Paul Murphy Challenges Return to Traditional Leaving Cert
Paul Murphy criticised the government's decision to revert to a traditional Leaving Cert, arguing it goes against student wishes and will increase pressure, points inflation and harm student wellbeing. He pressed the Taoiseach to reconsider and to invest in additional third-level places to reduce competition.
Main criticism of return to traditional Leaving Cert
Paul Murphy said the Government is "absolutely determined, against the wishes of 68% of students, to drive through a return to a so-called traditional Leaving Cert." He warned this approach follows two years without the traditional exam and risks "massive points inflation, severe pressure on students and the continuation of this unnecessary rat race."
Concerns about student health and competition for places
Murphy highlighted long-standing anxieties around the Leaving Cert, noting "over 50% of students to suffer from physical or mental illness" as a result of the exam. He pointed out that recent announcements "did not even include mention of extra third-level places to reduce the competition," framing the decision as likely to intensify stress rather than relieve it.
Requests made to the Taoiseach and Government
He directly asked the Taoiseach to "reconsider" and to "provide the investment to ensure that there is a place at third level for all who want it." Murphy presented the lack of expanded third-level capacity as a central policy omission that would exacerbate competition and pressure on students.
Government and ministerial responses on assessment changes
Murphy reported the Taoiseach's defence that the exam will not return to its 2018-2019 form because about one third of content has been cut and that the minister "did listen to the students." He relayed the explanation that accredited grades were not reinstated because roughly 25% of students had not taken the junior certificate, leaving inadequate data for a fair alternative; and that marking schemes and standardisation aim to limit inflation.
Fairness and future reform of the Leaving Cert
Murphy acknowledged that fairness "irrespective of background" has endured in the Leaving Cert and said reform is needed for access to higher-level education, noting that access issues predate the current exam debate. He argued reform should proceed but stressed that the current decision risks preserving a high-pressure, competitive system rather than easing it.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Taoiseach, you yourself admitted a year ago that the Leaving Cert was inflexible and that a new system was needed, yet here we are, having had two years of no traditional Leaving Cert, as it is called, and now the Government is absolutely determined, against the wishes of 68% of students, to drive through a return to a so-called traditional Leaving Cert. The usual anxieties, which causes over 50% of students to suffer from physical or mental illness as a result of the Leaving Cert, on top of that the fact of the inadequacy of preparation and so on. The announcements did not even include mention of extra third-level places to reduce the competition. Instead, it is a recipe for massive points inflation, severe pressure on students and the continuation of this unnecessary rat race. The Taoiseach, will you reconsider, please, and provide the investment to ensure that there is a place at third level for all who want it? In terms of the broader issue around the Leaving Cert, things are not going back to normal, Deputy, Oireadon. I just want to make that point, in the sense that this exam is not the exam that would be similarly put together in 2019 or 2018, insofar as about one third of the content has been cut back. The Minister did listen to the students. No one has come up with any alternative on the accredited grades and the fact that 25% did not do the junior certificate and their data could not be used in an alternative accredited grade system is a very important point that just seems to be ignored in terms of any responses to it. Students wanted clarity and certainty. That has been given. Students wanted greater choice in terms of the exam papers and in the oral. That has been given quite substantially and I went through some instances of that earlier in the debate in respect of the English paper, the maths paper, the biology paper, likewise in the art paper, accountancy and so on. There will be very significant additional choice given and the burden reduced. So it will not compare to 2019 or to 2018 because of the greater choice being given and the other key issue that students were anxious about, that there would not be disadvantaged in terms of greater inflation relative to the students of 2021. That also has been agreed by the minister and that will be the case via the marking scheme and via standardisation. The one area that the minister could not respond was on the accredited grades, not because she did not want to, but because it would not have been as fair as last year. It could not devise a system that would have been as fair as last year's system, principally because one could not use the data of about 25% of the students because they had not done the junior certificate. It is not about taking on the department. I do not believe the department is conservative on curriculum reform at all. And I believe there will be further reforms of the leaving certificate and there should be. The one aspect of the leaving certificate that has endured is fairness, irrespective of background. In terms of access to a higher level, it is not who you know in this country. It is crude, I accept that. It needs to be reformed. That is not because of the leaving certificate. And you know that. You know that. It was back much earlier.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
