Vote 28: Office of the Minister for Education.

Minister for Education (Mr. Richard Burke)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £3,068,000 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 education and cultural services and for payment of sundry grants-in-aid.

I understand that with the agreement of the Opposition, all the Education Votes will be discussed together.

The total additional amount being provided in the Supplementary Estimates for the five education Votes, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 33 is £26,246,000. This represents a percentage increase of about 13.5 on the original Estimate of £191,233,000 This figure was in turn £41 million greater than that in the Book of Estimates for 1974.

Included in the total amount of £26,246,000 is a sum of £19.6 million approximately for increased provision for salaries. It includes the extra cost arising from the implementation of the terms of the 16th round salary agreement and adjustments in certain allowances negotiated through the conciliation and arbitration schemes.

In the case of Vote 29—Primary Education—the additional amount required for subhead C.1 is £8,696,200 and in Vote 30—subhead B—an additional amount of £4,928,400 is requested for incremental salaries. The additional amount in subhead A of Vote 31—Annual Grants to Vocational Education Committees—is mainly for salaries and, similarly, subhead I.1 of the same Vote requires additional provision for salaries of teachers in the regional technical colleges.

The provision of £3,086,800 in subhead A2 of Vote 33—Higher Education—for the purpose of additional money to the Higher Education Authority in respect of general, non-capital, grants to universities and colleges and designated institutions of higher education includes in addition to an appropriate sum in respect of the 16th round salary increases, an amount of £1,500,000 to enable the colleges to reduce their financial deficits and be in a better position to meet their commitments in 1976.

Items for which additional provision is required arising out of claims at the conciliation and arbitration scheme include improvements in principals' and vice-principals' allowances and the payment of maternity leave to teachers.

Additional provision is being made in the Supplementary Estimates for £1,150,000 for capitation grants to secondary schools and £825,000 in the case of the supplemental grants payable to secondary schools in lieu of tuition fees. Deputies will recall that on 7th May last I announced that the Government had decided to increase the rates of these grants as follows as from the beginning of the school year 1975-6: Capitation grants: Maximum rates of grant—junior pupils from £19 to £28; senior pupils from £24 to £36; grant in lieu of tuition fees from £35 to £50.

The tuition fee had already been increased by £5 to £35 as from the beginning of the school year 1974-5. The increase in that grant in two years has accordingly been £20 or 66? per cent.

In the course of my statement on 7th May last, I explained the circumstances in which the Government had decided on these increases. The financial support to voluntary secondary schools from the State comprises:

(i) Capitation grants payable to all schools;

(ii) Grants in lieu of tuition fees in the case of schools under Catholic management in the free education scheme—a special variation of the scheme suited to the circumstances applies to the case of schools under Protestant management.

The rates of capitation grant for secondary schools had not been increased since 1st August, 1969. It is true, of course, that in the meantime the State has borne the entire cost of the increases in salaries for secondary teachers by way of adjustment of the incremental salary portion of the teachers' salaries. It is also a fact that the basic salary portion of the teachers' salaries—the portion of the salary payable by the school authorities—has remained static at £400 since 1st August, 1969 and that some relationship, whether direct or indirect, must be accepted as existing between the amount of basis salary per teacher, the pupil/teacher ratio and the rate of capitation grant per pupil. Nevertheless, the Government accepted, on my recommendation, that in consideration of the increase in costs arising under other headings an adjustment in the rate of the capitation grant as from the beginning of the school year 1975-76 was appropriate and necessary.

As from the commencement of the school year 1969-70 the rate of the grant per pupil in lieu of tuition fees payable to schools in the free education scheme was £25. An increase of £5 was allowed as from the beginning of the school year 1972-73 and a further £5 as from the beginning of the school year 1973-4. The further increase of £15 as from the beginning of the school year 1975-6 brings the amount of the grant at present payable to £50 per pupil.

In connection with the general provision for the financing of secondary schools, I might also recall that during 1975 the terms of the secondary schools building grant scheme were amended to provide a grant of 80 per cent in respect of the total approved cost of the school premises including the cost of furniture, equipment and fees but excluding site cost. This new arrangement will confer a great advantage on secondary schools. Previously no loan or grant from the Department was available for furniture for ordinary classrooms and grants in aid of specialist rooms were so inadequate that, in practice, school authorities found that the 70 per cent grant for the school premises did not constitute much more than 50 per cent in many cases of the total cost of the school plus furniture and equipment. The new arrangement means effectively an increase in the grant from not much more than 50 per cent in many cases to 80 per cent in all cases. It also means that the money which school authorities had to set aside for furniture and equipment will now be available to meet the balance of the 20 per cent required for the school premises, furniture and equipment.

