I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 48 together.
I have no plans to recommend to Government the withdrawal of the Supreme Court appeal in the case in question. I understand the appeal will not be heard by the Supreme Court before the autumn.
The judgment raises issues of constitutional relevance, primarily to do with the separation of the powers and duties of the Executive and judicial arms of Government and the appropriate relationship between the two. These are constitutional matters of the utmost importance, having a relevance across the entire spectrum of State activities. The Government has been advised by counsel and the Attorney General that the Supreme Court, which has the ultimate role in interpreting the Constitution, should, in the public interest, be asked to consider these aspects of the judgment. It is on this basis that an appeal has been lodged.
The appeal, however, when it is resolved, will not in any way diminish the services made available, after this judgment, to the child involved or to other children with special education needs. The appeal is being pursued entirely without prejudice to the present level of education services in the special needs area. It is also entirely without prejudice to the proposals set out in the White Paper on the future development of such services.