COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Wednesday, 12 Mar 2003

Vol. 1 No. 12

2001 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts.

Votes 26, 27, 28 and 29 - Department of Education and Science.

Mr. J. Dennehy (Secretary General, Department of Education and Science) called and examined.

Chairman

On behalf of the Committee of Public Accounts and myself I offer condolences to Deputy John McGuinness and his family on the recent death of his father, Michael J., a former mayor, alderman, and freeman of Kilkenny city who will be a tremendous loss to both the family and political life of the city and county. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam. May he rest in peace.

I welcome the witnesses to the committee. Witnesses should be made aware that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. The attention of witnesses is drawn to the fact that, as and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act 1997 grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. These rights include the right to give evidence, the right to produce or send documents to the committee, the right to appear before the committee either in person or through a representative, the right to make a written or oral submission, the right to request the committee to direct the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and the right to cross-examine witnesses.

For the most part, these rights may only be exercised with the consent of the committee. Persons being invited before the committee are made aware of these rights and any person identified in the course of proceedings who is not present may have to be made aware of these rights and provided with a transcript of the relevant part of the committee's proceedings if the committee considers it appropriate in the interests of justice.

Notwithstanding this provision in legislation, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House, or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Members are also reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 156 that the committee shall also refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government, or a Minister of the Government, or the merits of the objectives of such a policy.

I welcome the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Science, Mr. John Dennehy, who will introduce his officials.

Mr. Dennehy

I am accompanied by Padraic McNamara, who is the chief executive officer of the new State Examinations Commission; Mr. Seán Harkin, principal officer; Mr. Brian Duggan, principal officer; Mr. Alan O'Neill, assistant principal; and Ms Blaithín Dowling, higher executive officer. We are also accompanied by two of our colleagues from the Department of Finance, Mr. Eugene O'Sullivan and Mr. John White.

Mr. Purcell

There is one item in the report that deals with the Department of Education and Science.

Chairman

Paragraph 7.1 reads:

7.1 Examinations Branch

Introduction

The Examinations Branch of the Department of Education and Science is responsible for administering all second level examinations in the State, including those leading to the award of Junior and Leaving Certificates. Other examinations catered for by the Branch include those covering Leaving Certificate Applied, Leaving Certificate Vocational Programme, National Council for Vocational Awards, Ceard Teastais, other teacher training and PLC courses (on an agency basis).

The Branches work includes organising the setting and distribution of examination papers, co-ordinating the set-up of examination centres, organising marking, issuing results and dealing with queries and appeals.

Table 1 illustrates the diversity and scale of the work undertaken by the Branch for the main examinations in 2001. Students from some 800 post-primary schools sat the Junior and Leaving certificate examinations in over 4,400 centres. In all, over 2 million examination components (written, aural/oral, practical and project) were marked

Table 1: Throughput for the Main Examinations in 2001

	Junior Certificate	Leaving Certificate	Total
Examination Centres	-	-	4,415
Examination Superintendents Employed	-	-	4,434
Examiners Employed	-	-	5,682
Chief Examiners	44	62	106
Advising Examiners	197	197	394
Assistant Examiners	1,730	1,477	3,207
Oral Examiners	-	1,033	1,033
Practical/Project Examiners	-	-	942
Candidates	60,124	56,670	116,794
Subjects Examined	26	40*	66
Examination Papers	126	203	329
Grades Issued	582,765	390,371	973,136
Appeal Applications	1,712	8,974	10,686
Upgrades Granted	609	2,432	3,041

*Includes 8 non curricular subjects

The successful operation of the Public Examination System cost some €27 million in 2001 after taking examination fee receipts of €6.4million into account.

The direct costs incurred in running the 2001 examinations are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2 - Costs of the 2001 examinations

Expenditure Table	€m
Examinations Branch Payroll	4.3
Superintendent and Examiner Fees	16.2
Travel and Subsistence	8.2
Attendants Fees	0.8
Incidentals	4.1
Total	33.6

Review of the Branches operations

In August 1995, following operational failures in that years Leaving Certificate Art examination, the Departments of Finance and Education and Science agreed that the Centre for Management and Organisational Development (CMOD) of the Department of Finance and the Organisation Unit of the Department of Education and Science should undertake a joint review of the operations of the Examinations Branch "to make whatever recommendations are necessary for the future conduct of examinations".

At about the same time consultants were commissioned to carry out a specific review of the Arts Examination in 1995. The resultant report issued in 1996 recommended an extensive and comprehensive programme of change in this area. The joint Department of Education and Science/CMOD review (the Joint Review) took cognizance of the recommendations in this report.

The review team, which started its work in April 1996, concentrated on work practices, systems and procedures of the Branch. Areas covered were work volumes, the allocation of staff to different tasks, the incidence of overtime and the use of temporary staff by the Branch. It also covered the internal structure of the Branch, the level of supervision and the relationship between the Branch and the Inspectorate.

The Joint Review, published in January 1998, contained thirty-three recommendations, all of which were accepted by the Department. Implementation of the recommendations was delegated to the Branch. A further review of operational systems in the Department of Education and Science was carried out in 2000-2001 by a former Secretary of the Department of Finance, at the request of the Minister for Education and Science. This review concluded that the Examinations Branch was heavily overburdened and that, while the Branch has successfully drawn on new technology to enhance the efficiency and transparency of the system, additional benefits may arise from further outsourcing of specialist tasks including printing and logistics management. The review noted that there was on-going consideration by the Department of the desirability of achieving a better balance in the Junior Certificate by introducing elements of school certification rather than placing over-reliance on terminal written assessment, as at present. The review involved publication of a discussion paper and a countrywide consultation process. Such a rebalancing of the Junior Certificate to school certification would reduce the workload of the Branch.

The report by the former Secretary favoured a more radical solution, originally proposed in an earlier externally commissioned report, that a specialist body outside the Department manage the State Examinations. This suggestion has since been taken up by the Minister who announced in June 2001, that a State Examinations Commission with operational responsibility for the running of the examinations was being set up. This will bring the Department into line with best practice internationally. The new body is expected to come into being in October 2002.

Objectives and Scope of Audit

The principal objectives of the examination were to establish the extent to which the Department has implemented the Joint Review Groups recommendations and the effects of their implementation on overtime and staffing levels and on general operation of the Branch.

The scope of the audit included a review of files, analysis of statistics and financial data and discussions with senior officials in the Examinations Branch.

Audit Findings

Implementation Status

The Department did not set out a list of priorities or a timetable for their implementation. In the light of the 1995 Arts Examination crisis the Branch, under the direction of the Examinations Management Group, chose to implement those recommendations which impacted most on the public perception of the Branch, followed by technology measures to reduce the burden on the Branch. Issues impacting on industrial relations within the Branch have not yet been resolved.

While many of the recommendations have been wholly or partially implemented in the last four years some important areas have yet to be fully addressed which have the potential to improve the efficiency of the Branch.

These include cutting overtime, the development of a management information system and better organisation of workflows. These issues are considered in the following paragraphs.

Overtime

The review team considered that the level of overtime worked in the Branch was unacceptably high and that a radical revision of arrangements needed to be implemented, including increasing the number of permanent staff in the Branch.

The review team recommended an increase in staffing in the Branch, which it deemed was necessary to administer the examinations system. By February 2002, the total permanent staffing of the Branch was 90 officers compared with 73.5 in 1996. This staffing level is somewhat higher than the review teams recommendations and is attributed to the heavier workload since 1996.

Table 3 illustrates the trend in the overall level of overtime worked in the Branch from 1996-2001 in monetary and hourly terms. While this trend is currently downward, from a high in 1997, the total number of hours worked in the Branch in 2001 was 16% higher than in 1996. Costs incurred on overtime continue to be significant.

Table 3 - Salary and Overtime Costs 1996-2001

Year	Salaries ’000	Overtime ’000	Overtime as % of basic salary	Normal hours	Overtime hours	Overtime as % of normal hours
1996	1,864	536	29	157,244	47,120	30
1997	2,145	750	35	157,244	61,412	39
1998	2,383	907	38	189,335	59,823	32
1999	2,631	762	29	189,335	52,106	28
2000	2,952	769	26	189,335	55,290	29
2001	3,512	785	22	189,335	48,076	25

The review suggested that it should be feasible to eliminate the overtime worked between October and end-May if a concerted effort was made to substantially shift forward the cycle of preparation for the examinations. It also believed that a significant reduction in costs could be achieved by employing, in the period June to September each year, less expensive temporary clerical officers (TCOs) in place of overtime working by non-Examinations Branch permanent staff. There are insufficient volunteers from Examinations Branch willing to do overtime and, as a consequence, staff from other Departmental areas have to be deployed on overtime working. Industrial relations issues limit the TCO input to the Branch to 65 persons, working a maximum of 1,100 weeks during a 28 week period. Of the temporary staff deployed only porters may carry out paid overtime duties. These restrictions limit the Branchs scope to achieve payroll savings.

Since the Joint Review report the workload of the Branch has expanded through

· increases in the number of examinations

· candidates getting the right to view their original scripts

· internet access to results

· introduction of dial-up examination results.

Overtime has not been eliminated in the October to May period and there was no significant reduction of overtime in the June-September 2001 period. 127 officials were involved in the overtime roster over the period April to mid-October 2001. Twelve of these worked in excess of 600 hours in this period (an average weekly rate of 28 hours).

The Department is fully committed to reducing the Branches reliance on overtime working and points to a substantial reduction (about 22%) in overtime hours between 1997 and 2001, despite a considerable increase in the Branchs workload.

It notes that the work cycle and tight timescales between holding examinations and providing results and the manual nature of some of the processes will always generate a need for overtime working. The use of shift-work for TCOs was tried in the Branch in the mid-1980s but was found to be not satisfactory and was not pursued thereafter.

The Department considers that a formal agreement on the use of TCOs negotiated with the union representing the majority of staff in the Branch is a considerable achievement in view of the strong reservations of the union nationally. Recent legislative change and the establishment of the standalone State Examinations Commission will provide new avenues for progressing the issue of greater flexibility with the union in question.

