asked the Minister for Education how an application for free school transport is processed in his Department; and the length of time he considers it should take to reach a decision in response to a query from a Deputy.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - School Transport.
4.
Applications for school transport are processed: (a) through school managers and Córas Iompair Éireann in the case of national schools; (b) through school principals and the transport liaison officers in the case of secondary schools in accordance with the regulations laid down for the free transport scheme. All queries from Dáil Deputies and Senators are dealt with expeditiously in the Department as a matter of standard practice. Such queries frequently involve consultation with the other parties involved namely CIE, the transport liaison officer and the school principal, before a reply can be issued. The Deputy will, therefore, appreciate that it often takes time to collect all the facts relevant to an informed decision.
Do we take it from the Parliamentary Secretary's reply that he is handing the whole operation of this over to CIE even though his Department provide the money for the service?
No change in the existing practice has taken place or is contemplated.
The Parliamentary Secretary said in his answer that he was handing over this operation to CIE.
No. I indicated that there are frequently consultations with CIE.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary say why his Department have no transport officer to deal with applications for transport for primary school children?
We have contact with CIE who are our agents in this matter and we have also contact with the school managers who are also acting as agents of the Department of Education and of the parents in their managerial capacity. We feel that to introduce another tier of bureaucracy into this system would, perhaps, accentuate those delays about which the Deputy seems to be concerned.
I certainly would not like to introduce another tier of bureaucracy because there are enough already.
Sorry Deputy, we cannot allow statements to be made.
Why is there such delay now in regard to each application for transport? Why do Members of the Opposition writing to the Parliamentary Secretary's Department get replies after Deputies in the Government parties?
To the best of my knowledge, there is no delay which is not perfectly justifiable in view of the various consultations which have to be undertaken to ensure that an informed decision is taken, as I stated in my initial reply. Secondly, I am quite unaware of the practice referred to in the second part of the Deputy's supplementary.
Question No. 5.
Has the Parliamentary Secretary not given specific instructions on this?
No, I have not.
5.
asked the Minister for Education the number of children who were refused free school transport since 1st October 1973 although they had forwarded medical certificates.
The figures sought by the Deputy are not readily available. The time and cost involved in extracting such information would not be warranted.
Is a request of that nature, backed up by a medical certificate, dealt with through the Department's agents, CIE, or through the Department? If such a request is dealt with by the former what equipment have they to deal sympathetically with cases which require a medical certificate?
That seems to be a separate question.
The question is one requesting statistical information which I am not in a position to give. Perhaps the Deputy might wait for the reply to the next question.
6.
asked the Minister for Education if it is now the policy of his Department to refuse free transport to children who supply medical certificates; and, if so, why.
Pupils who satisfy certain prescribed conditions with regard to age and to the minimum distance of their home residence from their nearest school are eligible for free transport in accordance with the provisions of the school transport scheme. Where it is shown to the Department's satisfaction, on the basis of a certificate furnished by a medical doctor, that due to illness or disability, a pupil who is not ordinarily eligible for free transport, would be unable to attend school during a specified period unless transport were provided, permission may be granted to the pupil to travel free on an existing transport service for such period. This has been and still is the policy of the Department. The Deputy will, of course, be aware that all children attending special schools for the physically and mentally handicapped are provided with free transport under a special scheme.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that I have a letter in my possession from his Department signed by him and sent to the parents of a child who applied for free transport? That child had a medical certificate the previous year and got the free transport but it was refused by the Parliamentary Secretary.
It was granted under Fianna Fáil.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary or any member of his Department qualified to adjudicate on a medical report?
I would like to point out that under the previous Administration the practice was that the adjudication of these medical certificates was carried out by lay members of the Civil Service staff. I considered this to be a most unsatisfactory position and on taking office I initiated steps to have a competent examination of medical certificates carried out.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
I would like to indicate to the House the procedures initiated by virtue of representations I made and by virtue of the good offices of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare. The medical adviser and the deputy medical adviser of the Department of Social Welfare will personally take on the task of advising in such cases. This indicates that we will have, as was not the case in the past, competent medical advice in assessing claims for free transport on the basis of medical evidence.
Are we to take it from the Parliamentary Secretary's answer that he doubts the professional qualifications of the people who issued the certificates in the first place?
I am calling Question No. 7.
That is a valid supplementary.
We cannot have a statement on the matter.
I asked a specific question as to whether we were to take it from the Parliamentary Secretary's answer that he doubts the personal qualifications of the people who issue the medical certificates in the first instance?
I heard the Deputy in the first instance. I am calling Question No. 7.
I would like to explain that the medical certificate may be valid so far as it goes but the question is one of deciding whether that medical certificate is of sufficient strength to meet the requirements of the regulations which are that the certificate must indicate that the child would be unable to attend school during a specified period unless transport were provided. A doctor may certify that a child suffers from a minor ailment and may be factually correct in so doing but we need to have a means of assessing objectively and with the best professional advice whether that condition, as indicated in the certificate submitted by the family doctor, is such as would require transport to be granted in an exceptional way as in the case of the regulation.
Further arising from the Parliamentary Secretary's reply——
I am afraid we cannot debate this matter here today.
This is a very important matter.
Will Deputy Wilson allow the Chair? The Chair is in control of Question Time in respect of the manner, relevancy and number of Questions which may be submitted. The Deputy must be aware of that. The Deputy will ask a supplementary, Deputy Power will ask one and that will end it.
