When I reported progress on the 8th November I was dealing with secondary school buildings and I had reached the point at which I was outlining that we had increased the cost limit per square foot from £5.50 to £7 since 1969 and I had mentioned that, while the £7 is now getting tight and will have to be reviewed in January next, it reflects school building costs to a satisfactory building standard. If there are raw beams in some schools this is not because of the cost limit but rather because of the way consultants opted to spend the available money.
The Community schools, which are being built below the cost permitted, have carpeting and high cost acoustic tiles on ceilings, as well as a very high quality of blockwork. The Castledermot school was mentioned particularly and it was suggested for favourable comparison with other similar projects. Of course, this school also was built in accordance with the cost limits obtaining at the time when the tenders were obtained. It was a satisfactory project but not an exceptional one in the sense suggested.
One of the reasons for the community school project was to find ways to offset escalation in school building costs. As an example, the tenders for the Kilbarrack school worked out at £5 per square foot in the summer of 1973. This is a figure which compares very favourably with figures several years ago in this country. No one approves of prefabs but they are necessary in Ireland, as well as in every other country, in the context of a major school building expansion. They are necessary where time will not allow of the erection of permanent buildings, when the future of the school has yet to be determined or where money is not available for full permanent buildings and a limited amount of temporary accommodation will meet needs.
The mobile prefabs have a life of ten years or more if well maintained. The idea of mobiles was to ensure that they would not be left on site indefinitely, as was happening with traditional prefabs. Prefabs cost about one-half of the traditional building costs. The comparison is not meaningful since only minimum accommodation is being provided where with a permanent building, a full development would be in question.
I must protest at the exaggeration on the part of some Deputies in reference to schools without windows in this context. I would agree that the creation of so-called windowless schools with dependence on artificial lighting and ventilation would not be appropriate in Ireland. Community schools are not designed on that basis as the following extract from a recent newspaper article in regard to Tallaght school will indicate:
Certainly the design of the new building, spacious with plenty of windows which let light in, makes it a very pleasant place to be.
Reaction to this building has been very favourable from staff, parents and students as well as from visiting educationalists and architects from Spain, The Netherlands and Finland. All this is not to say that I am committed to a particular design. We will be looking at other design concepts which satisfy, first, the educational requirements and, second, which keep within our cost limits.
I want now to refer to a number of cases which were raised specifically. With regard to Loughrea, the existing vocational school is situated on a one-acre site which is completely built over and would be unsuitable to take a school extension. The question of building a new vocational school on another site arises. The vocational education committee have an 8.5 acre plot across the road about two-thirds of a mile away. It is 300 yards from a mixed secondary school—The Mercy—De la Salle. This school has been established on Mercy Convent property. It is probable that the new vocational school will be built on a site immediately adjoining the secondary school. The 8½ acre VEC plot could then be used for playing fields. The VEC would be asked to explore the possibility of acquiring the rest of the land for the Mercy Sisters.
In regard to Ballygar, the facilities which can be provided are related to the number of pupils in the school. Only limited facilities can be provided in a small school such as Ballygar with 200 pupils. The school has ten classrooms, including a metalwork room and a woodwork room, and this accommodation is sufficient for upwards of 225 pupils. The proximity of larger secondary centres such as Roscommon is bound to have an adverse effect on the Ballygar enrolment of pupils in the Ballygar catchmen area, as the pupils in that catchment area are attracted by the wider range of subjects in the larger centres.
The vocational school is the only secondary school in Scariff. There are 225 pupils in the school this year, and it has a senior cycle. The number of pupils in the school is not sufficient for the provision of an adequate range of subjects, so rationalisation is necessary. The two secondary centres nearest to Scariff also have only one secondary school each. They are Tulla, which has a mixed convent secondary school with an enrolment of 229 pupils, and Killaloe, which has a mixed convent secondary school also, with an enrolment of 209. No definite proposals have been formulated for the area. A possible course would be to have two of the three schools as junior cycle schools which would feed into the third centre for senior cycle courses. This third centre would cater for junior and senior cycle pupils. Tulla is about 12 miles to the west of Scariff, and Killaloe is about 12 miles to the south. Mobile classrooms have been provided for Scariff National School pending rationalisation of secondary education in the area.
In regard to Newbridge Vocational School there are difficulties not unconnected with the course of the Liffey. The site available to the VEC is too far from the other schools in the town. An alternative site was being sought, but this site, though convenient to the Dominican College, is separated from the college by the river. An inspection of the alternative site has been made and the architect reports that, while the land involved is suitable for building, there would be difficulty regarding access because it has no road frontage. Access would have to be by right-of-way through the Patrician Brothers' property or by means of a bridge over the Liffey. In either case the cost involved would be very heavy. The architect recommends that the new vocational school should be built on the Patrician Brothers' property and that the site to be bought from the Dominicans should be used for recreation purposes. It seems that because the Dominican College is primarily a boarding school and because of the high cost of building a bridge over the Liffey, that school should be regarded as a unit in itself for planning purposes. This leaves the convent, the Patrician Brothers' school and the vocational school, none of which is really fully viable on its own. Between them these three schools have about 600 pupils. Quite obviously, we must give some further thought to the possibilities inherent in having the three schools on conveniently adjacent sites.