General Operation of Branch

Aspects of the recommendations which impact on the general operation of the Branch may be considered under the following headings.

Management Information Systems

The review team was critical of the effort required of the Branch to provide it with basic management information relating to workflows, volumes of work, allocation of staff and overtime payments. In what is essentially a production line operation, it considered that the information it had sought to conduct its review was crucial to knowing the state of progress of work being undertaken at any point in time. It was unaware of any norms that had been set for staff which would help indicate productivity levels and highlight incidences of unevenness of workloads or less than full productivity. The report called for improvements in the management information available to the management of the Branch.

The Department accepts that while it has considerable informal information systems available on workflows, allocation of staff, progress of operations etc. there is a need to formalise these systems. It is intended that this will form part of the State Examinations Commissions agenda.

Examination stationery

The review team recommended that examination materials such as graph and tracing paper, answer sheets etc. should be sent directly to examination centres from suppliers in quantities agreed by Examinations Branch. This recommendation has not been acted on because of industrial relations issues involving the work of temporary porters. However, the Department has created a new examinations aide function and authorised the deployment of this resource for up to 15 days per examination year in each school.

The Department states that the objective of this new function is to provide for a greater role for schools in examinations delivery, to decentralise the current system, and to provide opportunities for the Department to improve the efficiency of examinations delivery. The new model also opens up the possibility of greatly reducing the Departments vulnerability in the area of examination paper security and non co-operation by teachers in supervising the state examinations.

While the approval of the Department of Finance has been obtained for the expenditure involved, the impact of the additional expense in the overall context of the examination system has not been computed.

The Department decided to defer further action on the examination stationery issue until agreement was reached with the unions on bringing into effect those elements of the 2001 Report approved by the government for implementation. Agreement has now been reached with the unions in that respect. It is now open to the State Examinations Commission to pursue outstanding issues relating to examination stationery. The introduction of the examination aide for schools was also a key dimension in ensuring school acceptance and positioning the external elements of the system for further internal change.

Production of question papers

The review group noted that as the Inspectorate saw no significant reasons to delay the setting of examination papers, these should be prepared before 1 April of the year preceding an examination. This would allow finalisation by the Inspectorate by the following 1 September and enable all printing work on these to be completed before end January when the demands on the Branch are normally low.

The review team felt that if printing of examination papers was completed by this deadline, the Branch would have sufficient time to have these packed before the end of May, as part of its routine operations. Bottlenecks continue to occur at the point of moving papers from draft to proof stage at Inspectorate level and as a result bulk printing is not being completed by the end of January. The Branch strives to meet this time frame but sees the role of the Inspectorate as vital to achieving the objective.

According to the Department there has been a strong improvement in the flow of examination papers to the printing stage in the past few years and further improvement is anticipated with the establishment of the State Examinations Commission. This improvement is due, in the main, to the introduction of Chief Setters at Junior Certificate and Leaving Certificate Applied level and improved schedules by the Inspectorate in dealing with draft examination papers. The Commission will have a dedicated professional/assessment cadre. Currently inspectors work as chief examiners is always competing with other Department wide pressures.

Collating data on pupils candidacy intentions

The Examinations Branch needs to get accurate information on the number of pupils sitting the various subjects, the levels being taken by each and the examination centre at which the pupils will sit the examination. The Branch relies on the Departments Post Primary pupil Database for most of this information but must seek confirmation from schools of any changes in the choices made. In order to do this the Branch uses what are referred to as turnaround documents to obtain updated information from schools and candidates.

The review team recommended that these documents be simplified for ease of input to the databases and that they be returned from the schools before Christmas for the Leaving Certificate and by the end of February for the Junior Certificate.

For the 2001 examinations, the Leaving Certificate documents were issued in the period 1 December 2000 to 29 January 2001 to be returned within 2 weeks, while the Junior Certificate documents were issued on 28 February to be returned by the 30 March 2001.

The Department states that the Branch is dependent on the flow of examination candidate information through the collection of pupil data by the Post Primary Pupil Database process. This process piggybacks on the capture of other data from schools each October. It is of the view that there would be considerable opposition at school level to a separate earlier process. Furthermore, Junior Certificate candidates have until the end of March to decide on the level at which they will sit their examinations. It has not been possible to achieve an earlier date because of the opposition of schools, teachers, parents and pupils, who argue that a decision on the level to be taken must be left until as late as possible.

This impairs the Branchs capacity to have a more even schedule and work in this area tends to be concentrated in the late April/May period.

Conclusions

While the Department has been active in implementing the Joint Review Groups recommendations, some key actions still remain to be taken four years on.

Over and above the actions recommended by the Joint Review Group, the Department has taken positive steps in improving customer service in this area through the use of modern technologies in particular.

The continued absence of a proper management information system in the Branch is a hindrance to its efficient operation.

The proposed State Examinations Commission will need to have a clearly enunciated strategy for addressing the human resource issues which presently constrain the efficiency of the operation of the examination system.

Observations of the Department of Education and Science

Following the difficulties with Leaving Certificate Art in 1995 the Department was dealing with a fluid and volatile examination landscape and chose to prioritise measures which were designed to re-build public confidence in the examination system. This approach was best suited to the unprecedented circumstances that applied at that time. On that basis new processes and measures were introduced which were not features of the examination process at the time of the review or identified by the review team as warranting implementation. Some of these flowed from reports produced by consultants in relation to the problems encountered in the 1995 Art examination and from a subsequent report by the same consultants on the Leaving Certificate Appeal system. Others were conceived by the Department itself. These included the introduction of bar-coding, alternative collection arrangements for examination material, introduction of examination appeal commissioners, automated dial-up and internet access to results and the mould breaking initiative to return marked scripts to candidates. All of these measures were implemented without additional permanent staff. Their introduction placed a heavy burden on an already heavily stretched IT resource in particular. The Examinations Branch has placed a heavy emphasis on finding IT driven solutions to problems because of the constant tension between the demands of the examination system and the availability of human resources. Some were part of an integrated approach to development. For example the huge logistical challenge posed in re-sorting scripts for return to candidates in August is enabled by use of sort codes to facilitate tracking of scripts from examination centres to the Department and to examiners throughout June and July. It is the firm view of the Departments top management that those measures with a quality assurance and customer service focus and supported by innovative IT solutions were a greater priority than some of the measures identified by the review that might have appeared to hold out the prospect of reducing the resources required. In essence, the Department chose to extract more and increase its services from within existing resources rather than maintain services with reduced resources.

The costs of the Public Examination System in Ireland are not out of line with those for broadly comparable examination systems, for example, those in Scotland and New Zealand. The review identified the human resources available to the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) and compared activity volumes but its recommendation on permanent staffing fell well short of bringing the Examinations Branch to the level of permanent staffing in the SQA without any indication of how the gap that had been identified was to be otherwise covered. In the comparison with the Scottish model the review furthermore did not factor in the greater degree of devolution to schools in Scotland in relation to examination administration. For example, the entire process of appointing examination superintendents there is school based and does not usually involve teachers. Here because of the historical involvement of teachers in supervision, which they guard closely, the Department is forced into recruitment, appointment, assignment and payroll functions. Furthermore, in relation to the cost of running the examinations, it is worth pointing out that travel and subsistence costs account for €8.2m (25% approximately of overall budget) in 2001. These costs arise from supervisory duties performed by teachers who travel to out-of-town centres and the insistence on the almost exclusive use of an external visiting examiner model for oral and practical examinations. These are not features of examination systems in other countries.

The public consultation process seeking a better balance in the Junior Certificate involved countrywide public meetings, at which teachers union representatives, articulated with regularity, the continued opposition of the union to any movement to school certification.

While the Examinations Branch would have wished to be further advanced there has been some progress in the area of procedure manuals and form design. Procedural manuals have been compiled recently for the Leaving Certificate Applied operations. In the case of efficacy of forms the Branch has, for example, reviewed the use and effectiveness of its forms and, as a result, has developed generic forms for use on processes that are broadly similar. The agenda is moving swiftly along and the issues now are how, through the use of web enabled technologies, all interactions with schools, students and examiners can be improved. At time of writing for example candidates have been given Internet capacity to lodge appeal applications and to pay on-line by credit card.

Mr. Purcell

Paragraph 7.1 records the results of a review by my staff of the operations of the examinations branch of the Department. The work of the branch involves the setting and distribution of examination papers, co-ordinating the set-up of examination centres, organising marking, issuing results and dealing with queries and appeals and a few other things besides. The cost of running the 2001 second level examinations was €33.6 million and the main constituents of that cost are outlined in table 24 on page 74 of the report.

Although the branch has, over the years, managed the examinations with few major slip-ups, particularly when compared to recent experiences in neighbouring jurisdictions, independent reports in the late 1990s tended to suggest that a new organisational framework would facilitate increasing efficiency and streamlining of the operation and in meeting growing demands on the system. Our review of the branch confirmed that while it was doing a reasonable job in the circumstances, there was scope for improvement, particularly in areas of management information, work scheduling and in the overall development of the system.

The Department recognised that further development of the examination system might best be achieved outside the existing framework. To this end the Minister announced in June 2001 the setting up of a specialist body with operational responsibility for the running of the examinations. The necessary order under the Education Act 1998 has recently been made to provide for a State Examinations Commission. The members of the commission have been appointed and extra staff are being made available. I understand that the new commission is to have a staff complement of 140 officials, which is significantly more than that of the examinations branch it replaces. Separate annual accounts will be prepared by the commission in future and the chief executive, who is here today, will be accountable to this committee for his stewardship of the commission.

While the Department has continued to make progress on many of the recommendations of the various reviews, it is now clearly over to the new commission to address the outstanding issues, the most notable of which is the need for greater flexibility in the deployment and use of staff.

To a certain extent the content of the report has been overtaken by the establishment of the new commission. I am not sure to what extent it is as relevant as usual.

