- Skip Navigation |
- Sitemap |
- Text Size: A |
- A |
- A
- Make a Complaint
- About Us
- FAQs
- Legislation
- Press Releases
- Speeches
- Publications
- Sample Cases
- Languages Act
- Disability Act 2005
The Office of the Ombudsman is open between 9.15 and 5.30 Monday to Thursday and 9.15 to 5.15 on Friday.
18 Lr. Leeson Street, Dublin 2.
Tel: +353-1-639 5600
Lo-call: 1890 223030
Fax: (01) 639 5674 Email: ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.ie
Department of Education and Science - Case Summaries 1998
Department of Education and Science - Case Summaries 1998
18 March 1999
In 1998 the Ombudsman received 143 valid complaints against the Department of Education and Science which amounted to 10.2% of the total number of complaints against Government departments. The equivalent figure for 1997 was 135 complaints so the 1998 figure represents an increase of approximately 6% in complaints received against the Department of Education and Science. As 58 complaints against the Department had been carried forward from 1997, the total number of complaints on hand against the Department in 1998 was 201 . During 1998, an examination of 149 complaints was completed of which a total of 41 were withdrawn or discontinued. Of the remaining cases 52 were not upheld, 35 were resolved and in 21 cases assistance was provided.
In 1998 the Ombudsman reports on the following cases involving the Department of Education and Science.
o The Ombudsman again asked the Department of Education and Science to seek to have the school transport scheme placed on a statutory basis. This request, first made in 1996, reflects the Ombudsman's concern that the school transport scheme, in its current non-statutory form, is not sufficiently transparent as to its rules and not sufficiently consistent as to the application of those rules. The Ombudsman's concerns arise from a series of complaints received over a number of years which suggest that
- there can be unfair discrimination at the level of individual school transport applicants;
- the basis on which exceptions to the normal rule may be made is not sufficiently clear;
- this lack of clarity has been exploited, both at school Board of Management level and at Ministerial level, in the taking of decisions for which objective criteria appear not to exist;
- the absence of a formal appeals mechanism is a significant defect.
The problem of unfair discrimination in decision-making by the Department appears not to be confined to the school transport area. The Ombudsman refers to a complaint in relation to the funding of school buildings. This case showed that an applicant had been treated less favourably than some other similar applicants, yet there were no objective grounds for the preferential treatment of the other applicants. Overall, the Ombudsman is concerned that the Department's schemes should be seen to operate fairly. Any departure from fairness will only serve to undermine the public's confidence in public administration (P.9 of Report).
o A number of complaints were received against the Department of Education and Science in relation to the decision to abolish fees for third level education, the so-called "Free Fees Initiative". The decision to abolish third level fees was announced in the Budget of February 1995. The Department undertook an immediate information campaign, including the operation of a Free Phone service, in relation to the Initiative. The Initiative, as originally announced, appeared to apply to all undergraduate students however the Department subsequently decided that the Initiative would only benefit undergraduates studying for a first degree and provided they were not repeating a year. This meant that students taking a second primary degree would not benefit. The difficulty with this decision was that the information which the Department had been giving under its information campaign - and which apparently was being passed on by the third level colleges - did not refer to any such restriction. Subsequently, the Ombudsman received a number of complaints from students who claimed to have made decisions based on a clear understanding that the Initiative applied to all undergraduates. They claimed to have been misled by the Department in this regard. The Ombudsman found in favour of a number of these complainants and at his request the Department gave the benefit of the Initiative to these students (P.13 of the Report).
The full text of the Annual Report, including the above cases, is available on the Ombudsman's Internet site (http://www.irlgov.ie/ombudsman/)
Enquiries to Fintan Butler at 01-6785222, e-mail: fintan_butler@ombudsman.irglov.ie