The secondary curriculum was raised by Deputy Wilson and others. Academic and practical subjects are by no means mutually exclusive. Ideally second level education should have a good mix of both types of subjects. Vocational schools, with long tradition in the teaching of practical subjects, have always included a reasonable proportion of academic subjects in their day school programme. Since the introduction of the intermediate and leaving certificate courses in these schools, the proportion of academic subjects has been substantially increased. Secondary schools, on the other hand, even before 1966, included practical subjects in their programme.
Since the introduction of the common intermediate and leaving certificate programmes in all post-primary schools, there has been a noticeable increase in the number of secondary schools presenting students for examination in practical subjects at leaving certificate level. The new curriculum for the leaving certificate examination includes a number of practical subjects which were not previously provided for. A basic aim in promoting proper education is to ensure that the school programmes will provide a big range of subjects, practical, academic and artistic, and so make possible a range of subject options which will suit the particular aptitudes of different students.
On the subject of school-based training after the leaving certificate, there are, of course, honourable precedents. We have had secretarial sections in which students who have secured the leaving certificate returned to school to prepare for the secretarial certificate examination of the Department of Education. There is no doubt that a case exists for some specialised pre-employment training after the leaving certificate, and it can be argued that a post-leaving certificate year of specialised study would be of advantage to those proceeding to third level education. However, it should be noted that the first year of the third level course in regional technical colleges is a form of introduction to specialised pre-employment training.
Since entrance to university must be 17 years of age, graduates will be at least 20 years by the time they emerge, and the tendency is for the courses to be extended to four years. In this area, while I can appreciate anxieties about a too-early commencement of third level studies, I must point out to Deputy Wilson that, perhaps, he does not do service to his cause by exaggerating references to completed university courses at 19 years of age. Moreover, it pushes us to the extremes which operate in some countries where qualification is not obtained until 26 or 27 years of age, and he seems to ignore the efforts those countries are themselves making to remedy what they do not regard as a desirable situation. Above all, Deputy Wilson seems to confine his thinking to those students, very much the minority, who go on to higher studies. It is quite unrealistic to suggest we should concentrate on general studies to leaving certificate level and then think of preparation for industry. Indeed, it is so unrealistic in regard to the great majority of our school population—and, incidentally, out of line with what Deputy Faulkner said on the balance in our education between the more academic and the practical sides—that I wonder if Deputy Wilson, on reflection, might revise his thinking on this matter.
I must say I was surprised at the suggestions on streaming in regard to the junior cycle. It is not desirable that students should be streamed up to intermediate certificate level, if by streaming is meant concentration on a limited number of subjects. However, "setting", which allows students to follow alternative subject courses which suit their intellectual ability is an acceptable alternative to subject streaming, and the provision of higher and lower courses in three subjects for the intermediate certificate examination establishes a basis for such procedure. In this connection my Department is looking into the question of greater integration of subject areas at junior cycle level, and a number of projects are at present being undertaken on this matter.
There is full agreement that agricultural education is desirable in all rural schools and, indeed, in urban schools which pupils from rural areas attend. This can be done by following one of the science subjects, particularly syllabus E, up to intermediate certificate level, and agricultural science and agricultural economics up to leaving certificate level.
It should also be pointed out that woodwork and metal work are subjects of much benefit to future farmers and that these are being provided on an increasing scale in all secondary schools. On the wider issue I must, of course, keep in close touch with my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries.
Deputy Tunney castigates me because I have not at once come up with a syllabus for Irish studies. The House will remember that I spoke about this last April when introducing the changes in regard to compulsory Irish. When I spoke about Irish studies I knew what I wanted and I indicated what my concept embraced —a knowledge of Irish history and Irish culture, as well as a knowledge of Irish. I did appeal, and I make no apology for it, for suggestions and advice in regard to the development of my concept. Deputy Tunney said that I had not any ideas about Irish studies because I asked teachers for suggestions. Deputy Tunney does not recognise consultation when he hears of it.
In regard to Deputy Tunney's statement about my claim to have introduced real consultation, I might say that at a teachers' meeting in the Gresham Hotel on 25th October one of the representative speakers, Father Hughes, S.J., thanked me for introducing consultation and asked me to be patient because they were not used to being consulted. I have sent out a document on regionalisation as a draft for discussion and invited all participating bodies to discuss it. I have invited all local interests which have expressed anxiety about educational proposals in their areas to come and talk these over in the Department. In fact, I had a group to see me on the very day that Deputy Tunney was speaking. This was a representative group of the VEC in County Waterford discussing the leaving certificate cycle in Kilmacthomas. I have not made a list of all our efforts at consultation but I venture to say that the list would be substantial.