Mr. Dennehy

Arising from difficulties that we encountered in the leaving certificate art examination in 1995, the Department of Education at the time commissioned PriceWaterhouse to investigate the reasons for the operational failures that gave rise to these difficulties. In addition, a joint review of the administration of the examinations was initiated by CMOD working with the organisational unit of our own Department. This included an examination of the structure of the examinations branch of the Department, its staffing, the levels of overtime and temporary staff, and a range of other issues.

Following these reviews, and arising from other measures that were initiated by the Department, a number of new processes were introduced. These included some that have proved very effective since in ensuring that we run a much smoother operation. For example: the introduction of bar coding track which enables us to track every individual piece of a candidate's work from the time the candidate parts with it right through the entire system; alternative collection arrangements for examination material; the introduction of examination appeals commissioners, which was very important; automated dial-up and Internet facilities for results; and the ground-breaking return of scripts to examination candidates, which has made an enormous difference to the openness and transparency of the examination system.

While all of these measures were implemented without any additional permanent staff, their introduction obviously placed a new and increased burden on the Department and, in particular, on the IT side of the Department. This is because over the past couple of years, the examinations branch has concentrated very heavily on finding IT solutions to the problems and the Department has taken the view that quality assurance and customer service and indeed many of the measures supported by IT solutions, should take priority over some of the other measures that had been identified in earlier reports.

We have continued to examine and implement the various recommendations that have been made to further improve the system and to implement most of the recommendations in the CMOD report. The final decision taken in the past year or so to appoint and establish a State Examinations Commission has given further impetus to a new programme of change. The former Secretary of the Department of Finance, who conducted a review of our systems and operations, again agreed with that view that we should move the examinations operation outside the Department because it interfered with the Department's capacity to focus on policy and planning. Apart from the obvious benefits to be derived from establishing an examinations commission and enabling the Department to concentrate on policy issues, the setting up of the commission will have the effect of putting the examinations themselves on a very sound footing for the future. The examinations system, as the committee is aware, is an enormous operation. The leaving certificate examination, in particular, impacts enormously on every single candidate and on his or her future prospects. It is vitally important, therefore, to ensure that public confidence in the fairness, quality and transparency of the examinations system is maintained.

The Department has been striving to ensure that the integrity of the examinations is not only maintained but is seen to be maintained. It is generally accepted that the Department has operated the examinations system with a considerable degree of success over the years. This system, responsibility for which the Department has handed over to the State Examinations Commission, is grounded on ensuring a quality service in a transparent manner. Therefore, it is vital that there is continuity. In this regard, a large number of the existing staff within the examinations branch have transferred to the new commission. The new chief executive of the commission, who is present today, was the principal officer in charge of the examinations branch for a number of years.

Deputy Fleming

I welcome Mr. Dennehy and his staff. I acknowledge all that has been said by the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Secretary General in relation to the examinations branch and the fact things have moved on and that substantial progress has been made. We had a good report and it is good to see changes have been made.

I wish to ask Mr. Dennehy about the buildings programme in first, second and third levels. I note in the report for 2001 that there are legally enforceable commitments of €62 million for first level, €60 for second level and €105 million for third level, which is most of the building fund for the following year. Has the Department been over-prescriptive in terms of the development of the buildings programme and the consequent knock-on effect of increasing costs on the Exchequer? I am aware of small nationals schools which sought an additional classroom for a maximum cost of €100,000, although one could be provided for much less.

What tends to happen is that officials from the Department's building unit visit a school and state that it needs an extra room for the resource teacher, that a general purpose room and staff toilets are required because there are four teachers at the school and that it would be better to build a new school. I am aware of a case where €100,000 would have solved the problem but where the Department said it could not do anything less because of new design guidelines. That school has been put on the treadmill for a new building, but the prospects of its being put in place are remote. The new school will probably cost €1.5 million or €2 million when it is built and community groups will then seek to use the old school, a good building, as a hall or a building from which to run FÁS schemes.

The buildings unit was over ambitious and extravagant in its thinking. That has caused some of the problems in relation to the logjam. The allocation of small amounts of money to deal with problems at local level should be handled differently.

Mr. Dennehy

An enormous sum of money is being spent on buildings. This year's building programme amounts to €342.9 million. That is four times the amount spent on buildings in 1997 and it will enable us to deliver on the published programme of 140 large-scale projects at primary and post primary levels, in addition to over 400 smaller projects. All primary schools will obviously still benefit from the devolved grants, which will enable them to carry out some smaller works.

As Deputies will be aware, we are coming from a situation where a large number of buildings were badly in need of repair, refurbishment and rebuilding for many years. Huge attempts have been made in the past four or five years to improve and increase the size of the building programme. Every effort was made to bring any school that needed a reasonably large extension or a fairly major refurbishment - these would involve builders knocking down walls and carrying out extensive works - up to the highest standards. I am sure there may have been instances where schools would have been happy with a smaller job. There is always tension in a parish or a district when a couple of brand new schools of the highest possible standards are built. Everybody in the surrounding area wants the same. They look at the €100,000 or €80,000 refurbishment and they are not happy with it.

We are conscious of what the Deputy said and we are giving the matter serious consideration. At budget time, the Minister announced a system whereby in the case of extensions or fairly large refurbishments - perhaps up to €200,000 - we would give permission, allocate the money, let the school do the job and then satisfy ourselves that the building was sound, well built and so on. As the Deputy said, for jobs of that size, schools can often do a better deal with local builders, etc., rather than having the over-prescriptive hand of a Department far away from the school involved. We are going down that road.

The Department is doing a major restructuring of its building unit and how it operates the turnover time for projects. At present, we have a separate primary and post primary section but we are looking at ways to streamline that operation and make it more effective. We hope we will have that in place in a few months.

Deputy Connaughton

I have been involved in politics for many years and I have heard the case the Department is making, with which I agree, about providing small schools with smaller capital grants being put forward on three or four occasions during the past 20 years. For some reason, however, such a system of funding never really got off the ground. The system to which I refer was first mooted long before the Secretary General took up his current position. It makes great sense, but there are vested interests involved which will ensure it never gets off the ground. It all comes down to standards and so on.

Will the Secretary General explain his thinking on this matter? This is the most important question anyone will ask today because it is what the entire country wants to know. Will he give us an indication of the criteria which would allow boards of management to go down this road? There is a small national school outside Tuam which was not included in the list of schools - or in the famous "bible", as I call it - but which needs an extra room. As Deputy Fleming said, those at the school would be very satisfied with just one room. How could they get around the current impasse? What is in it for them and what red tape is involved? I know I am being cynical, but I must be, given that I have seen this being tried for many years without success.

Mr. Dennehy

I would not describe the Deputy as being cynical. Perhaps he is being a realist. One of the early decisions made by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Dempsey, when he came to office was to enable schools to get involved in carrying out an extension, perhaps one room, with the minimum of red tape. Our buildings people are putting together a set of general procedures and guidelines for schools, which are not overly prescriptive, on how they would do that. We have put a sum of money aside, although I am not sure of the exact amount, to enable us to allow schools to go ahead with the absolute minimum of red tape, provided they can satisfy us that the extension has been built to a reasonable standard. In other words, we do not want it to fall down or to be dangerous. We will not impose rigorous assessments or evaluations. We will not do that to try to stop them from going ahead.

Deputy Connaughton

Who makes that decision?

Mr. Dennehy

They decide. I heard the Minister answering a question on this some time ago and he said that unless they have done something daft or something which is totally outside building regulations or is dangerous, we will not get involved in the nitty gritty and we will not look at whether regulations have been followed. As long as we can satisfy ourselves that it has been built, that it looks well built and that the school authorities are happy with it, then we will be prepared to fund it. We will give them the go-ahead and the money and let them get on with it.

Deputy Connaughton

Has any such project happened this year?

Mr. Dennehy

No. However, we hope that one will before the end of the year.

Chairman

Is Mr. Dennehy happy that we are getting value for money? Is a value for money assessment of the building programme carried out?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes. We are as happy as we can be in that regard. We have fairly tight procedures in our Department. That is an aspect of our spending at which we look carefully and critically. It is in our best interests to get as many projects as possible built and under way for the money at our disposal. However, we also want to get quality. There were periods over the years where we built buildings at the lowest possible cost to the State. We are now suffering as a result as many of them are falling down around us. There is asbestos in many of them and there are also other problems. There are many leaking roofs because of a major building programme in the 1970s when flat roofs were cheaply done.

Chairman

Has the Department a standard design?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes. The Department has standard design guidelines. Designs are done locally to suit the circumstances of the site or the area.

Chairman

Deputy Connaughton made the point about smaller schools. Have there been many cases where a fixed price has been agreed by tender but where, due to time lapses, the price has increased from that specified in the initial contract?

Mr. Dennehy

That happens regularly. Sometimes the procedure takes a long time, as is the case at present. That is why we are looking carefully and critically within the Department at our entire buildings operation, particularly at the procedure in relation to allowing things to move through as quickly as possible within the context of the money available to us.

Deputy Dennehy

I must leave the meeting because I have a meeting to chair at 12 o'clock. As regards value for money and what was done in the past, I heard a radio discussion recently about a school in Limerick, of which I am sure Mr. Dennehy is aware, which has subsidence, plumbing and roofing problems. However, I was startled to hear it was only built in 1973. Could a school which was only built in 1973 be falling down?

Mr. Dennehy

I cannot comment on that school. I know the circumstances of the school, but I do not know when it was built.

Deputy Dennehy

The principal said it was built in 1973.

Mr. Dennehy

There is no question or doubt about the fact that schools built in the 1970s, some of which are prefabricated buildings with flat roofs, are causing problems. We are now suffering the results.

Deputy Fleming

I want to raise an issue of which I am sure Mr. Dennehy is aware. I do not expect him to have the information with him today, but perhaps he might send it to me in the next few days. I have a large file on the number of untrained temporary teachers and substitute teachers in schools. We know trained teachers do not like such people being employed because they feel they are just walking in off the street. Those who act as teachers are either in the long-term temporary category or the long-term substitute category. I am aware of a small number of untrained teachers in my constituency who have taught every day of the week for the past 20 years. They only operate on a temporary or substitute basis. What type of employment rights do those people have? Some of them do not get paid for holidays and they do not receive superannuation. It is unsatisfactory that an individual who has been employed by the State for ten or 15 years does not have pension entitlements or rights when they leave as a result of trained teachers being found to fill the vacant 1,500 posts. It is unsatisfactory that we, as legislators, have such people on the State's payroll. I know Mr. Dennehy will say he may have difficulty providing records because ten years ago people were employed directly by boards of management. However, these people can verify their PRSI contributions during the periods when they were employed by the boards of management. They now get their cheques directly from the Department. I will come back to that issue after we resume.

