Vol. 282 No. 6
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £15,442,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1975, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education (including Institutions of Science and Art), for certain miscellaneous educational and cultural services and for payment of sundry grants-in-aid.
I want to ask a number of questions. I realise that our EEC commitments have changed the ball game so far as Ministers are concerned. I regret to say, and so do all the people who were responsible for the foundation of the AEDE in the early 1960s, that there is no initiative in education in Europe. There is no reason why the Minister for Education should not be here at this moment. The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs said Ministers were on official business. I think I know where the Minister for Education is. I have a strong suspicion he is not here because he does not want to answer questions.
He is well able to answer his own questions.
He is not here. I want to ask about subhead A.4. It carries a capital expenditure of £57,000. I asked the Minister questions about this yesterday or the day before. He half said it was being spent or it was not being spent. I do not know exactly what the position is. Six months of the year have already gone by. This was ear-marked for expenditure on the National College of Art and Design. I want to know what the position is with regard to it. It was specifically ear-marked for an addition to the National College of Art and Design. There is a gaping hole in the side of the building.
I should like to deal with the absence of the Minister. This morning he was at a meeting of the joint boards of the NIHE in Limerick.
It was deliberately fixed.
He is currently hosting a lunch associated with that meeting. This engagement was entered into some considerable time before this business was ordered for this morning. The Deputy will agree that it is an engagement of some consequence. It is understandable that the Minister should be there.
It is, but this is very important. I do not want to barrack the Parliamentary Secretary, but the Minister should be here. That meeting could be tomorrow, if necessary.
As there were people coming from various parts of the country to attend that meeting it might not have been as easy as the Deputy might think to make the change of schedule he has referred to.
I know exactly when it was fixed.
I am sure the Deputy will accept the Minister's absence in the circumstances. I am informed that there is no information in addition to that given by the Minister in his reply yesterday in relation to the situation regarding the College of Art. The Minister did give some information. If the Deputy is dissatisfied with any particular point, it is open to him to put down additional and more precise Parliamentary Questions.
The simple question is that £57,000 has been allocated in the Book of Estimates for capital expenditure on the National College of Art and Design. I am asking now has any £1 of that been spent since January, 1975? That is a simple question.
I am informed that no progress has been made as yet in relation to the expenditure of this capital money.
Has the money been spent anywhere else?
I have no information to suggest that it has. The year is only half-way through.
The School of Art and the School of Music in Cork are anxious to get sanction for extensions there. Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell me how soon this sanction will be forthcoming?
I regret I have no information to give the Deputy in relation to that matter.
The Parliamentary Secretary will now realise why I would like the Minister for Education to be here. With regard to Subhead A.5 —Expenses of the National Council for Educational Awards—£166,000— on 16th December last the Minister for Education arrived with a changeling baby. His own proposals, apparently, were killed in the Cabinet. He arrived with this changeling, that the NCEA was to be abolished. He has changed his mind on that. He has found it useful since then. Is it true to say that when this Estimate was being prepared the Department of Education did not know of the Minister's intention to kill the NCEA?
The Estimates were prepared, I would imagine, a good deal earlier than the Cabinet deliberation on this matter was finalised. I am speaking from general knowledge of the preparation of Estimates and the time-scale involved.
Was the kiss of life given to the NCEA since 16th December?
The NCEA is continuing to function. As the Deputy is aware, it has much useful work to do.
The point is, the Minister said it was being abolished—sic. Now we hear it is alive again.
For how long?
It shows confusion in planning. Subhead C.1 and C.2— University Scientific Research Grants to Students—is it envisaged that the newly announced grants from the oil exploration companies will come under this Department of Education subhead? Will the money be allocated by the Department of Industry and Commerce to the Department of Education? It is important that it should.
I understand that there is no information to suggest that the scholarships referred to by the Deputy will be provided for within the subheads which he mentioned. I do not have any information as to the plan for the allocation of these moneys. I imagine that discussions are taking place at the moment in relation to them. It may be that some other form of expenditure or some other form of college might be appropriate.
In view of the fact that on 13th December last the Minister for Industry and Commerce said that for the future he was arrogating to himself all responsibility for technology and so on, would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that it would be as well for Education to be on its mark with regard to this money and how it could be used to provide skilled personnel for the oil and gas industry?
I move the adjournment of the debate.