The additional provision of £129,000 in subhead C of Vote 30 is required to meet the increased cost of conducting the Department's certificate examinations. Improved rates of remuneration were paid to examiners and improved rates of travelling and subsistence allowances to superintendents at the examination centres. There were also increases in printing costs of the examination papers and in transport costs. An increase in provision for similar reasons is required in subhead F, of Vote 31 — Vocational Education.

The increase in the provision required in J.1 for secondary comprehensive and community schools is in respect of salaries for the teachers and of general operating costs. There are at present 14 comprehensive schools and 18 community schools in operation in which 15,600 pupils approximately are enrolled. The main increase in operating costs arise from increased costs of heat and light, and for maintenance and cleaning contracts, as well as increases in costs of administration in respect of printing, stationery, postage, telephones et cetera.

The scheme of aid towards the cost of school books in second-level schools is operated on a reasonably flexible basis which makes it difficult to make accurate estimates of cost well in advance of the period during which the expenditure is incurred. The provision in 1975 in subhead K of Vote 30 includes recoupment in respect of some claims for the school-year 1974-5 which were not received in time for payment in 1974. The greater part of the excess arises, however, from the fact that demands from schools were appreciably higher than originally anticipated. An increase in the cost of school books was a contributory factor in this regard.

In the case of the Vote for primary education it has been found necessary to open a subhead C. 10 for this year only to meet payments in connection with painting of schools undertaken and completed before 31st December, 1974, and for which the managers concerned had not been recouped before 1st January, 1975. The new scheme of capitation grants towards the operating costs of national schools —subhead C.6 of Vote 29 for 1975— comprehends these grants as from 1975.

The original provision of £10,000,000 in subhead E of Vote 29 —Building Equipment and Furnishing of National Schools—is being increased in the Supplementary Estimate to £11,000,000. This amount compares with the actual expenditure of £6,629,283 in the financial year 1973-4, the last previous 12 month financial year period. The total capital provision for the building of schools and colleges in the year 1975 is now £26,395,000 including £2,784,000 from the local loans fund.

The relevant subhead provision for free school transport—D. 3 of Vote 28 —is being increased by £3,318,700. A large portion of this increase— £1,043,700 is in respect of operating costs. Increased provision of £2,275,000 is, however, required for the purpose of making a payment to CIE in respect of the written down value of all school buses as at 31st March, 1974. It does not represent an additional charge on the Exchequer, since at the same time as the Department of Education pays the appropriate amount to CIE an identical amount will be paid by CIE to the Department of Finance. The aim of the transactions is to enable a more satisfactory arrangement to be made in relation to the financing of school transport services, including the capital required for the purchase of the school buses.

The remaining increases arise generally in miscellaneous subheads, such as travelling and incidentals, post office services, international organisations et cetera, where the increases incurred were largely outside the control of the Department of Education.

Finally, I should wish to make a brief reference to developments over the past year in relation to the reorganisation of educational structures and courses at third level.

Following my announcement of the Government's decisions on 16th December, 1974, I have been engaged at their request in continuing consultation and exchange of views with various interests in higher education with a view to elucidation of the decisions and their implementations.

The governing bodies of the National Institute of Higher Education, Limerick and Dublin, have been established in accordance with the Government's decisions and held their first meeting on 19th June last. On that occasion I met both governing bodies together and in the course of my address outlined the role, in the Government's view, of the NIHEs in the sphere of higher education.

In the meantime the governing bodies have been engaged in the work entrusted to them. They have each nominated ten members to serve on the reconstituted National Council for Educational Awards, and I am now recommending persons for nomination by the Government to complete the membership of the council.

I would also like to inform the House of progress in the implementation of the Government's decision in relation to the National College of Physical Education, Limerick, and the College of Education for Teachers of Specialist Subjects, which is planned for the same campus. The Government decided that these two colleges should have a joint governing body of 25 members. I am happy to say that invitations have been issued to serve on this governing body and also that the institution—which will embrace the National College of Physical Education and the college of Education for Teachers of Specialist Subjects—and for which the governing body will have responsibility will be known as The Thomond College of Education.

The National College of Physical Education has already been successfully established. When the College of Education for Teachers of Specialist Subjects is in operation we will be catering on one campus for our teaching needs in the areas of physical education, woodwork, metalwork, rural and general science and building construction. In addition to providing initial teacher training in those areas, the Thomond college will be a major centre for in-service training for teachers of general subjects and for teachers in remedial and adult education.

In conclusion, I desire to state that satisfactory arrangements have been completed between the university authorities and the Colleges of Education for Primary Teachers for the award of a university degree on the successful completion of the new three-year course of study in these colleges.