Chairman

Is it agreed that we suspend for 15 minutes for the vote in the Dáil? Agreed.

Sitting suspended at 11.58 a.m. and resumed at 12.50 p.m.

Chairman

Deputy Fleming may be back so we will hold the reply. I have concerns regarding the overtime level, which seems to be very high as it is up to 22%. How confident are you that this situation will not prevail with the examinations commission? Also, Mr. Purcell has indicated there are considerable extra staff in the commission. How many additional members of staff are there? How do you see the overtime issue going forward?

Mr. Dennehy

In relation to overtime levels, enormous strides have been made within the Department to reduce these. In 1997, 40% of the normal working hours were overtime. In 2002, we brought that down to 19.6% through careful, assiduous management. The managers within the examinations system tell me they think they have pared it as tightly as possible. They are totally determined to keep it at that level. Due to the cyclical nature of the examinations and the huge pressures at different times of the year as well as the wide range of skills needed from those working during those times, this area is fraught with deadlines and dates by which certain things have to be achieved. They tell me we will probably not make any bigger strides but it has been an enormous achievement to bring this from 40% to under 20%.

Chairman

Would the additional permanent staff not reduce the overtime requirement?

Mr. Dennehy

With the establishment of the examinations commission, there is a wide range of new functions it will have to take on. Quite a number of the additional staff going in - which is not a big number, by the way - will have to have IT back-up within the examinations branch. They will need porters, cleaners and other ancillary staff and that accounts for the bulk of the additional staff. The umbilical cord to the Department is cut, if you like, therefore many of the people in the Department who would be servicing the wider campus within Athlone, for example, would need their own dedicated staff.

Chairman

What is the total number of staff?

Mr. Dennehy

There are also personnel and corporate services. The total number of staff which will be in the new examinations commission is 118 administrative staff and 35 inspectors.

Chairman

Mr. Dennehy mentioned upgrading the IT facilities as part of the overall budget. What will be the total cost of running the examinations commission?

Mr. Dennehy

About €40 million per year.

Chairman

In cash terms, what will the overtime amount to?

Mr. Dennehy

It would be less than €1 million - approximately €0.8 million, I understand, on the 2002 figures.

Chairman

But it was 19% of the total wage cost, which was considerably higher.

Mr. Dennehy

No - it was 19% of the total number of normal working hours within the examinations branch.

Chairman

The report states that the wage cost is €8.6 million.

Mr. Dennehy

I understand a significant change in the amount of money to be spent on overtime is expected next year in comparison with 2002.

Chairman

You do not expect that?

Mr. Dennehy

No.

Chairman

Will you answer Deputy Fleming's earlier question on temporary and substitute teachers?

Mr. Dennehy

Of course. This is a very real problem and there are people working in schools, as has been pointed out, for many years. The thrust of the EU directive on part-time workers is to give part-time workers the same pro rata rights as permanent employees. From the current year that legislation is in force and it will be implemented. In addition there is also a fixed term contracts directive which has been passed by the EU but which has not yet been transposed into EU law. Obviously those directives will make an enormous difference to part-time employees from a current date, although I understand there is no retrospection as it stands.

Deputy Fleming

I am not at all happy to let this go. There is an injustice here regarding people who have been teaching in our schools for many years. I am pleased the EU is doing something about this although there is no retrospective element.

This is a question of common decency regarding people who may be employed for ten or 15 years and we do not need an EU directive to do something about it. How many people in this category have been employed for over five years? I do not expect Mr. Dennehy to have that information here - he can write to the committee about it - but I seek a proper proposal from the Department on how it deals with its own employees. They may be untrained but, de facto, they have done the job. Any of them I have spoken to would be willing to do whatever course is necessary to give them official recognition, although they would not be qualified through the normal system for teachers. It is deplorable that we can leave out people who have worked for 20 years in the public service. Employing someone for that length of time on a temporary basis should not be allowed.

I do not know if any other State agency or Department keeps people on the never-never with no statutory rights. The fact that they are let go during the summer holidays breaks their service, so they are probably not building up proper rights considering their cumulative hours. I am not prepared to let this issue go until I get some commitment on a proper report to us on the numbers involved, which I am told are not high. I put down a parliamentary question on this in 2000 and received figures from the then Minister. However, based on my knowledge those figures are not accurate. Maybe the exact information was not available to identify what I am talking about. This concerns a small number of people and the costs are not significant considering it is an issue of justice for them. They are not looking for a full teacher's salary.

What is even more distressing is that those who are teaching children are on an hourly rate which is less than that of the classroom assistant, who is there to mind the children. Teachers are being paid less although they are there for years. The new special needs assistants are coming in with full rights and entitlements and some of them are permanent and pensionable. Yet those teaching for years have zero rights. I do not know if this happens anywhere else in the public service and I am not happy to walk away from it.

Chairman

Deputy Fleming's point is a good one. What is the total cost of teacher's pay to the Department?

Mr. Dennehy

We can obtain that figure in a few minutes. We will return to the matter.

Chairman

I am interested in the point made by Deputy Fleming.

Mr. Dennehy

I will provide the committee with as full and detailed a reply as possible. We have to put this matter in context; we are not the employers in this case. I am not splitting hairs. We will answer the question openly. Teachers are employed by individual schools, rather than by the Department. The teachers to whom the Deputy refers would have the same rights, or lack of them, as similar part-time employees in other sectors. As far as part-time teachers are concerned, we will return to the committee with the most detailed response we can assemble.

Deputy Fleming

The teachers concerned receive their salaries from the Department, not the local boards of management. Mr. Dennehy may say this takes place on an agency basis——

Mr. Dennehy

That is not the case. The boards of management of the respective schools are the legal employers of all teachers. The Department does not employ any teachers, either on a full-time or part-time basis. The Deputy is probably correct from a legal point of view, but the substance of my case is still valid.

Deputy Fleming

I would like fairly accurate figures to be provided. Given the large number of temporary or substitute teachers who have been employed for just a year or two, I will make Mr. Dennehy's life easier by confining the scope of my question to teachers with more than five years service. Obviously, hundreds have joined the profession in recent years. Those affected are teachers with many years experience.

Mr. Dennehy

We will return to the committee with a reply. The total pay bill for teachers and administration in schools in 2003 will be €3.7 billion.

Chairman

If the Department wished to include a figure for pension provision in the survey, what would it be?

Mr. Dennehy

I must consult one of my more enlightened colleagues on the question. We are paying €422 million in pension contributions this year.

Chairman

Is that figure taken from the voted Estimate?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Chairman

The heads were built in to the Estimate. When one takes the figure of €3.7 billion for pay and salaries, future pension liabilities will be huge. Is that correct? Using this figure, what will be the pension provision for this allocation?

Mr. Dennehy

I understand that all teachers pay 6.5% of salary.

I have received information on Deputy Connaughton's question on the small schools initiative. We have allocated €5 million for the programme this year and a pilot initiative is under way in 20 schools throughout the country. I do not have the names of the schools concerned, all of which have four classrooms or less. The schools have been made aware of the initiative through a briefing session and have signed up to become involved in the project.

As stated earlier, guidelines are being finalised and staff of the building unit have already held talks with the schools in question. The sums of money involved vary. The figure of €200,000 to which I referred is an average. The projects have received between €100,000 and €300,000 and schools have been given one year to get them under way. If they manage to do so sooner, we would accept that. A concrete initiative has started and is in place and the Minister is determined to increase the number of participating schools in the coming year.

Deputy Connaughton

Did the schools that have been identified for the project feature on the official list of schools scheduled to have work done this year?

Mr. Dennehy

I understand they are separate.

Chairman

I will ask one question on transport before Deputy Boyle makes his contribution. There was a €5.5 million overspend on transport services. What did the Department pay Bus Éireann to run the service? Is it possible to have a breakdown of the overall cost for the service of €60 million?

Mr. Dennehy

We will try to get the relevant figures.

Chairman

In January 2002, Bus Éireann confirmed that 120 buses were replaced in 2001 by second-hand buses from the United Kingdom. Did Bus Éireann or the Department pay for the new vehicles?

Mr. Dennehy

Bus Éireann paid for them, as it is contracted to deliver the service to the Department. In relation to the €5 million excess, it arose from increased costs for improved or additional services for pupils - mainly those with special needs - increased contractor costs and minor route improvements in the mainstream provision. There were also some additional or new services, particularly in the context of new all-Irish or multi-denominational schools. In addition, transport costs in general increased during the year.

Chairman

Is it possible to provide a breakdown of the cost of insurance? How much was spent on the acquisition of the second-hand buses?

Mr. Dennehy

We would not know how much Bus Éireann paid for them as it is a matter for the company.

Chairman

The breakdown of the Department's costs is solely——

Mr. Dennehy

We receive a monthly bill from Bus Éireann for collecting and delivering pupils. The provision of the transport is a matter for the company.

Chairman

The current cost of transport is €60 million.

Mr. Dennehy

That is correct.

Deputy Boyle

I will ask one question on the examinations report before turning to other areas. Will Mr. Dennehy explain the level of travel and subsistence costs which, at €8 million in 2001, account for nearly 25% of the total budget? To what extent does he feel this travel is necessary? Is it being reviewed as part of the development of the State Examinations Commission?

I am familiar with many examiners who have been asked to travel from Cork to Athlone, a six hour round trip, on a regular basis during the examination period, which does not appear to be a productive use of time or resources. This money could be spent more productively on acquiring capital for IT purposes to allow people to do work of this nature in their locality or on establishing a system whereby staff of the Department's examinations unit, the new commission, would meet examiners on a regional basis rather than requiring them to travel back and forth to Athlone. To what extent has this area of expenditure been examined by the Department?