Deputies Hussey, Coughlan and Haughey, among others, spoke about free books in the second level sphere. The only significant difference between the administration of the free book scheme in secondary and in vocational schools is that while the grants are paid directly to the school headmasters in the case of the secondary schools they are paid to vocational school principals through the vocational education committees as, of course, are all other State grants for vocational schools. As far as the operation of the scheme within a school is concerned there is no difference. The principal teacher, within the overall allocation of money made available, has discretion in the selection of pupils to be assisted and in the amount of assistance to be given. There is no discrimination against vocational schools pupils. While under these arrangements an occasional anomaly is possible, such as different treatment being given to two members of the same family in different schools, and, of course, such a case should be capable of being resolved locally, the scheme works well in the great majority of schools and great credit is due to the teachers for the care with which they administer this scheme in schools generally. A centralised scheme administered from Dublin with a formal means test would be impersonal and inflexible and would probably provide a less effective means of meeting the needs of the needy pupils in the matter of books and accessories. It is not correct to say that money is left unspent each year out of the allocation in the Vote. In an open-ended scheme such as this it is not prudent to estimate for the minimum expenditure expected. While in the last financial year the original voted provision for this service in the secondary schools, £230,000, was found to be insufficient and a Supplementary Estimate was passed by the Dáil, there was a saving on the total provision as thus increased but this is characteristic of such open-ended schemes. It is important also to realise that text books for secondary and vocational school courses are not prescribed by the Department. The only prescribed material is the literary content of language courses and, therefore, there is no departmental control over the books which individual pupils have to have or over the cost of the books to the student.
Deputies Mrs. Desmond, Coughlan, Hussey, Power and other Deputies spoke about transport to second level schools. Indeed, many Deputies referred in one way or another to this problem. The references in my introductory speech to the cost of this scheme were intended to draw attention to an important aspect, that is that it is easy to ask for extensions of the scheme and improvements to the service while ignoring the very high share of total educational expenditure which has already been spent on the transport scheme. We must be conscious of the cost of the service and try to make it as efficient and economic as possible but it goes without saying that I do not want to do this at the expense of the children. At the secondary level there has been a good deal of complaint about catchment areas and catchment boundaries. It must be borne in mind that these catchment areas were drawn up after consultation with all the interests involved and that alteration of catchment boundaries and the provision of transport from one catchment area to another can have very serious consequences for the school in the catchment area which is losing these pupils. In the circumstances, it is not difficult to understand that managers and teachers are very seriously concerned where proposals of this nature are made and that my Department cannot over-ride their wishes unless they are satisfied that the services being offered are not adequate. Moreover, Deputies will readily appreciate that a series of crisscross transport services would be very wasteful and extremely expensive. The original purpose of the free transport scheme was to assist pupils in rural areas, particularly those who lived a considerable distance from their nearest school and where, very often, there was no bus service available even if the parents could afford to pay for it. It is basic to the scheme that transport be to the nearest suitable school and, indeed, many of the complaints made during the debate arise from concessions which have been made from time to time, for example, catchment boundary facilities for pupils not attending their nearest school and special fares for children who are not eligible for free transport. This, perhaps, points up the fact that concessions, however well-intentioned, often only succeed in creating dissatisfaction and generating pressure for further concessions.
There are a number of specific points to which I want to refer. Minimum standards have been laid down for these transport services: (1) no pupil shall have more than three miles to walk or cycle either to school or to a pick-up point on a school bus route; (2) no pupil shall spend too much time per day between waiting and travelling time. Waiting time arises because many buses double trip in the interests of economy. Some pupils arrive before school opens while others must wait after school closing time. Generally those who are brought in first in the morning are brought home first in the afternoon so as to minimise the inconvenience. Double tripping must continue to be a feature of school transport services if costs are to be kept within reason. Pupils not eligible for free transport to and from school public transport to and from school benefit from the subsidy of £3,54,000 per year paid by the Department to CIE. The effect of this subsidy is that the general fares increases in the CIE network which took place in October, 1970 and in August, 1971 did not apply to school-going children. The subsidy was not increased to meet the fares increase of August, 1973 and school-child fares increased accordingly. Nevertheless, these fares are now only 37 per cent of the adult fare compared with 50 per cent for any other child. In no instance was the increase more than 1 p per journey.
Transport catchment areas were based on the location of national schools to their nearest secondary centres and were finally drawn up only after full consultation with the local interests involved. Pupils eligible for free transport but not attending the school or schools serving their own catchment area are given concessionary transport from the catchment boundary of the centre at which they attend school. Less than 7 per cent of the pupils eligible for free transport have availed of this concession. This indicates a fairly general assessment of catchment areas.
We have no evidence that catchment areas are "chaotic". They are determined on the basis of the distance. Pupils who are attending their nearest school but who are less than the qualifying distance from it are allowed to travel on the school buses at a nominal fare provided that the space capacity is available. Transport routes are organised so as to ensure that as far as possible the vehicle is used to its full capacity. Where spare seats happen to be available noneligible pupils along the route are given the concession of travelling as farepayers up to the limit of the spare capacity available. These spare seats are allocated on a first-come, first-served basis. When all spare seats have been occupied, there can be no question of providing larger vehicles to provide for additional pupils seeking transport as farepayers. The provision of larger vehicles in such cases would involve additional costs which would not be covered by the nominal fares charged to farepayers. These fares are justified only by the fact that it is costing us nothing extra to fill empty seats.