Mr. Wilson

My first reaction to the Minister's speech is one of great disappointment. It is an arid document with nothing new to it. One might say that it is even a defeatist document. Whoever they are in Government they seem to have defeated the Minister for Education. Last night I read his latest Estimate speech and I noticed that it was full of promise, full of planning and full of projection but there is nothing in his speech this morning introducing these Supplementary Estimates. This was the Minister's first major speech —if it was major—for more than two years and I expected to hear from him some proposals for dealing with the serious stagnation in educational matters that has gripped the country over the last two years.

I propose to go through the Supplementary Estimates first to seek the meat which has been left out of the document and, relative to the Supplementary Estimates, to make some positive suggestions. I should like to reiterate what a colleague of mine said this morning, that there seems to be a serious defect in the system of preparing Estimates. We hear a lot nowadays about programme budgeting but if this is what it means and any householder in following that—I am not the best at managing my financial affairs myself—was so far out in his estimate of what he could spend in a year, he would be in serious trouble. It is apparent from what the Minister said that a great deal of this money is for salaries. Surely, it would not take a financial or economic expert to forecast that there would be, in the context of continuing national wage agreements, demands for increases in salaries. When the Book of Estimates was being prepared this could have been provided for so that the Book of Estimates would not become a charade, a joke.

It is not really a Book of Estimates in any accurate sense. The Supplementary Estimates provide for more than £3 million for the office of the Minister, more than £8 million for primary education, more than £8 million for secondary education, almost £3 million for vocational education and more than £3 million for higher education. In order that Deputies can make any kind of meaningful comment on an Estimate the Minister, and his Department, should be more realistic. I find very interesting the reference to the little bit of financial juggling that went on with regard to the school bus service. Apparently, the Department of Education gives the money to CIE who in turn gives it back to the Department of Finance. From replies to letters asking for an extension of the school bus service one would have thought that the Minister had no money to play around with. I am not suggesting that this money has gone around its wheel of fortune but it could be applied to liberalising the whole school transport system.

I note that the Minister has to provide extra money for Post Office services and that the Estimate applies to the end of this year. I hope that when the Estimate is being prepared for 1976 the Department officials will take into consideration the increased postal charges which will operate from 1st January next so that we will not be coming back in December, 1976, with a tale of woe about increased postal charges which will be severe and are due to the individual action of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs.

With regard to the subhead A.4— Bord An Choláiste Náisiúnta Ealaíne is Deartha—an additional £13,000 is required but I should like to know if the £57,000 mentioned in the original Estimate as a capital service was spent. Is this £13,000 for current expenditure or is it also a capital cost?

Under subhead A.5—Expenses of National Council for Educational Awards—I should like to state that the council are in some kind of limbo at the moment. They were set up as an ad hoc body but this “ad hockery” has gone on for a long time. They were abolished on 16th December last and resuscitated and two groups of ten have been nominated by the institutes for membership. However, we are awaiting the Minister's ten and in the meantime there is no chairman —there is an acting chairman—and the council are working away and have been called on by the Minister to give the educational accolade to the graduates of the National Council of Physical Education. I said at Question Time recently that the council are being used in an unworthy manner by being left in never-never land. The council are giving very good service to the Department and the State and at least the Minister should take account of the feelings of people who give that kind of service.

The ad hoc element seems to me to be the insulting part of it—that after three or four years of hard work there has been no finality. There has been a certain crossing of personnel. There are people in the two groups of ten who have been on outgoing groups and I expect the same will happen in respect of the ten the Minister will be choosing. I will come back to this later. I think the National Council for Educational Awards deserves better from the Minister and the Department.

In regard to scientific research grants to students, there has been an increase of £6,500. I seem to recall that there was some trouble about the allocation of these grants. If my memory serves me right, there was a question of only first class honours graduates being awarded grants. I should like to know if this allocation of £6,500 is connected with that.

I see in subhead G.2 that the Royal Irish Academy are to get an additional sum of £10. There is something very difficult to understand about this. Further down, the grant-in-aid of the general expenses and so forth is £23,000, less savings on the printing of the Dictionary of Old Irish, £20,000 and in the national biological programme, £2,990, a total of £22,990, which leaves £10 out of the total sum of £23,000. I understand the Dictionary of Old Irish has been finished and I hope the Minister will see to it that the £20,000 will be extracted from the Minister for Finance and allocated to the academy in due form. I realise there might be difficulty when the Secretary of the Department will face the formidable Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts if the money is not spent on what it has been assigned to, but it would be a great pity if through some kind of accountancy jiggery-pokery the academy would lose the money. I appeal to the Minister to see to it that they will not.

