AS ONE might expect, this week’s protest by the parents of special needs pupils was dignified and respectful. But there was no disguising the depth of anger – even exasperation – among those present. One mother spoke movingly of how the Government was “turning its back’’ on some of the most vulnerable and needy in our society.
It is to be hoped the protest will help to concentrate minds in the Department of Education where the need to achieve cuts in special needs provision appears to have been given a curious priority for several years. Neither the previous administration nor the current Government have an unsullied record on the issue. The current cap on special needs assistants (SNAs) in schools was set by the previous government at 10,575. With 10,802 assistants in situ, the current Government is pushing for a return to the original cap, despite the potentially calamitous impact on pupils and families.
It would help if Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn and his officials adopted more than an accountant’s approach to special needs provision. Last month, the department’s value-for-money report on SNAs found there was an “over-allocation’’ of 27 per cent in primary and post-primary schools and 10 per cent in special needs schools. This was an extraordinary finding when one considers the State’s dismal history in this area. For years, the parents of special needs children were left to their own devices without much isuccour or support. While undoubted progress has been made, this is largely because of the courage of individual families who fought valiantly to vindicate their rights in the courts.
This week, Government sources were making the dubious claim that special needs cuts are a regrettable byproduct of the EU-IMF deal. But the Government has been much slower to acknowledge the strain on parents, worried about how their child might cope in a mainstream classroom situation.
The whole episode reflects poorly on the Coalition, particularly on Labour Ministers and backbenchers who pledged to safeguard special needs during the election campaign. Parents of special needs children may have little alternative but to – once again – pursue their rights in the courts. In all the circumstances Mr Quinn must adopt a more open-hearted and generous approach. He controls an education budget of more than €9 billion. Why are the most vulnerable being targeted in order to achieve relatively minor savings? The proposed cuts are mean-spirited and unconscionable.