A minibus licensed to carry 21 passengers is carrying nine eligible pupils plus 12 farepayers to Ballyrassan National School. A further seven or so children are also seeking transport as farepayers but to cater for these would involve putting on a bigger bus at an extra cost of about £40 per term. Any examination of the offer by the parents to pay the extra cost would have to take all the cost factors into account and would necessitate some rethinking of the basic principles of the scheme. I am not sure that the suggestion would be possible but I shall have it considered carefully.
Handicapped children, mercifully, form only a small portion of schoolchildren and their dispersion over wide areas means that transport is difficult to organise. While efforts are made to convenience pupils to the greatest extent feasible, in most cases a door-to-door service would not only be extremely costly but would add to the travelling time of the other pupils. This is a factor that must be borne in mind by those who advocate such a service. Modification of the services to St. Anne's School for moderately-handicapped children has been made recently in an effort to convenience pupils further.
On the point raised by Deputy Mrs. Desmond regarding weekend transport for a group of pupils who are only 12 miles from pick-up points, my Department are in touch with CIE and expect to have a report as soon on the possibilities.
On the question raised regarding two children in one family being eligible for free transport while another in the same family is not so eligible because the school concerned in the latter case was within the three-mile limit, I would point out that such a case should not arise. Where different schools are involved in the one town the distance is measured from a central point. So far as possible a point that is approximately equidistant between all schools and which is identifiable readily is selected, for example, a post office, a church, et cetera. The object of this is precisely to avoid the splitting up of families. By working to a central point all members of the one family are either eligible or not irrespective of which school they are attending. If this practice does not obtain at any centre it should be introduced. The matter is one that should not have to be raised in Dáil Éireann. I would like Deputies to bring any such cases to my attention.
On the question of the position of parents, teachers and students in regard to secondary level education, I would point out that parents are provided for on the boards of management of community schools. Teachers are not on these boards but in some cases are appointed secretaries to the boards. This is a matter on which I, as a teacher, in common with many of my professional colleagues, have considerable reservations. There is room here for a further examination of the implications in this regard both for the teachers and for the management boards. There is no provision for student participation in management. The formation of student councils which would make suggestions to the board should be considered. Such councils exist in many secondary schools.
Regarding slow learners, there is provision for guidance teachers outside the quota for schools having more than 250 pupils. The Department are agreeable also to two schools having less than 250 pupils each sharing a guidance teacher. In this respect there should be no difficulty arising from two systems, vocational and secondary, because a guidance teacher could be employed by either the vocational education committee or by the secondary school. People spend a proportionate part of the time in each of the schools.
I mention especially the question of Clonakilty because during the course of the debate some rather impassioned pleas were addressed to me as if I were the only arbiter and also because the issues here indicate fairly clearly the extent to which many of these matters are so firmly in the hands of the local parties as to defy all attempts at a solution from a distance by an outsider, however interested or disinterested, according to one's point-of-view. Most Deputies are aware now that there are three schools in Clonakilty—the convent school which caters for about 420 girls including about 100 boarders, the vocational school which caters for 210 boys and girls and a lay secondary school which caters for about 100 boys. The Department suggested a community school to cater for all 730 students but the convent have refused consistently to accept such a solution. The other two schools would accept that solution. The major religious superiors proposed then that the convent school be allowed to continue as it is and that the other two schools be amalgamated to form one vocational school. This school would be sited close to the convent school and co-operation established between both of the schools.
The former Minister agreed to proceed on this basis and for my part I am prepared to honour his decision. However, the trouble is that there is substantial opposition to this course. When I use the word "school" in this context I am referring to the whole entity concerned, the management, the teachers and the parents. The three parties in each case must consider the future welfare of the children of their school and no one should forget that each party has its own difficulties in facing up to an arrangement aimed at the future welfare of the children of all three schools.
While taking account of these difficulties, an outsider, even the Minister for Education, may be forgiven for suggesting gently but firmly that the problem is one primarily for the people of Clonakilty and that the solution must come from them. To those continuing to press for a community school I would say, therefore, that I would be glad if this solution were acceptable generally. However, if this is not the case I cannot impose it. To those resisting that solution I would say that deference to their wishes on the matter of principle places on their shoulders a serious responsibility for willing co-operation in arriving at the closest possible alternative solution in the interest of all the children. To all I would say that my Department should be as flexible as possible in arriving at an alternative solution but that they must be able to count on similar flexibility from other interested parties.
Deputy Staunton referred to the system for the selection of the teachers for appointments to schools under vocational educational committees. It is my impression that there is general satisfaction with the present arrangements for the making of such appointments. A procedure for the constitution of appointment selection boards has been adopted by all 38 vocational education committees and has operated for the past six years. The function of the board is to determine the relative merits of the applicants for each post and to make a selection accordingly. The understanding is that in the normal way the vocational education committee will make the appointments in accordance with the selections of the board.
Deputy Power principally, and other Deputies, spoke about teacher training. I have already announced the setting-up of a committee who had their first meeting on 26th October, 1973, to do the following things: (1) examine the functions proposed by the Higher Education Authority; (2) consider how its powers and functions should be defined to enable it to achieve its objectives; (3) consider its composition and structure; (4) consider its relationship with other involved interests; (5) consider how it should be financed; and (6) report to the Minister when it has finished its work. It is too early yet to comment on any of the detailed functions which it may have. I do not want to go further into general issues at this time but there are a number of points arising out of the debate on which I wish to comment.