The projected publication of a national atlas was mentioned as was the setting up of field study centres. I believe there is an overdraft of nearly £100,000 in the academy at the moment. Everybody realises the work the academy do is of great importance in the cultural life of the country and there is always a danger that that type of institution will lose out. I do not want to go on about it in case it might seem unbalanced but I was thinking on something on the lines of Parkinson's Law: the more cultural the content the easier and sharper the axe seems to be wielded, when axes are being wielded. That is what we have to look out for when considering Estimates.

One thing I should like to find out is what these savings on other subheads, amounting to £389,210 are about. I should like from the Minister a breakdown of those savings. It would be very revealing and I should be obliged if the Minister were able to show me how, with all the clamour there is for money for education, that £390,000 specifically comes to be saved.

On the question of university grants, I had a letter from the Minister on the matter of higher education grants stating he would communicate with me further. I do not see any provision for increased grants in this Supplementary Estimate. Perhaps the Minister has the information which he promised in a letter to me as to what his intention is in this matter.

Subhead G.1—Publications in Irish —was the subject of an Adjournment debate and the Minister made statements with regard to certain publications in Irish. I would hope he would be able to transmute sympathy into money.

I do not see in the Estimate—and I am dealing with Vote 28, Office of the Minister for Education—any provision for increased payments covering 1975 up to 31st December for audio-visual aids for schools. Again, at Question Time, we were told that, with the sanction of the Department, many schools purchased audio-visual aid equipment but that the money allocated had been exhausted. I think—and I hope that the word is not too severe— that this is dishonest budgeting, to allocate at D.4 £120,000 to sanction purchases for schools and then to leave the schools are an dtrá folamh. The Minister had an opportunity with this Supplementary Estimate to add to the £120,000 an amount of money which would cover sanctioned expenditure and, when I say "sanctioned", I mean sanctioned in general by the Department. I criticise the Minister for not having done that.

The annual general meeting of the National Library Society of Ireland took place during the week. There was a kind of academic resolution congratulating the Parliamentary Secretary on his efforts to provide adequate accommodation in paragraph (1) but paragraph (2) was substantially an appeal to the Minister and to the Parliamentary Secretary to make sure that the perennial problem of accommodation for the National Library be dealt with.

In the Estimate for Vote 29 this lack of realism with regard to the national wage agreement and the increase in salaries is evident. I understand that, under a previous Administration some leeway was left in the Estimates because, realistically, people knew these demands were forthcoming. I know there is a bargaining problem in this but people should not be thrown to the extent that they were by this Book of Estimates.

In the primary section I see that for nine months of 1974 £77,000 was allocated for special courses. For the whole 12 months of this year the Minister could only see his way to providing £12,500. There is no relief here either in the Supplementary Estimate on that score. This is a very serious problem. Both in this House and in the Seanad people have called the Minister's attention to the importance of these special courses—and I understand some of this money was for courses for remedial teachers— whether for remedial, subject courses or what have you. Teachers cannot be expected to live on their capital. Again the Minister missed a golden opportunity to increase those amounts.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I see under subhead F of Vote 30, Courses for Secondary Teachers, that an additional sum of £10,000 is required bringing the revised Estimate up to £20,000. On the analogy of the reference back in Vote 29 I want to point out that the £10,000 dropped from £90,000 for nine months the year before and that this only adds £10,000 to the original Estimate. The Minister lost an opportunity here. The sum of money is very very big so he had the opportunity of at least bringing it back to what it was for the nine months of 1974.

Under subhead J.1, the Comprehensive and Community Schools Running Costs, the complaint must again be made that there was a total lack of realism in assessing the costing. I cannot understand how the costing could be so far out. Even if new schools came into the scheme, intelligent anticipation should have made allowance for this amount. I intended to say something about education on television but subhead H is not included in the Supplementary Estimate so I cannot refer to that.

In relation to subhead K, I want to compliment the Minister for providing an additional sum towards the cost of school books. This is a very necessary scheme. I have not sufficient knowledge of how comprehensive it is. My policy is that where the need is great the books should be provided and where it is not we should encourage people to purchase books. From my own experience of teaching I find that very often the people who can best afford to buy books are the people who show the greatest reluctance when encouraged by teachers to do so. Very often the person of moderate means is prepared to make a greater sacrifice than the person who is in reasonably affluent circumstances.

There is a saving on other subheads of £25,900. On what was this saving made? There is also reference to savings on secondary schools building grants of £718,000. I would like some further information on that.