Mr. Dennehy

In relation to travel and the example given by the Deputy of the training sessions in Athlone, the integrity of examinations is of vital importance to us and the general public. The quality of the training the examiners receive is very high. A significant number of training and marking conferences take place within the examinations branch in Athlone. We and, I am sure, the new examinations commission consider it absolutely vital that staff attend these meetings and are collectively involved in the high quality training sessions available. This is one area of expenditure which I can say with certainty is very important to the quality of the examinations.

In addition, there is a tradition that the superintendents in the examination centres are teachers, and that has been a very good system. There are arguments for and against having teachers do this work but in the main it has worked extraordinarily well. The teachers have done the work extremely well but it requires travelling to centres. We also have the orals and the practical exams. There has been ongoing debate between the Department and the teachers' unions and management bodies in relation to ongoing assessment by the pupils' own teachers but, to date, it has not been possible to reach agreement on this issue. That is another reason there is a fair amount of travel involved. Teachers generally do not assess the work of their own pupils, therefore, they have to travel to other centres or schools to do so. That is an issue on which we have had a great deal of debate with the teachers' unions. It is not necessarily the way it is done in other countries but that is the current position.

Deputy Boyle

I understand much of what Mr. Dennehy said but I would have thought the Department, given its commitment to distance learning and information technology, could find more imaginative approaches——

Mr. Dennehy

We will continue to keep that under review but I am told by the experts that the marking conferences, at which there is a great deal of interaction between markers and the individuals themselves, are very important in terms of ensuring the highest quality exams. I have just been reminded that there is a lot of practice within the conference rooms using the actual students' scripts and working out the correct marking scheme for those scripts.

Deputy Boyle

On the examination report supplied by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Dennehy in his response compared the cost base as being similar to other examination regimes and he cited the Scottish example. Is that a good example to use given the problem in which the Scottish system found itself over the past number of years?

Mr. Dennehy

While any system can have some kind of failure, and it had a bad one, over the years Scotland would be regarded as having an exceptionally good education system but we are not just comparing with Scotland. It might be no harm to mention that over the past few years, people from a number of other jurisdictions - Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia and Scotland - have come here to examine our system and have gone home intending to implement it in their own jurisdictions, particularly in regard to the return of scripts idea.

I am currently chairman of the education committee of the OECD. About three weeks ago I had a meeting of my counterparts across the OECD countries and one of the areas of great interest to them was the return of scripts and the Internet access to results. They were extremely interested in that and sought more information, including the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Education in New Zealand from whom we got some of our ideas initially in relation to improving our exams system. We have a good system.

Deputy Curran

The nature of today's meeting is a little disjointed because of the exceptional number of votes earlier this morning. Rather than ask a specific question I want to refer back briefly to the start of the meeting when Deputy Fleming spoke about the building programme. As someone who has been a member of a number of school boards of management over the years, I welcome the manner in which the building programme is now being dealt with because boards of management would generally have experienced many delays and difficulties in dealing with the Department of Education and Science. I say that as a member of a board of management, not as a public representative.

I want to raise concerns in regard to schools refurbishment and maintenance. Mr. Dennehy said that in the 1970s many schools were poorly built. What percentage of schools identified for refurbishment-maintenance type projects had that work done specifically on the basis of health and safety reports?

Mr. Dennehy

Off the top of my head, I would not have a notion of the percentage but I can get that information for the Deputy and formally let the committee know about it.

Deputy Curran

It is really just for my own information to know how the procedure works. I am aware that an increasing number of schools are going down the health and safety route, and Mr. Dennehy identified a batch of schools from a particular era which are of a lower building standard. What, if anything, has the Department of Education and Science done over the interim period? Has it inspected the general maintenance of these schools or has it waited until boards of management approached it with a crisis? If these schools have been inspected, has the Department identified them for funding for appropriate maintenance to prolong the life of those schools?

Mr. Dennehy

It happened in a slightly haphazard way because there are occasions where, for example, inspectors who visit schools would report on the quality of schools and there would be other occasions also where it would come to the Department's attention. However, we are trying to do this now in a systematic way and over the coming years we will aim to build up a geographic information system on every school in the country and on the quality of the buildings. We have started that work already and the 115 schools in County Kildare are being examined on a pilot basis so that we can ensure we have adequate information on all schools to enable us to put in place a long-term strategy.

We hope that when that geographic information system database is set up, we will have undertaken an assessment of the quality of every school building in the country which we will keep updated. It is a major task but when it is completed, it will be at our disposal on a permanent basis and will improve the position from what the Deputy described, which is totally accurate.

Deputy Curran

As of today, however, there has been no proactive, systematic survey of the school properties and, going forward, Mr. Dennehy does not as of now know the general state of repairs of the schools nationally. That makes it very difficult to budget for what might be required to maintain these schools, at least to a standard that will comply with general health and safety regulations.

Mr. Dennehy

We are very conscious of this which is why we are undertaking this pilot phase with a view to making it a national survey because it is important from our point of view. The problem is that there are over 4,000 schools, some of which are very small, but nonetheless we are setting about getting this database in place which will give us the kind of information we require. It is probably something that should have been done a long time ago but we are conscious of the need to do it now and to do it properly.

Deputy Curran

What is the timescale for the completion of this database?

Mr. Dennehy

When the pilot phase is completed we would hope to put the system in place very quickly. I cannot say whether it will take two or three years but our intention is to do it as quickly as possible because apart from helping the schools, it will certainly help us in terms of planning and responding more readily to the needs of schools.

Chairman

What were the criteria used in respect of the 400 qualifying schools on the recently published list?

Mr. Dennehy

Without question they qualified on the basis of need as identified.

Chairman

If an accurate survey of the needs of the majority of schools was not carried out, as Mr. Dennehy stated, surely it would be difficult to quantify the needs.

Mr. Dennehy

We would have accurate information on all schools that made applications for building projects and we would prioritise within those. However, what we are trying to do is to ensure that for every school in the country - even those that have not submitted applications for building projects - we have accurate, up-to-date information on the fabric and quality of their buildings.

In relation to the schools that have applied to us for building projects, we first prioritise special education facilities, new special schools, extensions to existing special schools, accommodation for special needs autistic children, high support units or special teaching accommodation in ordinary national schools. That would be one of our categories. Then come new schools in developing areas where there are schools already in place. The next category we look at is new schools to replace an existing school, including those that are in temporary accommodation. Then come extensions and major refurbishment works to existing schools. The next category is health and safety, which cannot be addressed by funds from the devolved grant or the minor grant scheme. They would be the criteria used.

We obviously rely on the professionals within the building unit of the Department - our architects, engineers and quantity surveyors - to advise the Minister on a list. However, the list was drawn up on the basis of our assessed priority needs in relation to those categories.

Chairman

Were the schools concerned visited?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes, they would be visited by our professional staff. Where we are undertaking, or planning to undertake, any major work on a school, a visit would be made by one of our architects or engineers.

Chairman

Is any forward planning done on the basis of demographic changes?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Chairman

How actively is that developed?

Mr. Dennehy

For at least ten years, and probably a lot longer, we have had a separate planning unit as part of the building unit in the Department. That unit is in constant contact with all the local authorities throughout the country. It would have regular meetings with them and continually monitor demographic shifts. In addition, we set up the school accommodation commission, which works with our planning unit, to look at schools and demographic shifts and consider any schools that might, for example, be intending to amalgamate, those that might ultimately need to be phased out, etc.

Chairman

It is important that schools' boards of management be given a timescale. Living on a wing and a prayer is not good enough for boards of management of schools which find it very hard to commit funds or plan ahead without a timescale.

Mr. Dennehy

That is something the Minister is determined to do and he has said so on a number of occasions. We have already started the process for this year, rather than stringing schools along and saying we might get to them by the end of the year. We are hoping we will have a far more accurate list into the future for 2004-05. Much will depend on the funds that are voted to us for any given year. The Chairman is perfectly correct in stating that it is important for schools to know where they are on the list, whether their projects will be carried out this year or in four years or five years time and that there must be some certainty about that.

Deputy Fleming

It might be necessary for Mr. Dennehy to supply information to the committee on this matter at a later date.

In first level education, I notice there were grants of approximately €4 million for clerical assistants, a further €4 million for caretakers and in the region of €33 million for other grants and services. Will Mr. Dennehy provide a breakdown of the categories for the other grants? He will be amused to hear why I am requesting this information.

I am a member of a school board of management. From my work as a Deputy, I know first level education payments are made to help science activity and different payments are made for physical education and IT. In recent years, parish priests and chairpersons of boards of management have told me that they receive money into their accounts every other month without knowing its purpose. There is a flow of funds directly into the schools, which is to be welcomed.

Mr. Dennehy

I am delighted the Deputy is acknowledging there is a flow of funds.

Deputy Fleming

I would like to receive the list so that we can be aware of the categories of headings.

Mr. Dennehy

I can give it to the Deputy now if he wants.

Deputy Fleming

In view of what we saw on television last night concerning certain schools, if it does not already have a mechanism - as a matter of good practice - in place, the Department should ask them to give the balance in their accounts at the end of the year. Some schools have substantial balances in their accounts. These may come about as a result of repairs and maintenance or capitation grants for minor repairs or for caretakers or secretaries that were not employed. Funds are growing in the accounts of every primary school in the country.

Deputy Connuaghton

Is the Deputy in a position to name them?

Deputy Fleming

Some boards of management are better at spending the money in their accounts than others. In the interests of the Department, the question should be asked at least once a year. It would be useful to know whether some schools are utilising the funds. Parents and even boards of management do not know that funds are arriving for certain categories.

Mr. Dennehy mentioned a figure of about €20 million relating to information and communications technology for schools. There was about €7.5 million allocated to the schools IT 2000 programme, of which about €4 million was spent. I know of schools that have got computers which have hardly been turned on yet. Some small schools have a few computers, but there are older teachers who have not received the training required for such computer systems. A fund may exist, perhaps under one of the headings I mentioned, to allow someone to come once a week to give training.