In regard to singing for girl candidates for national teacher training colleges. I must repeat that singing is an essential element in the curriculum of the primary school. I think few will doubt that it should be so. Further, in junior classes particularly it is integrated with the teaching of other subjects as, for instance, in the singing of simple rhymes in Irish or in English. It is necessary, therefore, that as many teachers as possible should be able to sing to the extent necessary to enable them to teach the primary school curriculum in full. Audio-visual aids, though extremely useful in education, would not compensate for a lack of ability to sing or to teach singing on the part of the teacher. For these reasons I am not prepared, at this stage at least, to modify the requirement that girl candidates for admission to training must qualify in a singing test unless they have attained a very high standard in the other subjects which comprise the competition.
On the question raised as to whether the increasing intake of candidates to these colleges was affecting quality, and specifically as to the comparison with ten years ago, I can say that (a) in the case of girl candidates in 1963 the standard reached by the last entrant to training was four honours, Irish, English, history and Latin, plus pass mathematics, domestic science and geography, and in 1973 the standard achieved for last candidate entering training was three honours, Irish, English, and French, plus pass mathematics, history and home economics: (b) in the case of boy candidates, in 1963 the position was four honours, Irish, history, geography and Greek, plus pass mathematics, English and history, and in 1973 the position was four honours, Irish, English, Latin and accountancy, plus pass mathematics and chemistry. Deputies can draw their own conclusions from those facts. I do not think there is such a great disparity in the quality of entrants.
In regard to teachers coming from England the position is that teachers who have successfully completed a full-time course of teacher training of not less than two years duration at a recognised training college in England will not be permitted to teach in a recognised capacity in a national school until they pass the preliminary test in oral Irish. These tests are, however, arranged in such a way as to facilitate English trained teachers who may be interested in coming back here to teach. It would, for example, be possible for such teachers to take the oral Irish test during the Christmas or Easter holidays and to commence teaching here on the following 1st July. English trained teachers may, of course, seek appointment in special schools for the deaf, emotionally disturbed and mentally handicapped, where qualifications in the Irish language are not compulsory.
On the matter of in-service training the question was asked why this could not be done during school term. The position is that courses for teachers with few exceptions are held during holiday periods. The number of such courses held during school terms is kept to the minimum to avoid, as far as possible, disruption of school work. Another reason for holding these courses during holiday periods is the easier availability of instructors and lecturers. If it were decided to extend the number of such courses held during the school terms it could cause considerable disruption in the work of the students even if substitute teachers would add very considerably to the over all cost of instruction in the schools.
Ninety-six approved courses of at least one week's duration were organised during the vocation periods this year, involving some 9,000 teachers. In addition, a series of evening lectures was conducted at various centres throughout the country. It is obvious that if these courses were held during the school period it would involve a considerable disruption of normal school organisation to the detriment of the children's education. Where the full expenses of a course are not recouped by the Department, extra personal vacation, usually three to five school days, may be allowed to the teachers who attend such courses. The future development of in-service training will fall to be considered by the proposed Foras Oiliúna.
In the matter of teachers of elocution, I must say that there has always been official recognition of the importance of speech training as a fundamental part of the work in primary schools. It is for this reason that so much attention is paid to speech and drama in the course of study in all teacher training colleges. Highly qualified lecturers have recently been appointed in colleges and speech and drama is an integral part of every primary school teacher's training. As speech is a matter of habit it must be recognised that all teachers have a role to play in the raising of standards and something as important as speech training could not be left as the responsibility of the occasional visiting elocution teacher. Elocution, verse speaking, drama, et cetera, do not constitute a separate recognised subject in second level schools. They may be recognised only to the extent that they form part of the recognised subjects, Irish, English or whatever the language may be. There is a general feeling that it would not be desirable to have a particular aspect of a subject isolated from the teaching of the subject as a whole. Elocution and speech training should be given by teachers generally in the normal course of educating their pupils.
In secondary schools only teachers who hold qualifications acceptable to the registration council and who are engaged full-time in the teaching of recognised subjects may be paid incremental salaries by the Department. This council is statutorily constituted and comprises 18 members, only two of whom represent the Minister for Education. The question of the acceptance of qualifications in speech and drama for registration purposes was fully discussed by the registration council in 1968. The council, however, decided against recognising such qualifications. Schools are, of course, free to employ speech and drama teachers and to pay them such a salary as may be agreed on between the teachers and the manager of a particular school.
The introduction of guidance and remedial teachers in second level schools means that pupils with speech handicaps, who would require specialised help, would be referred for appropriate treatment if such were readily available. Assistance with technique in relation to interviews and competitions would normally come within the ambit of the guidance teacher. It could, of course, be a matter for each individual guidance teacher to assess the needs of the children in a particular area and to organise his programme accordingly.
By the way, the status of the subjects speech training, and so on, might be enhanced for boy students if the word "communications" were substituted for the word "elocution" for reasons which are obvious to Deputies who may think about it.
