of SNA posts. This number is 10,575 whole time equivalent (WTE) posts. This is a significant number of posts and unlike other areas of the public sector vacancies are being filled up to this number. It also represents continual increases in the number of SNAs over recent years. For example, there were 10,543 WTE SNA posts in place at the end of 2010 and 10,342 at end 2009. It is considered that with equitable and careful management and distribution of these resources that there should be sufficient posts to provide access to SNA support for all children who require such care support to attend school, in accordance with Departmental criteria. The NCSE has issued a circular to all schools advising of the allocation process for the 2011/2012 school year. A key feature of the amended scheme will be to provide for an annual allocation of Special Needs Assistant support to eligible schools. The NCSE asked schools to submit all applications for SNA support to them by 18th March, 2011 and intend to inform schools of their annual SNA allocation as soon as possible, in advance of the coming school year. My Department and I will be glad to consider any suggestions from school management or parent representative organisations as to how the allocation of SNA resources can best be managed within the context of the overall limit on SNA numbers established. In this regard I am committed to making whatever improvements are possible to the resource allocation system.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inclusion
Ireland, Unit C2, The Steelworks, Foley Street, Dublin 1, Ireland.
Tel: 01 8559891 Fax: 01 8559904 Email: info@inclusionireland.ie |