As a result of inadequate space, some of these computers end up in cloakrooms. We are not getting adequate value for the fantastic investment in primary schools. Some progressive schools are utilising these to the maximum and are collecting tokens from Irish Independent to obtain more computers. However there are other schools without the wherewithal to do so. What mechanisms does the Department have to ensure that all those children are getting an equal benefit from the great resources that are being spent? I am complimentary in speaking about the great resources.

Mr. Dennehy

We had a fairly detailed discussion last year on the schools IT 2000 programme at this committee. We have conducted quite a detailed survey of schools throughout the country in relation to the work that is being done using computers. I pay tremendous tribute to the teachers who have been outstanding, in the main. However, as in any occupation, there have been people who did not bother to attend training courses. We have made the training available. We have provided very extensive elementary and advanced training. I do not have the figures with me, but there have been an enormous number of days spent on training teachers, particularly primary teachers, in this area. If any schools that need further training are identified to me, we will certainly provide it.

The schools IT 2000 has been one of our flagship programmes. It has been extraordinarily successful. Ministers for Education have come from countries as far afield as Malaysia and Britain to look at the IT 2000 project. The head of the national centre for training in technology in education will be visiting one of the Asian countries next week to talk about introducing a system similar to ours. We are anxious that this is a success everywhere.

There might be problems for schools providing additional rooms, that is another issue, but we are providing the commitment and we are training the teachers. There have been 60,000 IT training days for primary teachers in the past two years and we will make more available if they are needed. We are as interested as anyone in ensuring this is good value for money.

To help the boards of management that do not know when they are getting money, we are looking at ways to pay all moneys to schools as one grant or perhaps two. We want to consolidate our Vote and our grant payment system. At present, a Minister announces a sports, science or library initiative. It starts as a once-off grant, but the following year, because it has worked well, we continue it. Many of these have built up without much careful planning. We want to consolidate them across first and second level.

Under the "miscellaneous" heading, there is aid towards the cost of school books, equipment for special education, special assistance for schools in disadvantaged areas, travel and subsistence expenses for teachers who attend some kinds of courses, a primary pupil database, rent of temporary school premises, the grant to the National Parents' Council, grants to primary school management bodies, aid towards the cost of educating the children of migrant workers and refugees and a substance abuse programme. Those make up the total.

Deputy Fleming

Could each school be sent an annual statement listing the payments it got over the previous 12 months?

Mr. Dennehy

We try to establish at the end of the year how much money each school has in its account. I cannot send out individual statements because I would need a huge number of extra staff to do so. Over the years, fraud or misappropriation in schools has been rare but we have looked at every conceivable way of auditing school accounts at the end of the year. Sending out statements would be an enormous task. There are 4,000 schools involved. We expect boards of management to sign off accounts and we audit some schools. This year, our internal auditor is looking at how several schools spent their maintenance grant and other money. They represent a cross-section of schools.

Deputy Fleming

I am not expecting an audit, but at least school boards of management should make an annual return verified by bank statements. I amazed that it would not be possible for the Department to assemble the payments sent to each school on a single schedule.

Mr. Dennehy

I did not say that, I said we are looking at doing so.

Deputy Fleming

I must have misheard. I am not asking for an audit, but surely the schedule of cheques that go out can be tracked on one computer?

Mr. Dennehy

That should be done. I agree.

Deputy Fleming

Is that an aspiration for the end of next year or is it a live issue? Given that the Department's computer system issues the cheques and has the roll number on each one, why can it not print out a schedule of those cheques?

Mr. Dennehy

Some of them are still issued by hand. We are putting a new financial management system in place in the Department which will be ready by the summer. It is currently being installed and will make an enormous difference to how we do business. It will bring us from a paper system, with some IT help, to a totally streamlined financial management system. That will enable us to do what the Deputy is saying more readily.

Deputy Fleming

I am intrigued that there is an IT 2000 programme for schools, but that there is no IT system in the Department for issuing cheques.

Mr. Dennehy

Sad as that might be, it is true. Our financial system operates on a manual book-keeping system with some IT help. After much to-ing and fro-ing, expense and work, however, a new financial management system is being installed.

Deputy Fleming

I would like the Department to send a report to the committee on what this will do and the timetable of the new system's implementation.

Mr. Dennehy

That is not a problem.

Mr. Purcell

I identify with Deputy Fleming's concerns. Not alone does this cause problems on the education side, it causes problems for us, as auditors. It manifested itself in the past two years in the vocational education committees and I reported on it in last year's accounts. We were trying to reconcile what vocational education committees got with what was shown in the Department's records. It was a difficult task and contributed to the delay in auditing and clearing accounts. As an auditor, that is one of the fundamental checks. As the accounting officer pointed out, the problem was due to grants and payments coming from different sections in the Department and it was difficult to get them together.

In that case, the accounting officer, in response to my concerns, instituted a procedure that ensures vocational education committees get a list of what has been issued to them. That system could be developed for the 4,000 schools. The numbers are much higher, but it is essential. It was administratively impossible to do it in a cost-effective way without the assistance of IT. I am glad to hear a system is being installed because it will make my job easier.

Deputy Ardagh

Will each school have a schedule of the payments made to it by 2004?

Mr. Dennehy

I will look into it, but I will not give a guarantee because I do not want to mislead the committee. It is my intention that at the earliest possible date, hopefully 2004. I agree that it is essential.

Chairman

Is this related to the SMI ethos in the Department?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes, we have a partnership committee that meets regularly.

Chairman

I take Deputy Fleming's point about a manual system for such a huge task. I can see where problems would arise. The scale in third level colleges and, accordingly, the level of funds would be far greater.

Mr. Dennehy

That is correct. We also have the additional issue of decentralisation and having a major part of our operation in Athlone and in Tullamore. When the new system is in place, it will streamline the situation and make our lives so much easier, as well as making us more efficient.

Chairman

Will that incorporate the entire building programme?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Connaughton

On another matter entirely, has Mr. Dennehy's Department carried out any evaluation, whether positive or negative, of the free education system and higher education grants? If the question is not out of order today, does he expect that the higher education grants will be in place for the next academic year? If not, would it be true to say that is due to pressure from the Department of Finance on his Department, seeking a major change in that area?

Mr. Dennehy

Is the Deputy referring to the free fees initiative?

Deputy Connaughton

Yes.

Mr. Dennehy

The Minister initiated a review of student support within the Department, including the free fees initiative. That review which is being carried out within the Department, with help from the ESRI in relation to some of the required facts and figures, is almost complete. We hope to have a report for the Minister, within about two weeks, setting out the different options and looking at the international experience. Whether we will have a different system in place for the beginning of the next academic year will, obviously, be a policy decision by the Minister. We will be in a position to discuss with him, in detail, the various options within about two weeks.

Deputy Connaughton

What influence has the Department of Finance in this matter?

Mr. Dennehy

This review is being conducted within our Department without any interference whatsoever from the Department of Finance. Of course, we seek that Department's advice from time to time on certain issues but, so far, we have not discussed this. We have not shown or discussed any range of options to the Department of Finance and, accordingly, that Department has not influenced this matter in any way to date. Whatever system the Minister ultimately decides on will, obviously, require the concurrence of the Minister for Finance and, probably, the Government.

Deputy Connaughton

From my observation of what is happening, it would appear that the Minister for Finance will be happy with it. That is my reading of the situation.

Deputy Ardagh

In Dublin South-Central and, I suppose, Dublin Mid-West and Dublin West, there are areas of great economic and social deprivation. Education is a major factor in dealing with that. In relation to subhead B.17, there is an explanation on page 199 for the cause of the variation between outturn and estimated spending. Expenditure was €4.6 million less than was provided for new initiatives, including the education welfare service, school development and partnership programmes. In relation to stay-in-school programmes, after hours clubs, breakfast for needy children - effectively, all the desirable and necessary initiatives to ensure that all children are equally treated and continue in school up to leaving certificate stage - those services were affected by that shortfall in expenditure relative to what was provided for. Why was there less expenditure than provided for in this area?

Mr. Dennehy

In the case of a number of those initiatives, including the stay-in-school initiative and the welfare board, the rate of progress in putting of projects in place was not as quick as we had anticipated at the beginning of the year. Some of the schools took much longer than we had anticipated to identify their precise needs. Accordingly, some schemes did not progress as quickly as we would have liked.

Deputy Ardagh

Is everything in operation now? In relation to the money which was not spent, has that now been spent in addition to what is required on an ongoing basis?

Mr. Dennehy

It was a slower build-up, really.

Deputy Ardagh

Was there a catching up process?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Ardagh

In relation to non-attendance of children at school, I understand the whole system is creaking and there is no effective system to ensure that children who do not attend school can, in some way, be encouraged to attend. What is the situation in that regard, in reality rather than in theory?

Mr. Dennehy

It varies greatly from one school to another. Some schools in disadvantaged areas have made enormous strides in improving pupil attendance. In the case of some schools in the inner city area, the attendance rate of pupils has been improved dramatically as a result of the Breaking the Cycle project and a whole new approach. Generally, the National Educational Welfare Board has been put in place and the Education Welfare Act 2000 provides for a very comprehensive new framework for promoting school attendance. It is acknowledged that these developments have not been operating equally well and evenly across the country. Accordingly, it was considered essential to establish the National Educational Welfare Board. An interim chief executive officer has been appointed and the 36 former school attendance officers are being brought on board as welfare officers. There is a proposal from the board for the recruitment of a fairly large cohort of welfare officers. It is intended that the first of those new staff will be appointed this year. The current budget for the board for this year, 2003, is €5.2 million and the board has been asked, in its work and in the employment of welfare officers, to give priority to areas of greatest disadvantage - to begin in those areas and work out from there.

Deputy Ardagh

My intention is to impress on the Department the importance of trying to achieve greater equality in society. I believe that is to be achieved mainly through equal educational opportunities, towards which all of us must work.