References were made by Deputy Wilson and others to the National Museum and the National Library. As I said at the opening of the debate, I have devolved responsibility in my Departments to my Parliamentary Secretary for these matters. However, I want to make a few comments. I am afraid that the references made by the Opposition Deputies to the plight of the National Library and the National Museum cannot be regarded as other than cynical. Comments including words like "atrocious" and "distastrous" could scarcely be regarded as relating to recent history. These Deputies spoke as if to infer that bad conditions began with the change of Government. Surely they could not have been ignorant of the fact that criticism inside and outside of the House has a lengthy history and that their own party had many years in office in which to do something positive to remedy these matters.
It was quite extraordinary—and I say this with all respect— to hear Deputy Wilson return to this topic again and again and, indeed, even resume it on the radio the following day as if his party had not been in office. In this connection Deputy Faulkner, with characteristic honesty, admitted that he might have been able to do more in his time in office. I am not criticising him. I am just stating the situation. Of course, as a community we cannot be proud of the conditions in which these two premier national institutions have to subsist, however proud we may be of what they contain as repositories of our national heritage in one form or another. It would not be going too far to say that we should be thoroughly ashamed that they have been allowed to fall to such a low ebb in terms of physical accommodation.
It was precisely because I recognised that urgent action would have to be taken if both the library and the museum were to recover the prestige which is rightly theirs that one of my earlier decisions after taking office as Minister was to assign special responsibility for both and for the National Gallery to my Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Bruton. He has approached that task with an equal sense of the urgency attaching to a solution of the problems affecting both the library and the museum. The assignment is not an easy one. It would not be realistic to expect that the neglect which has characterised the life of the two institutions for such a long time, and the inevitable consequences of that neglect, could be remedied overnight.
Nevertheless, the Parliamentary Secretary has applied himself energetically to the problems involved over the past few months. He has, at his own instance, personally interviewed persons and bodies who are in a position to offer useful suggestions in regard to the short term and the long term development of both the museum and the library. He is currently reviewing the position in each case in the light of the suggestions he has received for the purpose of formulating positive proposals for my consideration in due course.
Limited accommodation, of course, lies at the root of the difficulties in each of these institutions. How this problem is to be satisfactorily resolved in the long term requires, and will receive, serious consideration. There are negotiations in progress to acquire additional space for both the museum and the library in the new Setanta building in Kildare Street as a partial amelioration of their accommodation shortcomings until a decision is reached on the question of providing improved long-term accommodation for both. A satisfactory outcome to these negotiations will necessarily be dependent upon the financial terms being reasonable and acceptable.
There are also plans for the building of a book repository at Santry, the facilities of which will be shared between the National Library, the city and county of Dublin public libraries and Trinity College. Although accommodation restrictions seriously impede the potential of both the museum and the library for full development they are not, of course, the only limiting factor. Consideration will also have to be given to the staffing and equipping of the two institutions on lines which will enable them to fulfil their roles adequately in the modern world.
These desirable improvements cannot be carried to their full extent until suitable permanent buildings have first been made available. Of paramount importance, too, is the desirability, one might even say the necessity, of availing to a far greater extent than at present of the contribution which these and other cultural institutions can make to the general system. Serious consideration is being given at present to the feasibility of establishing an educational service associated with appropriate cultural institutions at the earliest possible opportunity.
While I have laid particular emphasis on the physical shortcomings of the museum and the library because, understandably, they are the facets which have attracted most vigorous public comment and criticism, I would not wish to let this occasion pass without paying a well deserved tribute to those most immediately associated with each of these institutions, the directors and staff of both, the Council of Trustees of the library, and the Board of Visitors of the museum, for their continued dedication to, interest in, and work for the institutions, notwithstanding the disappointments and frustrations which they have had to face. I hope they will understand that there is now a serious intention on the part of the Government to do something positive towards a realisation of their hopes and ideals and that, in the interim, they will continue to devote their talents to the well-being of the institutions as assiduously as they have done in the past.
Some criticisms were directed at the National Museum during the course of the debate which I do not think I should let pass without comment. It was stated that there was no general guide to the collections. This is true, but there are very good reasons for it. It must be remembered that the museum collections number between 3,500,000 and 4,000,000 items. These are, of course, all duly numbered and registered in the records of the museum. Obviously, it would neither be feasible nor desirable to publish so comprehensive a catalogue. Such a catalogue would be so large and expensive that there would be virtually no demand and consequently no sale for it. Very few people would be interested in the whole range of museum material. Catalogues of this kind are no longer produced by most museums. Of greater interest to visitors are an outline guide to the principal collections, already available, and more detailed guides to particular material in which they have a special interest. A number of guides in the latter category are also already available or in course of production.
I cannot subscribe to the criticism of the museum's publication record in general. The current list of museum publications runs to 22 items. Since 1962 an annual list of the archaeological acquisitions has been published which gives full particulars of every item acquired during the year, many of them illustrated by drawings and photographs. In addition, members of the museum staff have over the years contributed an extensive number of research articles dealing with museum material to learned publications of various kinds at home and abroad.
