andDr. O'Connell asked the Minister for Education whether it is a fact that pupils must pay a sum between 6/- and 8/- for subjects to be taken in vocational school examinations; if so, whether in view of the fact that there are many cases when such a charge could impose an unfair hardship on parents of large families he will arrange for its abolition.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Vocational School Examinations.
91.
Dr. Browne, Mr. M. O'Leary
Candidates for the day vocational certificate examinations are required to pay an entry fee of 6/-per group of subjects. This modest fee has remained unaltered since 1957 and I do not accept that it imposes an unfair charge on parents.
The fee of 8/- is charged for certain subjects in the technical school examinations. These examinations are not intended for day students and accordingly, it may be presumed that the candidates therefor are practically all in employment.
I put it to the Minister that the 6/- and the 8/- charges are simply nuisance value to his Department but from the point of view of medium-sized or large-sized families it is quite a consideration for the parents. We should abolish it because it means very little to the Minister but means much to some families.
Did the Minister assume or did he make a definite statement that these fees were in respect of boys and girls going to night classes?
The 8/- is in respect of the night classes and the 6/- is for day classes.
Would the Minister consider the following case: a widow with three children having to pay 18/-for this? She is eligible for free milk and footwear but not for education. Would the Minister not consider this case?
What is the purpose of the fee?
To a certain extent it guarantees the bona fides of the applicant. It is a very low charge——
It is so low that it should not be there at all. Would the CEO have power to remit this?
I do not think so.
Would the Minister reconsider his whole attitude towards this fee, particularly in respect of certain classes?
Certainly for day pupils.
The Minister for Health is abolishing it in his health charges. Could the Minister for Education not do the same thing?
The question puts it very strongly that this imposes a hardship, hut how many children in the same family would do the examination at the same time?
I quoted the case of a widow with three children, all of whom are doing the examination.
They are all doing the same examination? That is a very peculiar case.
What is peculiar about it?
It is peculiar to have three children doing, say, the group certificate at the same time.
Does the Minister not accept that to allow a child to go to a vocational school is an imposition on parents and as this is such a fiddling sum could he not remit it? Will he not simply look into the matter again?
Would the Minister be prepared to remit the money in the case of families who have medical cards?
We found considerable difficulty in relating free books to medical cards.
The Minister is, therefore, not going to do anything about this?
I have stated in my reply, that I do not accept that it imposes an unfair charge on parents.
Knowing the Minister as I do, I am quite certain this is not his decision but has been forced on him by the civil servants. He is a kindly man.
92.
asked the Minister for Education whether pupils in vocational schools will be refunded fees in respect of the current year should they be unable to proceed to their examinations because of the dispute between him and the Vocational Teachers' Association.
I shall consider this matter in due course in the light of the circumstances then obtaining.
93.
asked the Minister for Education whether the statement in All our Children, page 40, that from 1969 onwards a whole-time day student who attempts five or more subjects at the examination and earns D in only three of them can get a certificate if he completes his five Ds at a later examination or examinations, and that he does not have to repeat the subjects he succeeded in and if he likes may attempt new subjects instead of the ones he failed, has since been withdrawn by his Department; and whether in view of the fact that students who passed certain subjects in last year's examination have dropped them this year on the strength of this assurance he will apply this new arrangement in the current year as promised.
There seems to be some misapprehension in relation to this matter. Arrangements as contemplated in the booklet All our Children will operate as from this year onwards.
This is a very serious matter as there could not be a more explicit statement than the one set out in this booklet. The relevant statement starts off with "From 1969 onwards" followed by a number of sentences, all apparently governed by this. Nobody could conceivably be expected to know they were not meant to be governed by it. They include the assurance that any parent or teacher was entitled to assume this would apply and to advise the pupils to act accordingly in the choice of subjects for this year. The Minister is aware of the fact that in a number of cases pupils have dropped subjects on the strength of an explicit assurance in this booklet that from 1969 onwards it would be possible to do so. It may well be that there was a misunderstanding and that in drafting this the second sentence——
I am sorry, Deputy, we are talking at cross purposes here. I am accepting what the Deputy has said in his question. There seems to be some misapprehension in relation to this matter but arrangements as contemplated in the booklet All our Children will operate as from this year onwards.