Mr. Dennehy

At every opportunity, the current Minister has made it absolutely clear to us within the Department as well as the outside bodies that he places dealing with disadvantage and social inclusion at the top of all his priority lists. We are working very steadily in that direction.

Chairman

That is encouraging.

Deputy Curran

What must schools do to participate in the school retention initiatives and what does that initiative involve?

Mr. Dennehy

I do not have the detail of it, but schools put forward to the Department a proposal for involving the community in working for the retention of pupils in the education system. The initiative involves not just the schools themselves but the wider community, involving parents, local youth clubs and other local organisations. It is the kind of thing we are trying to encourage right across the whole area of social inclusion, that is, what I have heard the Minister describe as "joined up government", where many agencies and Departments are involved in a whole range of initiatives but often do not come together on them.

We are involved in discussions at present with the Departments of Social and Family Affairs, Health and Children and Justice, Equality and Law Reform, with the county development boards, and with a range of other agencies and organisations to try to plan some kind of systematic and concerted effort to alleviate disadvantage. They would be the main criteria. I can get the Deputy the more specific ones for schools' selection for involvement in the schools completion programme.

Deputy Curran

I appreciate that this is a very necessary and important project, particularly so in my part of my constituency. The retention of early school leavers is a big problem, one in which I am very interested.

I note from the figures in Vote 26, particularly on page 199, that the Estimate was just under €12 million for 2001, about €5 million of which was not spent. There is a substantial difference between what was estimated and what was actually spent, and I wonder what was the reason for that.

Mr. Dennehy

I missed the beginning of what the Deputy said. Is that on the school completion programme?

Deputy Curran

It is subhead B5 on page 199. It relates to the rate of expansion of the school retention initiative, which was slower than anticipated. Could Mr. Dennehy give us some clarification?

Mr. Dennehy

Certainly. In fact, I have just received a little more information on the school completion programme. The school completion programme incorporates a number of other programmes we had - the eight to 15 early school leavers and the stay in school retention initiative. The two were brought together in 2002.

The idea behind the school completion programme was that it would incorporate the learning experience and best practice from other schemes; that the expansion of the programme would target areas of greatest need, particularly those pupils leaving school before completion of junior cycle; and that new projects would consist of one second level school or more, and their feeder primary schools, local statutory and voluntary agencies, community groups and the local drug task force area agencies, as I mentioned earlier.

The selection of areas for expansion of the programmes were based on objective data on early school leaving which was supplied to the Department through the post-primary database, and the understanding that each project would be given support for a three-year period and would be managed by a local management committee which would be linked in to the various agencies in the homes completion programme.

When schools were invited to participate in the programme, it took a lot longer to actually get the programme up and running in quite a number of the schools in the first year than we had anticipated. They had to do quite a lot of linking in to other initiatives in the area, working with other groups and drawing up some kind of systematic plan for this. That is the reason for the shortfall in that particular year. However, as I mentioned in response to Deputy Ardagh's question, the scheme is up and running now and the same issue will not arise for the coming year.

Deputy Curran

Basically the schools did not have enough advance notice of these schemes to take full advantage of them.

Mr. Dennehy

Not necessarily. I have just been reminded here - I should have thought of this - that there were a number of issues which slowed down the briefing of teachers, etc., in that year. The ASTI dispute was one that caused some problems regarding meetings with teachers to get co-operation on getting a scheme off the ground. The foot and mouth disease crisis also resulted in a period of time during which we could not bring groups of teachers together for meetings to move this forward. Apparently there were a number of unusual circumstances that particular year which slowed down the rate of development of that programme.

Deputy Curran

How many of these schemes are now running nationally?

Mr. Dennehy

I actually do not know the answer to that, but we can forward the information later.

Deputy Curran

Do each of these schemes have an associated home-school liaison officer?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Curran

Does each and every one of them have this?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes. That is considered an essential part of this initiative.

Deputy Curran

Thank you.

Chairman

I note that under subhead B8, the grant-in-aid fund for general expenses of youth organisations, there was an under-spend of nearly €3 million.

Mr. Dennehy

I understand that this was money that was for drugs related initiatives by local drugs task forces. Again, it was dependent on drugs task forces reporting back to us and applying for funds. There was less of a take-up in that particular year than anticipated.

That particular subhead has since moved to another Department.

Chairman

What is listed on page 203, is that the breakdown of the funding or does it relate to a different payments section?

Mr. Dennehy

I understand that the breakdown on page 203 is a mixture of subheads B8 and B9. Therefore, some of them are in that list.

Chairman

That is mainly for sporting organisations. I see there is one payment here, "Dublin Corporation, €4,293,000." What was that for?

Mr. Dennehy

I am told it relates to an anti-drugs strategy in which the corporation was involved.

Chairman

Is it possible to get a breakdown of that figure?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes. There is no problem in supplying any detail required.

Chairman

I totally support the concept. It is just important that we are getting good value for money in all of this, particularly since it is for the promotion of youth activities. The fact that there was an under-spend was my main concern. May I also query subhead B21?

Mr. Dennehy

That one is very easily explained, it relates to the appointment of the NEPS psychologists. We are expanding the national educational psychological service as quickly as we possibly can but the recruitment of psychologists has been a relatively slow process because there are not as many qualified psychologists out there who want to become NEPS psychologists as we originally thought there might be. Things have improved considerably in the past few months, in that we have another tranche of psychologists about to come on stream.

Some of those savings come from delays relating to the Office of Public Works sourcing suitable accommodation at some of the centres. As the committee will be aware, the psychologists will be based in local and regional offices and there was, in some towns, quite a bit of difficulty sourcing suitable accommodation.

Chairman

I hear from a large number of parents looking for NEPS psychologists. Is it not possible to refer them to somebody in private practice when permanent staff are not available?

Mr. Dennehy

We will do that. We have also made huge progress because at that time we had 43 psychologists and now we have 120, with more waiting to come in.

Chairman

Was there an underspend in the 2002 budget in that section also?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Curran

My colleague, Deputy Fleming, wants to discuss the area of third level education. Before we do so, however, I want to ask for clarification about Vote 27 and what is stated on page 213. It can be seen that fairly substantial legal costs have been incurred, including £1.66 million for one case alone. The next paragraph refers to a total of more than £500,000 for 25 cases. These are just legal costs. Perhaps we could have some explanation of what was involved here.

Mr. Dennehy

It grieves me, as accounting officer in the Department, when our money has to be spent on legal costs. It also grieves me that parents should sometimes find it necessary to take the State to court for what they consider to be the rights of their children. That this should happen is not something of which I am proud. Sometimes it happens because we have failed, sometimes because parents have extremely high expectations. Nonetheless, it is wrong that it has to happen.

Some of the sums the Deputy mentioned, particularly the very large one, relate to a well-known landmark case, the Sinnott judgment. It relates to the rights of children to a particular education. I would much prefer, as would the Minister, to have a system in place. I am confident that we have now built up such a system. We have ploughed enormous resources into special needs education in recent years.

Chairman

It is encouraging to hear that.

Mr. Dennehy

I am happy that we are moving away from litigation, although we will never totally eliminate it.

Deputy Curran

I just had to ask the question because the figures were so——

Mr. Dennehy

The Deputy is perfectly right to do so. The same thing struck me when reading them the other day.

Chairman

Deputy Curran's point is that according to Mr. Dennehy's replies, special needs seem to be a top priority. It is good to know that any voted allocation of cash will be spent in this manner.

Mr. Dennehy

Yes, we will do everything in our power to achieve that.

Deputy Fleming

I wish to refer to pages 224 to 228 of the report. Subhead A1 refers to the higher education grant. Savings of more than £4 million were made because the numbers of students qualifying for grants was lower than estimated. Subhead A3 refers to grants for vocational education committees in respect of scholarships to students. The savings here, amounting to £2.1 million, arose because the number of students awarded VEC scholarships was lower than anticipated. Subhead A4 refers to grants in support of trainees on ESF-aided programmes. Savings of £3.3 million were made because the number of students qualifying for grants was smaller than anticipated. Subhead K deals with the alleviation of disadvantage. Savings of £3.5 million were made in this area because the likely student numbers qualifying for the principal grant scheme was overestimated.

I estimate that this amounts to a lack of spending of £13.2 million because not enough students are taking up higher education grants, ESF grants, VEC scholarships or alleviation of disadvantage grants. People would be stunned to hear that £13 million was provided and that there were not sufficient students make use of it. Deputies will testify that they are inundated each autumn with people who cannot obtain grants for third level through vocational education committees, alleviation of disadvantage or ESF grants. How can this be the case? The only conclusion to which I can come is that the grant income thresholds are so low that many deserving people are being excluded. The £13 million will now be returned to the Exchequer, despite the fact that it is clearly provided for in the Estimates. Am I reading it wrongly?

Mr. Dennehy

I do not ever want to see money going back to the Exchequer, but then I can never have an excess Vote, so I must be careful. The amount of money put aside for student support is based on an estimate. It is a "guesstimate" taken at the beginning of the year.

Deputy Fleming

Based on last year's experience.

Mr. Dennehy

It is still an estimate. There are phenomena such as double incomes and the fact that people become more prosperous. In the year to which the Deputy refers, the latter was particularly noticeable. These grants are demand-led and we estimate the amount required at the beginning of the year. Income levels increased considerably over a couple of years. One can blame the Celtic tiger or whatever one likes, but there was more prosperity in the country. One could say that too many people got rich too quickly, but whether they did or did not, this was the situation. Because there are income limits, which we do not set——

Deputy Fleming

Who sets them?

Mr. Dennehy

The Minister sets the income limits. That year, many people were excluded as a result of their being considered to have too high an income. We guessed wrong; we did make a mistake.

Deputy Fleming

I know we are not dealing with 2002 but with 2001, and the amounts given are in pounds. In that context, £13 million is the equivalent €15 million. Did the same thing happen again last year, according to the provisional estimates?

Mr. Dennehy

Not to the same extent; there were still some savings, but very much less.

