asked the Minister for Education whether he is aware that members of the same family are being treated differently in the matter of free books; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
36.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Free Books Scheme.
35.
asked the Minister for Education if he will review the free book scheme with a view to ensuring that the money concerned is equitably distributed between schools and between pupils.
37.
asked the Minister for Education whether he is aware that under the free book scheme a widow (name supplied) living on £6 per week pension has been refused assistance and has had to pay £6.33 for school books for the current academic year; and whether he will take steps to ensure a refund in such a case.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I will take Questions Nos. 35 to 37 together.
Under the scheme for the provision of free books for necessitous pupils the position in national schools is that a grant is paid annually to the principal teacher of each school based on the percentage of necessitous pupils on the rolls of the school as furnished by the principal teacher. The administration of the scheme within a school is left to the discretion of the principal teacher. I am satisfied that principal teachers are carrying out this duty in a satisfactory manner.
In the case of post-primary schools the scheme is administered through the headmasters of the schools who, in relation to the overall amount of money made available to them, have discretion in the allocation of grants under the scheme. I do not, therefore, have any information in regard to applications for grants in respect of individual pupils, nor do I feel that in relation to the amount of official time and expense that would be involved I would be warranted in seeking such information.
I am having inquiries made into the specific case mentioned by the Deputy.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree that it is totally unsatisfactory that a brother and sister in the same family should be treated differently—one given assistance and the other not given assistance? Both children are in the same family and have the same degree of necessitousness. Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that the scheme is undesirable and should be changed?
I presume that the case the Deputy has mentioned is the matter I am inquiring about?
Not necessarily.
Apart from that, the Deputy will be aware that this is an example of the Department and the Minister allowing this area of responsibility to the principals concerned. I should have thought the Deputy would be in favour of allowing the people on the spot to establish who are necessitous pupils.
While that kind of devolution of authority is something we look for from the Department generally and rarely get in other matters——
The Deputy is getting it now.
——when it comes to a scheme which is a social welfare scheme there should be some criteria laid down and some equity of administration, together with some tolerance and discretion in particular cases to deal with special problems.
The criteria of which the Deputy speaks are available and are laid down. I would remind the Deputy that there is devolution of authority—something he has recommended on many occasions—and this devolution applies in this case. I hope the Deputy is not suggesting that we should go back and try to administer this scheme entirely from the Department of Education so as to ensure the uniformity he says should apply in every case.
What is desirable is that there should be a basic entitlement of people and there should be discretion at local level to deal with any problems that arise. In this instance there is no basic entitlement by anyone to a book; it depends entirely on the amount of money given to the school, which depends on the Department's assessment of how many necessitous pupils there are——
That is not so.
——and the money is allocated.
The position is that the Department send out circulars to principals or managers to indicate the number of necessitous pupils. In advance they make a payment in respect of post-primary schools of half the estimated amount so that the scheme can be got under way immediately. They pay the balance according to the figures supplied by the principal or headmaster during the year. The only cases where the balance is outstanding is where the relevant information has not yet been supplied. There is no anomaly in this——
Each school gets the full amount it looks for?
As much as possible within reason.
Either the school gets the full amount or it does not get it. The implication in the Parliamentary Secretary's reply is that the school gets what it looks for when it sends in its list. Is this so?
Obviously the Department consider the global amount, having regard to the resources available. The Deputy can be assured that, so far as we are aware, no pupils are without books because of their parent's finances.
Schools do not get what they look for in the matter of free books for necessitous pupils.
By and large they do.
I am calling Question No. 38.
38.
asked the Minister for Education on what date in the current academic year grants for free books were paid to post-primary schools.
A provisional allocation of money under the free book scheme for necessitous pupils in secondary schools, estimated on half their requirements, was paid to all schools on the 15th September, 1971. The date of payment of the balance depended on the date of receipt of completed claims by school principals.
In the case of vocational schools the vocational education committees provide the funds of school headmasters and are recouped by the Department at various dates according as claims are received.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary say what delay occurs, on average, from the receipt of the claim from the school to the payment of the claim?
I do not think the Deputy could seriously expect anyone to answer that question on the average. Does the Deputy expect the Department to look into about 120 different cases and strike an average between them?
I am not asking for precisely that, but in a general way——
The Department meet these claims as quickly as possible.
Would it be within a matter of a couple of weeks normally?
I would hope so.
Is the initial application based upon the amount paid in the previous year or related to it in some way, or is it based on some figure thought up by the Department at an earlier stage?
The advance payments in each year are generally about half the previous year's allocation.
39.
asked the Minister for Education how many schools received free book grants of £10-£15, £15-£30, £30-£50, £50-£100, £100-£250, £250-£500, £500-£1,000 and over £1,000, distinguishing in each case between secondary and vocational schools and between schools up to 150, 150/300 and over 300 pupils.
The information sought by the Deputy in respect of secondary schools is being given in the form of a tabular statement which, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to circulate with the Official Report.
In the case of vocational schools the grants are paid in bulk to the vocational education committees for distribution among the pupils of their schools and my Department have no information as to the amounts allotted to individual schools.
Following is the statement:
Numbers of secondary schools in receipt of grants for free books and accessories 1971-72
|
Pupil Numbers in School |
££10—15 |
££15—30 |
££30—50 |
££50—100 |
££100—250 |
££250—500 |
££500—1,000 |
Over £1,000 |
|
Under 150 |
3 |
7 |
8 |
22 |
57 |
37 |
3 |
|
|
150—300 |
4 |
9 |
63 |
110 |
53 |
1 |
||
|
Over 300 |
1 |
5 |
17 |
37 |
65 |
16 |
Can the Parliamentary Secretary indicate how the Department arrive at an appropriate figure for vocational schools in relation to secondary schools if they have no information to go on, if I understood him correctly? On what basis is the vocational school figure calculated?
The figure for the vocational schools in relation to the secondary schools?
In the case of the secondary schools, as I understand it, subject to the full amount not being paid in some cases, it is based primarily on the request put in and in the vocational schools that does not seem to be the case from what the Parliamentary Secretary said. How is the figure arrived at?
The figure is arrived at on the same basis except that the actual allocation of the money is made through the vocational committees themselves. If they inform the Department at a certain stage that the moneys allocated to them, as estimated by the Department, are not adequate the matter is looked at broadly in the case of each vocational committee. They have to administer and allocate the funds to each school.
They also look for what they need?
Precisely.
And normally get it?
Precisely.