If the family doctor states in his certificate that the child is suffering from a certain ailment and that in his opinion he is entitled to free transport will the Parliamentary Secretary's Department accept this?
I have indicated the procedure which we are going to adopt in future.
You will not.
I have indicated that we are going to have the advice available to us—which the previous Administration did not think was necessary—of the medical adviser and the deputy medical adviser of the Department of Social Welfare. It is quite normal administrative practice to have competent advice such as this. The Department of Social Welfare, for instance, have medical referees such as this to adjudicate on analogous cases. I wonder if our opponents would prefer if there was no such machinery in the case of social welfare cases.
(Interruptions.)
Seeing that the Parliamentary Secretary——
A question, Deputy, please, quickly.
I am about to ask a question if you will allow me. Seeing that the Parliamentary Secretary made a reference to the transport to school of physically and mentally handicapped children, would he now confirm that door to door transport is provided as far as possible because there is often undue hardship when a handicapped child is asked to go to a pick-up point?
That question does not really arise on this. If the Deputy wishes to put down a question——
The Parliamentary Secretary is in a very nice mood today.
7.
asked the Minister for Education if he will consider favourably the request of owners of school buses for a substantial increase in remuneration in view of the recent steep increase in operating costs.
The remuneration of school bus owners in respect of school transport services is the subject of contractual agreements between CIE and the individual operators concerned. Contracts are usually of one year's duration and, on renewal, contractors have an opportunity of negotiating new terms with CIE to compensate for increased costs. However, I am advised that in view of the recent exceptional increases in fuel costs CIE have agreed to increase the rates of remuneration stipulated in current contracts.
How does the Parliamentary Secretary think CIE will do this? Approaches have been made to CIE in my constituency and they have indicated that contracts have been made for 12 months and they will stand over them. Has the Parliamentary Secretary some indication that CIE will increase the calls within the contract period or will they wait until the expiration of the contract?
CIE have arranged to compensate contractors for the rise in fuel costs as follows: Firstly to the extent of 3p per gallon in respect of increases which came into effect in December, 1973. Compensation is being paid in respect of operations from the reopening of the schools on 15th January, 1974. The amount of 3p per gallon does not meet the full cost of the increase but was arrived at having regard to the point made that contractors would have been expected to provide for slight cost increases themselves under the normal terms of the contract; (b) compensation is being provided to the extent of 9p per gallon in respect of the increases authorised on 21st February, 1974. The increase consists of (i) 7.5p per gallon to the oil companies and (ii) 0.77p per gallon to the retailers, plus VAT on these figures, bringing the total to 8.83p per gallon. The compensation in that case which is being awarded by CIE is slightly above the actual increase in costs which has taken place.
Surely the Parliamentary Secretary is aware that since those contracts were made last September the price of petrol, fuel oil and lubricating oil has gone up by 11p per gallon?
Precisely.
And they are to get 3p. That is not within an ass's bawl of it.
I said there were two stages of compensation granted to the contractors: (1) 3p per gallon and (2) 9p per gallon. I also pointed out that it was the normal situation that these contracts were made on a 12-month basis and that normal increases in costs which took place in the past within that 12-month period were to be absorbed by the contractors and the initial contracts were entered into on that basis. Because of the exceptional increases in fuel costs, exceptional compensation over and above that was made, as I indicated.
When was this offer made to the minibus drivers and other drivers?
This relates to the contractors, not to the drivers.
Question No. 8.
On a point of order, is it not correct for the Parliamentary Secretary to resume his seat when another Deputy is called on?
Well, yes, this is——
He is learning his arrogance from his Minister.
Is it not true that some people who operate school buses are on strike at the moment?
The Parliamentary Secretary still will not sit down.
The question relates to the owners of the buses, not to the people who are on strike. I should say that I am very concerned about the development to which the Deputy refers.
8.
asked the Minister for Education if he is aware that there are sufficient children outside the required distance to merit a free transport service to Ballydesmond primary school, County Cork; and if he will sanction this service.
There are 15 children in the Ballydesmond NS area who are eligible for free school transport in accordance with the rules, but they reside in scattered localities—eight in the Tureenglanahea/Glencollins locality south of the school, four in the Knocknaboul locality to the west and north-west, and three in the Tureenduve locality north-east of the school. Each of these localities must be regarded as separate for school transport purposes. All these children reside less than three miles from the school, and the establishment of a special transport service is not warranted.
I understood that the whole aim of free transport was to ensure that children in remote rural areas would attend school regularly. There are 15 qualified children in this remote rural area. Would the Parliamentary Secretary look on that as an exceptional case? They qualify as regards numbers and as regards mileage but because they are scattered those children are discriminated against.
It has been standard practice that it is necessary that there be a minimum of ten children in a distinct locality on one side of a school for the establishment of a service. While there are over ten altogether in the school catchment area they are not in a distinct locality, they are scattered, and the fact that they are scattered would naturally greatly increase the cost of laying on such a service. It is unfortunate but true that one of the reasons for a regulation such as this is to keep the cost of the service within reasonable bounds.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there was a school transport service to this school from one part of the area and when the Government changed they dispensed with this? At the time we were campaigning to extend it and you wiped it out completely.
The service from the Tureenglanahea/Glencollins locality was terminated after the summer vacation 1973 because there were then less than ten eligible children being carried.
There was the same number as before.