Deputy Fleming

I am stunned to hear about these savings. We met the USI yesterday and we meet students in our clinics each weekend. We fight for additional funding for the Department of Education and Science and then we find that it ends up at the bottom of the page under the heading "Surplus to be surrendered". I am exasperated, as will be thousands of students and parents. In fact, I have to telephone somebody when I leave this meeting to explain that he will not get a grant because his father's income is just over the limit. It is unconscionable to see this much money ostensibly in the system and yet being returned to the Exchequer when people are in need.

Mr. Dennehy

It is one of the things that needs a radical overhaul. We know this and so does the current Minister. This is why he has set about investigating student support generally within the Department. I refer not only to free fees, but to student support right across the board. Within the next couple of weeks we will be discussing the issue in great detail with the Minister as a result of the huge amount of trawling that has been done within the Department. As I said, I never like to see money not being spent at any level and, particularly, in respect of disadvantage. At the same time, we must gaze into a crystal ball at the beginning of the year - I am not talking about all the surpluses but only some of them. We are looking quite closely at the entire area of student support.

Chairman

Do I understand that it is determined by reference to current incomes?

Mr. Dennehy

That is correct.

Chairman

The cut-off is very low.

Mr. Dennehy

It is.

Deputy Fleming

In the Office for the Minister for Education and Science in the year in question, £15 million was surrendered. At first level, £15.5 million was surrendered, at second level, £20.7 million was surrendered and, at third level, £9 million was surrendered. That is more than £60 million of hard-fought-for money, some of which might have come from Supplementary Estimates.

Chairman

It is apparently very difficult to balance the books.

Mr. Fleming

Quite a lot of it was supplementary.

Deputy Fleming

As it transpired, however, the Department did not need a Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Dennehy

We did not, but nor did we need an excess Vote, so it is very difficult. This can be seen when one considers the time of year in relation to the academic year. We must make these estimates before the academic year begins in October.

Chairman

How much tolerance is there? What is the normal tolerance of a miscalculation of budget?

Mr. Dennehy

We try to ensure that what we hand back on the surplus side is a small percentage of our entire spend. Every year we acknowledge that we got it wrong the previous year and try to get closer to getting it right in the current year.

Chairman

Would that be 1% or 2%?

Mr. Dennehy

It would be about 2%. I do not disagree with Deputy Fleming. One other thing we are doing that will help the position in relation to surpluses is that we are moving towards having just one Vote rather than four as at present.

Chairman

Will that be of benefit to the Department?

Mr. Dennehy

It will be a huge benefit. If we have surpluses in one area approaching the year end, we can hopefully move money around a bit more to areas that are short of cash.

Chairman

There will also be one balance sheet.

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Fleming

Under the headings, the figures are all around 2%. It is clear that some 10% of higher level grants of €47 million are not utilised, which is a saving of €4 million. In some other areas, the savings are 20% of the Vote, for example, the alleviation of disadvantage saving is at least 20% of the Vote. Given that the money has already been provided in the Estimates, could income limits not be revised or supplementary payments made in September or October to those who have already received their grant which, as we know, does not cover the cost of attending third level college? Why not make a once-off ex gratia payment, even though it would set a precedent?

Chairman

That would be difficult.

Deputy Fleming

Sending €15 million of what should be student grants back to the Department of Finance is a bigger sin than giving it to hard-pressed students. This must be viewed against the background of what we, as public representatives see and hear on the street and in our clinics about severe income limits.

Chairman

I will recommend that the surplus be sent out to Laoighis-Offaly.

Mr. Dennehy

I am not trying to slide out from under the Deputy's question, but I will pass his comments on to the Minister.

Deputy Fleming

If a surplus is expected in October, supplementary payments should be made to students who are in receipt of grants.

Mr. Dennehy

We often do not get information from students in relation to the current year until mid-December. It does not always come in September.

Deputy Fleming

Given that the Department's accounting system is substantially paper-based, supplemented by an IT system, the Department might have information quicker and be in a better position to move at the end of the year if it had a better IT accounting system.

Mr. Dennehy

We are dependent on getting information in from local authorities quickly. We will take the Deputy's comments on board.

Deputy Curran

I am a member of a local authority through which the higher education grant is administered. Members are frustrated and annoyed annually by the late arrival of information on the scheme. Mr. Dennehy mentioned that the Department does not get the information back from the local authorities but, equally, it is being sent out late. Therefore, the ball is in the Department's court on this issue. If it does not get the information to the local authorities at an appropriate time, it is unfair to say it is not been returned to the Department.

Mr. Dennehy

I will follow up on that.

Deputy Fleming

Local authorities process third level grants while VEC offices, probably some 100 yards up the road, process grants for the institutes. The task is similar in both cases, often with members of the same family supplying the same income figures to both. If we combined the administrative process we would achieve efficiency and less heartbreak for applicants. Some people also get confused as to what organisation they are applying to. There is no good reason why there should be two independent bodies in Portlaoise, or elsewhere, dealing with grants for people going to third level.

Mr. Dennehy

The Deputy's point is a good one. It is one of the issues we asked the group, which is looking at our student support system, to address and suggest improvements on.

Deputy Fleming

We will support you in that endeavour.

Chairman

Deputy Fleming has raised some good points.

Mr. Dennehy

He has. We have taken note of them all and will examine them.

Chairman

I received a letter from Deputy Ring referring to the proposed school at Newport, County Mayo, on which some €400,000 was spent. Has development to this extent ever been undertaken without a study being carried out on the necessity for a school?

Mr. Dennehy

There was huge local pressure in relation to that school and the Minister of the day made a decision that we would proceed with it. Subsequent to that, the school accommodation commission examined population shifts in the Mayo region and our planning division is undertaking a process of examining catchment areas. No decision has been taken in relation to the future of the school. The Minister may decide against building a school there in favour of a build-up figures elsewhere. We need to examine this in depth before we give the go-ahead for the building of the school.

Chairman

The Secretary General's reply states:

As with all proposals involving major capital expenditure, an estimated €1.2 million, it was essential to confirm that the project was absolutely necessary having regard to pupil numbers and existing provisions in the general area. Accordingly, it was decided to review the post-primary provision in the Newport area.

It is disappointing that €400,000 could be spent without the Department's scrutiny. It is putting the cart before the horse on that catchment area.

Mr. Dennehy

We need to examine this project from beginning to end and look at where we are going with it and why we have done what we have.

Chairman

Is it normal practice to give that kind of discretion to vocational education committees?

Mr. Dennehy

Not normally. This situation occurs rarely. Usually children are there and it is fairly straightforward - the school is either needed or it is not. The pressure was exerted and the information coming from the ground was that the school was necessary.

Chairman

There is a school within five miles so it amazes me that there could have been justification for a second school. It should have been clear to the Department that the demographics for a school were not there from the outset.

Mr. Dennehy

The Minister of the day made a decision that we would proceed with the school but we are now reassessing that. I will examine this entire project from its commencement up to now and where we are going with it.

Chairman

Perhaps Mr. Dennehy would report back to the committee on the matter.

Mr. Dennehy

I will.

Chairman

The Cork School of Music project is stalled because the risk is not transferred to the private sector. That is the report from EUROSTAT.

Mr. Dennehy

At this point, EUROSTAT has not adjudicated on it but it is looking at it. There was a communication in recent days from EUROSTAT via Pat Cox, MEP——

Chairman

Today?

Mr. Dennehy

In recent days. It is dated Friday, 28 February, and states, contrary to some media reports, that while EUROSTAT is looking at the issue, it has not adjudicated yet adjudicated on it. However, it is a major issue. There is great concern that where a project such as this is financed on a deferred payment basis by the private sector, the capital value is a charge to the GGB. EUROSTAT is looking at this issue and the Minister for Finance has also set up a group to look at it, not just in the context of the school of music but in general. Our most experienced assistant secretary in the buildings PPP area is our representative on that group.

Chairman

It is important. Jarvis Projects Limited has built some fine schools. In County Sligo, it built one of the finest schools in Europe. If this project did not go ahead, the State could be liable for up to €12 million. This contract, by all appearances, was agreed to proceed so the State could be liable for the costs to date.

Mr. Dennehy

That is correct.

Chairman

Clearly, if questions were asked about the risks being taken by the private sector, it would not augur well for the PPPs.

Mr. Dennehy

Absolutely.

Chairman

If this development was stalled because of the risks involved, we will have to be careful with regard to the element of risk being taken by the private sector vis-à-vis the public sector. Perhaps Mr. Dennehy would keep the committee briefed on this important development and the PPPs in general because it will have an impact on further developments in education——

Mr. Dennehy

Across the country.

Deputy Curran

At the outset I asked about health and safety in our schools. Will Mr. Dennehy refer back to the committee on that matter in writing?

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Deputy Curran

I refer to schools on which maintenance and refurbishment programmes are being carried out on foot of health and safety reports.

Mr. Dennehy

Yes.

Chairman

I propose that we dispose of chapter 7 but leave open chapter 10 of the Vote as the discussions today were interrupted. The remainder of the Vote will be left open until later. We have avoided any examination of the redress issue as it will be the subject of a substantive debate later this year.

Deputy Fleming

When will we clear the remainder of the Vote?

Chairman

The information will come in on foot of the Deputy's questions.

Deputy Fleming

We can do it when the information is received?

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. Dennehy

Will the committee sign off on the Votes when we return with the information or will we be obliged to come back before the it?

Chairman

We can sign off on chapter 7, but we will not sign off on the remainder. When Mr. Dennehy replies to the committee on the Deputies' queries, I intend to have another meeting to sign off on the Vote.

Deputy Fleming

Do we expect to have the Secretary General back before the committee?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Fleming

That will be at a later date?

Chairman

Yes. I thank the Secretary General and the Department of Finance officials for their attendance. I also thank Mr. Purcell, the Comptroller and Auditor General, for his detailed work. This has been a good debate. I apologise for the interruptions. Many questions were put down today by members and we look forward to receiving the replies. I am pleased with Mr. Dennehy's reaction to the many questions raised.

The witnesses withdrew.

Chairman

Our next meeting on 27 March will deal with the health boards. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The committee adjourned at 2.25 p.m. until 10.00 a.m. on Thursday, 27 March 2003.