It’s always interesting to participate in the odd conference and hear what the neighbours are up to, so I headed for Budapest to gain insight into inclusive education around Europe.

Work is not all about making money but is an important part of achieving greater independence- Nathan Farrugia

It seems that Malta is doing quite well if we believe that the inclusion of children with disabilities in mainstream education is the way to go. Surprisingly, many countries still believe in special schools and seem to be inclined to stay that way. ‘Culture’ was the simple answer to my query about this mindset.

On the other hand, we seem to be lagging behind when it comes to inclusion on the workplace and in the community. We have very little by way of sheltered and supported employment and we are clearly nowhere near providing supported independent living in the community either.

Interesting debates across the floor from 200 people from all walks of life kept my attention in an event where one usually expects to be bored to tears by academic and research paper reviews. Many of the opinion leaders were individuals with disabilities and their parents, besides the professionals and academics.

Inclusion is a little difficult to measure because the chances are that we gauge the physical presence of the child with special needs in the classroom, though not necessarily whether s/he is playing an inclusive part in learning.

It seems that those countries that prefer special schools have ones that are extremely well resourced and funded and stretching those resources out to mainstream schools diluted the care so much that it backfired. Children were physically present in classrooms but not necessarily playing an active part in the classroom.

Other countries have stepped this up by providing co-teaching classrooms with two teachers working with a split group within the class, which changes organically as children change to a subject depending on their strengths or weaknesses. A dedicated learning support assistant is only there for children with very severe needs.

These good examples complemented the academic curriculum with on-site therapy services and extracurricular activities catering for special needs students; from independent living skills to assistive technology training.

Interestingly, countries with the most successful educational mainstreaming had the best inclusive employment sectors too. Scandinavian countries and Austria measure the ability of each individual on a particular job in order to determine their ‘productivity’. This allows the State to subsidise the wages of the individual for the difference in output. Employers are therefore motivated financially and the funding is specific to the individuals’ needs. In this way, those who have more complex needs or who are doing more complex tasks get more funding.

In Malta, we have blanket EU-funded programmes that may equally reward people at either end of the ability spectrum, not specific to their needs.

Another reason why more people with disabilities work in some countries is because they do not lose their pension when they start earning a wage, like they do in Malta.

Here, a person loses an amount from his/her pension according to what they earn when they reach a particular ceiling, thus reducing the financial motivation to work. Work is not all about making money but is an important part of achieving greater independence.

Italy is another example where employers not reaching the appropriate quotas of persons with disabilities in their workforce are asked to either employ or to pay a fine that goes to fund a local NGO providing sheltered employment.

In Malta, we have a law that states that companies need to employ two per cent of their workforce with some form of disability. Due to the fact that the majority of companies are SMEs, these quotas are rarely met. In larger companies and, indeed, government service, they are not enforced.

At least, in Italy, the companies are forced to contribute to the employment of a disabled person, if not in their ranks in a sheltered environment that suits the individuals’ particular needs.

Unfortunately, it can be taken as an opt-out clause by companies not wishing to welcome an all-ability workforce but the NGOs see this as a compromise and use the funds effectively.

There is a lot to learn from these examples and I am hopeful that we will continue to progress towards greater inclusion. My worry is that we sometimes pay lip service to the community and make claims about inclusion that are superficial.

Inclusion requires considerable effort: financial and in terms of expertise and human resources, and goes beyond statistics. Companies must contribute further and laws should be changed so that funding goes to the people that need it most.

An independent viewpoint of how inclusive our schools and workplaces actually are would be an interesting and useful tool for taking stock and mapping out our needs for a more inclusive society.