Paul Murphy criticises SNA allocation process after reversal

People power has forced the government into a retreat on SNAs and that's extremely welcome but the underlying problem of the basis of allocation of SNAs and the insufficient number of SNAs remains and this special school in Tala illustrates the problem precisely. So they received a letter on the 11th of February saying that their allocation would be reduced from the 2025-2026 academic year. It was later withdrawn on the same day but the rationale presented is quite telling. It's based on primary care needs. That's the basis, in other words primarily medical as opposed to other needs and 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. So the idea being that there was too many SNAs, too many staff members to assist these children. When these are children with profound difficulties who may often need multiple adults and I would add to that that the environment, which is not a purpose-built space, it's a shared campus, there's 600 kids and students on this campus, loads of cars coming and going, we saw videos of buses arriving, kids trying to get off, cars pulling in and out, a dangerous situation where multiple staff are needed to keep children safe and that needs to be taken into account. I'm almost encouraged when you have cross-party bringing issues onto the floor of the Dáil and the sincerity of it. At the outset, right, I have, I know the school the deputies are referring to and I have engaged with the principal previously in relation to some issues and I know the deputy had to bring this to my attention a number last week as well in relation to it. I suppose there's a few things, right. I have a script available that will be handed out so you can take that as read. So I just want to talk through the issues. One, I just want to get my head around like Deputy Hart mentioned that there was further information, Deputy Crow mentioned in terms of the 40 minutes between the taking and the taking of the SNA and giving back the SNA. I really need to get further clarification from all of you on that because I do want to understand this. I do know, we were out in St Michael's house this morning in Baldoyle. I have visited many, many special schools and I know the enormity of the work that they do there and the huge complex care needs and medical needs of children across the system and the work that's been done there is second to none in terms of the school leadership, the teachers, the SNAs and a lot of the SNAs as you pointed out Deputy Hearn is very much, you know, they are doing a work, enormous work in terms of it. But I would, like I think whilst, you know, the SNA review that has been paused but I think that there is still, we need to get under the bonnet in terms of this issue. Myself, I need to get an understanding of it because, like, I'm really concerned when you have special schools and the complex needs that are being presented in special schools and, like, you look at your school and every other one and they are going way above and beyond the call of duty in terms of the administration of it. If it is possible, when it is convenient to all four deputies, if I could convene a meeting with you and, like, I would ask you to bring as much information as is possible on it because, like, I can give the stock answer that you have received there but that's not sufficient in terms of what you're looking for. And as I understand it, your concern is about an additional SNA support but also additional, a particular SNA or an SNA that may have qualifications or may have, you know, non-medical but would have qualifications. That's as I understand it. But I want to be very clear, right, we are, we understand what the challenges are, we understand what the issues are and I would and maybe in your closing contributions you might just dig a small a bit deeper onto the exact, you know, medical needs that were presented that weren't taken into account. And I might take it that when the letter was issued on the 11th of February, that the principal returned documentation by email to the NCC at that point and then the subsequent letter was withdrawn 40 minutes later and you might confirm that to me. And if it were possible, at a convenient time to all four of you that we would meet and that we would try and trash it out and try and come to, first of all, to an understanding of what the issues are. And I have no difficulty because I do believe part of my job is very fundamental in that I should be out looking at what's happening in special schools and I don't have any difficulty in visiting that school either. I have engaged with the principal previously, but maybe in the short few minutes that you have, if you could expand on that point, I'll try and respond to it and then we could have a further meeting to expand on it. Thank you, Dr. Murphy. Thanks a lot, Minister. And yeah, I would very much welcome the idea of a meeting. I'd also invite you to come and visit the school, meet with the principal and teachers and S&As and so on. Just the bottom line point, what happened in the 40 minutes between the letter removing the S&As and the letter saying no S&As will be removed is that the principal contacted the NCSE to say, wait a minute, all the parents' questionnaires that you asked us to fill out, the parents have gone to fill out that's been explained, they're all still sitting here. These things that you were supposedly taking into account and making your decision, you couldn't have taken them into account because we still have them. We saw them when we visited the school, she still has them at this stage. That was what happened in the intervening 40 minutes, which raises the question about, did this apply elsewhere as well? Chuck McCrope? Yeah, if I could, in the few minutes revealed to me, right, I'll meet with Chief Wright and I'll further engage with the principal as well because we did engage and I will go through that. The worrying thing that I seem to, like, because there is one, or are students within us, we won't, we'll just say students within us, just to be clear, that there is a medical need that is developing within the school and that has become more profound or more needy. Is that one of the issues that are within the, that that wasn't taken into account? I will go back in relation to, like, I know that all the forms and consent forms, they are hard won in special schools because of the complexity that has to be put on the forms and, like, parents have other challenges in terms of having children with profound needs and to try and meet that. So that's something that I will certainly look at. But am I clear in saying that they are looking for a particular type of support within the schools? Like, they look at special schools and, you know, the ratio of staff to pupils is quite high because of the complex needs within the schools. But that shouldn't, if they're, like, you would know from your walk in your communities as well, like, some of the special schools are providing very high-end medical care as well within the school communities. So, like, it isn't fair to say, like, that there's a ratio of two to one or, you know, that that can vary depending on the needs of the child. What I will undertake is that I will meet with you if we could get it better and maybe we could liaise with the principal of the school authorities as well during the meeting just to get a sense of it because there's no point in I standing up here and I can go through. We are committed to this. We are very serious about it. I am desperately serious about trying to do the right thing here and what I will do is I will undertake to liaise with you yourselves and the school community and I am glad to see that they have a bit of, they have well, the investment. But we have to continue that investment on the overall sense but just to get an understanding of this particular issue, I will engage with you and we'll take it from there. Okay. Thank you.