asked the Minister for Education the primary consideration which governs the closure of national schools.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - School Closures.
5.
Mr. R. Burke
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to circulate with the Official Report a document which sets out my policy in this matter.
Following is the document:
Amalgamation of National Schools.
A Statement of Policy.
It is not the intention—in normal circumstances—to build new one-or two-teacher schools or to provide new premises—or to undertake major reconstruction or improvement work—for schools of this size. The necessary provision for replacement would be made on the basis of amalgamation with other schools in larger units. A new school premises is an investment for the future and it would be altogether inappropriate and unreasonable to replace a one- or two-teacher school with a school of the same size which would be obsolete in terms of educational requirements in a relatively short period of years.
The same general considerations as in the case of a one- or two-teacher school apply to a threeteacher school when there is a declining average enrolment and the prospect were that it will not remain a school of that size.
In normal circumstances as the opportunity offers the educational interests of the children may require that recognition should be withdrawn from a one-teacher school and suitable arrangements made for its amalgamation with another school to form a larger educational unit.
Parents of pupils should be informed of the advantages for their children of attendance at schools of suitable minimum size and they should be encouraged to agree to amalgamation where suitable arrangements may be made by use of free school transport to bring the children to a larger school.
It needs to be emphasised that as well as providing better educational opportunities for the children, larger schools contribute to a more equitable distribution of the total number of teachers available for all schools and, accordingly, to an improvement of the pupil/teacher ratio in areas of particular need.
It is necessary for the State in the general good of all to have advertence to this fact.
In connection with a proposal for the amalgamation of schools in any area, the particular circumstances of the individual schools must receive the fullest consideration and an opportunity must be afforded for all aspects of the case to be examined and discussed. Due regard must be had to the wishes of those in favour of amalgamation as well as of those opposed to the proposal.
Parents are concerned for the welfare of their children and anxious to provide them with the best opportunity for their development and advancement. At the same time they are fully conscious of their obligations as citizens and are prepared to consider the requirements of the common good in connection with the decisions that require to be made. It is in the full recognition of such considerations that suitable and equitable decisions may be made in relation to the amalgamation of schools.
Surely the Minister should be able to give us a brief outline of the reason. I am baffled by the attitude of the Department of Education, over which the Minister now has control, in regard to the matter of closures.
Mr. R. Burke
I am circulating it with the Official Report. But the Deputy can always ask another question and have the matter debated further if he wishes.
I do not accept that. I cannot understand it. In fact, I would go so far as to say now that it is a slick way of evading the issue, that the Minister has come to a point now where he has authorised his Department to close down certain schools and open others.
Deputy, this is Question Time.
Is the Minister aware that he opened a five-pupil school, with one pupil in each class, and closed, in my constituency, a 22-pupil school? Further, the Minister sent an inspector around in the middle of the summer holidays to slap the bad news on them.
We cannot debate this matter today. The issue is too great to debate at Question Time.
I want to elaborate further and say that, at the time of the election, the Government told the people they would have open Government, but the Minister for Education was not open.
Please, Deputy Connolly. Next question.
The Minister sent an inspector around and said: "I am closing the school and that it that". Yet he decided to open a five-pupil one——
(Interruptions.)
Please, Deputy G. Fitzgerald, cannot the Deputy see that I am trying to deal with disorder?
It is a very reasonable question.
It is a very reasonable question. I think I am being most reasonable. I want a reply to this. This is a very slick way for the Minister to get out of that but he need not think he is getting out of it as easily as that.
Mr. R. Burke
I would suggest that that is a reflection on the Chair. I have got the permission of the Ceann Comhairle to circulate it with the Official Report.
A Cheann Comhairle, you have no control, as you stated here before, over how Ministers reply.
I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that the Chair is seeking to deal with Question Time in an orderly fashion. Next question, please.
I remember when we were on the far side of the House we were accused of arrogance. This is sheer arrogance. I am protesting against that reply.
The Deputy has done so. He should leave it at that.
I want an explanation from the Minister as to why he reopened a five-pupil school and brought in children from outside areas. The public require an explanation for that action and in particular the people of my constituency want the matter clarified in regard to their school.
Next question, please.
I am not satisfied with the reply given to my question.
The Deputy has registered his protest. Will he please allow questions to continue?
I have been refused an answer to my question.
The Chair has no control over such matters.
The Minister cannot answer the question. That is the reason for his refusal to do so. As for the hyena who sits beside him——
My constituents are demanding clarification of the situation.
(Interruptions.)
Mr. R. Burke
I doubt if the word "hyena" as used by Deputy O'Malley in relation to the Parliamentary Secretary is in order. I suggest that he be requested to withdraw the remark.
It is a matter of indifference to me what Deputy O'Malley calls me.
Does the Minister think that the term is inappropriate?
It is not an appendage that should be applied to any Member of this House.