A statement was made to the effect that collections in other countries, presumably of Irish interest, are available to this country on request. In this context reference was made to the Pitt River's Collection in Dorset. It is true that the collection does contain or did contain some important Irish items which the National Museum would be interested in acquiring in the ordinary course. It is understood, however, that there are legal difficulties associated with the collection which do not offer a prospect of being easily surmounted. The museum authorities are not aware of any other collections of Irish interest abroad which are available for acquisition and, with one exception, none has been offered. The exception was a collection of Irish material called the Brackstone Collection which was housed in Salisbury Museum and which, thanks to the co-operation of the Curator of that museum, the National Museum duly acquired.
It may be that, as was suggested during the debate, the museum could profit if a greater measure of publicity were given to the facilities and services it provides. This suggestion will certainly be given serious consideration. I should, however, mention in this context that the museum caters for some 20,000 school pupils every year by way of educational tours and that large numbers of students from Dublin schools also visit it from time to time. These are apart from the ordinary visitors at home and from abroad who count a tour of the museum as a necessary part of their visit to the capital city and who do not offer any criticism of the services which the institution provides.
Deputy Power raised the question of student assistance in regional technical colleges. Careful consideration was given to the question whether a national scheme of grants should be established to assist students taking third level education courses in the regional technical colleges. New legislation would be required for this since the courses at present provided in these colleges would not be admissible for the tenure of grants under the Local Authorities (Higher Education Grants) Act, 1968. Furthermore a national grants scheme of courses at this level would have to be based on a lower level of qualification than that prescribed for grants to degree level courses but, since the level of student maintenance assistance would need to be the same, it would be virtually impossible to avoid merging the two schemes into one third level grant scheme at the lower level of qualification and this might very well result in very few of the grantees competing for the courses provided in the regional technical colleges.
There was also the consideration that a national grants scheme would have to be administered under rules which of necessity would be inflexible. Legislation already existed in the Vocational Education Act of 1930 under which student assistance for attendance at technician level courses could be provided by vocational education committees by way of scholarships and such scholarship schemes were in operation in many vocational education areas for some time past. These schemes admitted of greater inflexibility than could be achieved under a national grants scheme established under statute and so could be more suited to regional needs.
For example, scholarships could be offered in an industrial area for competition between students who did not reach the leaving certificate but who pursued their studies in trade subjects after entering their apprenticeships. It was decided that the needs of students for assistance in the non-degree third level area of education could be served satisfactorily by giving increased funds to vocational education committees to enable them to offer substantially more scholarships and this was done. The increased funds were distributed as fairly as possible over the country on the basis of the numbers of leaving certificate students in each vocational education area.
Regarding the question of awarding scholarships to second year students who did not hold awards in their first year it must be emphasised that such a practice does not obtain in scholarship schemes generally. A scholarship by its nature is awarded on the basis of merit as shown in competition and to allow a student who had completed a year in third level education to compete with candidates who were only leaving secondary education would be unfair. Besides this would give all the unsuccessful candidates in the entrance year a second chance on more favourable terms in a subsequent year with consequent effects on those seeking scholarships in that particular year.
I should like now to say a few words about higher education. Following the decision of the Government at the time to establish a third level education institute in Limerick the Higher Education Authority was asked to recommend how such an institution might be fitted into the existing or future provisions for higher education. The authority made certain recommendations and the National Institute for Higher Education, Limerick, was established and, as I said recently, when I was presented by the planning board with its development plan, that institute has already in its brief existence shown that it is designed to play a very full, creative and innovative role in Irish education. Four years have passed since the Higher Education Authority reported on the institution to be established in Limerick. Several events have occurred in intervening period which have affected the situation which then prevailed in the Limerick region. In the first place there has been established on the same campus the National College for Physical Education which it is planned to expand to cater for the education of teachers of many other specialised subjects. Secondly, a course leading to the higher diploma in education is now being provided in Mary Immaculate Training College from University College, Cork. Thirdly, the training course for primary teachers, which is also provided in Mary Immaculate Training College, is to be extended from two to three years with those who successfully complete it being awarded a degree.
These three developments have altered the whole landscape of higher education not only in Limerick but in the country generally and other developments, new needs and new demands which must be met have also changed the educational situation. All of the changes and developments that I have mentioned have made Limerick a great centre of educational activity. It was in this context that I made my recent statement and I want to make it clear that, when I said I would envisage a university for Limerick, I was not thinking about the immediate future but about a development which might come about in the next decade. Meantime diplomas and degrees earned in the Limerick Institute of Higher Education will be awarded by the National Council for Educational Awards.
Deputy Healy spoke about the dental hospitals and dental education. I propose to deal with the dental hospitals in Dublin and Cork together since they are intrinsically bound up with the recommendations on dental education contained in the report of the Higher Education Authority on university re-organisation. It has been stated that conditions in the existing premises of the Dublin Dental Hospital are not fully satisfactory. Of this I am fully aware, but there is nothing that can be done about it immediately beyond continuing with such ameliorative measures as are feasible by way of adapting the additional accommodation in Dunlop Oriel House, Westland Row, to supplement the facilities in the main building in Lincoln Place and to enable the space in both buildings to be used more constructively in the context of the hospital's general needs.
The trouble is that new dental hospitals were projected for both Dublin and Cork but the Higher Educational Authority advised, as an integral part of its recommendations on the re-organisation of higher education generally, that on educational, financial and demographic grounds the case for the rationalisation of dental teaching by providing for it in a single centre and for the selection of the Dublin Dental Hospital as that centre is overwhelming. Pending a decision on that recommendation by the Government the proposal for the provision of a new dental hospital in Dublin has had to be deferred and, for the same reason, the plans for the building of a new dental hospital in Cork had to be put to one side although in this case they had reached a very advanced stage.
If it were just a question of deciding the future provision to be made for dental education alone the matter might be resolved with reasonable expedition but, as Deputies will be aware, the future of dental education cannot be divorced from the future of higher education generally and treated in isolation. Neither do I have to remind the House, I am sure, of the complexities inherent in the restructuring of the university system in the Dublin area in particular. While, therefore, I appreciate very fully the sense of disappointment and frustration at the lack of progress by those closely associated with dental education in Dublin and Cork—and they have made their views known to my Department in no uncertain terms—I feel that I can offer no lasting solution to the problem until I am in a position to formulate long-term proposals for the re-organisation of the country's system of higher education generally and my proposals have been approved by the Government.
What I have said about the dental hospitals in Dublin and Cork applies equally to the question of the provision to be made for architectural education in the future. The Higher Education Authority dealt substantially with this matter in its report on the Ballymun project. It was referred to also in the authority's report on university reorganisation. In brief, the authority, having considered the matter in all its aspects, reached the conclusion that the best interests of architectural teaching would lie in there being only one school of architecture and considered that that school should be on the campus of University College, Dublin. The authority recognised that if this recommendation was accepted the two existing schools in Dublin could not be immediately integrated and envisaged that the process of phasing out the courses in architecture now provided in the College of Technology, Bolton Street, might take five years to complete.
The authority's recommendation in this respect takes its place amongst the several recommendations which the authority has made in the two reports referred to for the re-organisation and development of higher education generally, and a decision in relation to architectural education will not be taken except in the context of the Government's overall determination, in due course, of the form which the organisation of higher education is to take in the future.
A question was raised about town planning. A course leading to the award of a diploma in town planning is provided by University College, Dublin. The course is a post graduate one of three years duration and candidates for the course must have obtained a degree in architecture or civil engineering, or an honours degree in economics or geography, or a qualification of equivalent standing approved by the college's faculty of engineering and architecture. The authorities of the college, and the Higher Education Authority, agreed last year on certain steps deemed to be necessary to strengthen the department of town planning. These included the creation of additional teaching posts which have since been filled and the provision of funds to enable the accommodation at Earlsfort Terrace to be suitably adapted to serve the department's requirements.
It has been said that the amount provided in the Estimate for adult education is too small but, as I said in my speech, the whole matter of adult education has been subjected to an exhaustive examination by a special committee. I have received the committee's report and I hope that a Press conference to be given by the committee in the near future will enable the public to appreciate the reasons, and the principles, on which they base their report. This will take place in the very near future. I do not have to remind the House that adult education in the light of the demand for continuing education is a most important sector. It is my firm intention to support it as strongly as our resources will allow.
A question was asked about the National College for Physical Education, particularly about teachers of physical education and the new course of Irish studies. The position in that regard is that all students at NCPE will follow a course in Irish studies during their first three years in college. Some students will select at the end of their first year Irish studies as their second area of specialisation and will study the subject in depth during their second, third and fourth years. I am satisfied, from all the advice available to me, that the students who specialise in Irish studies will be qualified to teach Irish, and will be unusually well qualified to teach the new Irish studies course envisaged for the secondary schools.
That brings to a conclusion my remarks on the Estimate for Education. I should like to refer briefly to a point raised by Deputy Griffin on proposals in the matter of incremental credit for teaching service in developed countries. I should like to state that these are under active consideration in my Department. Those who write letters to the newspapers reminding me of the position I took, when an Opposition Deputy, in regard to incremental credit for those teaching abroad can take my assurance that I am pursuing this matter with the utmost attention because I believe myself that something must be done to change the regulations in this regard but the public at large will have to await discussions on this matter. I am certainly pursuing it with all the vigour I can.
Finally, I should like to thank all the Deputies who contributed to this debate. I regret, as I said at the outset, that one of the Deputies does not consider me fit to be Minister for Education. I want to welcome an old colleague and friend, Deputy John Wilson, as spokesman for the Opposition on Education and the Arts and to assure him of my full co-operation with him as I am sure I can be assured of his co-operation with me in what is largely a bi-partisan approach to educational matters in this country.
I look forward to a period of great expansion particularly in third level education. No time is being wasted in my Department in coming to conclusions about the many difficulties of the third level area and I hope to be in a position very shortly to announce Government proposals in this field. This may be before the end of the year, or it may be after the end of the year. Some people castigate me for having made a promise that I would produce results by the end of the year but I said in this House—I believe it was in answer to Deputy John O'Connell—that I would do my best but that I was not going to be tied. I can assure the House that I will spare no effort to bring our deliberations to a conclusion in this field in the very near future. I should like to thank the Members of this House for the kindly way they received my Estimate.