Under Vote 31, Vocational Education, the greatest disappointment to me in the original Estimate and this Supplementary Estimate is that there is no effective action, financially, on the Murphy Report. Under subhead B, the Minister referred to the Thomond College of Education in Limerick. I see there is an additional sum required under this subhead of £44,000. Will this refer to the training of teachers in the Thomond college exclusively? They are being trained elsewhere at the moment. I would like to know a little more about the actual college and at what stage of planning or execution this is. A sum of £144,000 seems very small in this regard. It will take a good deal of money to cope with this.

We need more of what are now being called specialised teachers. In many parts of the country there is a crying need particularly for metal work teachers and electronics teachers. I wish the Minister well in his efforts to train as many as possible. On subhead I (3)—Regional and other Technical Colleges and Specialist Teacher Training Colleges: Capital Costs—there is a saving, according to the Supplementary Estimate, of £774,700. This is a substantial percentage of the Estimate of £2,434,000. I would like to know exactly what that refers to. Is there some allocation in the original for the Thomond college in that?

We come now to Higher Education. Under A (2)—an tÚdarás um Árd Oideachas—Grants to Universities and Colleges and Designated Institutions of Higher Education—during 1975 we were continually told by the university colleges that their current accounts were in a parlous position. I would like the Minister to tell me whether they have cleared them. There is a reference in his speech to this and it seems to me that there is an implication that they are still carrying some dogs' legs of old debts. This is not a healthy situation for the university colleges to be in.

Without being at liberty to debate the whole Estimate, I do not think I could sort out a certain amount of to-ing and fro-ing of finance in respect of the National Institute of Higher Education. I understand that from the original Estimate £50,000 was taken to finance the NIHE in Dublin. I have a note here that from B (1), which is not in the Supplementary Estimate, £250,000. I would like the Minister to comment on that. It says here there is a saving under subhead B (1) of £200,000 and this, together with the £50,000 that was taken already, seems to me to have deprived Limerick of £250,000.

Nuair a bhí an tAire ag caint linn cheann féin ar an Meastachán dúirt sé go raibh suim fé leith aige i bpáistí atá ciothramach agus éislinneach. Níl aon tagairt sa bhFó-Mheastachán do scrúdú agus do theistiméireacht speisialta do na páistí sin. Iarradh ar an Aire scrúdú speisialta agus teistiméireacht speisialta a chur ar fáil dóibh ach níl aon trácht sa bhFó-Mheastachán seo air sin. Dúirt sé linn go raibh suim fé leith aige fosta sa phaíste díphribhléideach. Níl sé ag tabhairt níos mó airgid dúinn chun an chabhair sin a chur ar fáil.

Dúirt mé cheana féin go ndeanfainn athagairt do chúrsaí oideachais le haghaidh an duine fásta. Dúirt an tAire linn go mbeadh scéim aige, ag dul le tuarascáil Murphy, i dtaobh oideachas don duine fásta. Fágadh ar lár an méid sin fosta as an bhFó-Mheastachán seo.

In éineacht leis sin dúirt sé go nglacadh sé fíor—chomhairle leis na dreamanna go léir atá páirteach san oideachas. Ní dóigh liom gur sheas sé lena fhocal sa méid sin ach an oiread. Dúirt sé mar phrionsabal ginearálta go raibh sé de dhualgas orainn sa tír seo níos mó dár gcuid rachmais a chaitheamh ar oideachas mar go bhfuil ár maoin shaolta níos teirce ná mar atá sé ag tíortha na hEurópa. Sin rud nár dhein sé go fóill, ar aon chaoi, agus is dóigh liom go bhfuil sé ró-lag sa Rialtas chun é sin a dhéanamh. Ba chóir dó an fód a sheasamh i gcoinne na ndaoine atá chomh sprúnlaithe sin nach bhfuil siad ag tabhairt an airgid dó.

I said I would come back to the National Council for Educational Awards. I would like the Minister to finalise this particular problem. He should set up a National Council for Educational Awards statutorily and appoint his own ten in addition to the 20 that already have been selected and are ready to take over.

Rud a chuireann íonadh ormsa ná gur theip ar an Aire, mar adúirt sé i dTrá na gCeist le déanaí, cúigear agus fiche a thoghadh don Ghúm. Níl ach cúigear tofa aige cheana féin. Dúirt sé liom go raibh postanna fógraithe aige le déanaí. Tá súil agam go mbeidh sé ábalta an 25 úd d'fháil. Mar chruthaige mé fein tá easpa téacs leabhar Ghaeilge ag brú ar mhic-léinn agus ar mhúinteoirí le fada. Bhí focla dócais ag an Aire dúinn nuair a thosnaigh sé aréir ach ní mór an dul ar aghaidh atá déanta againn go fóill sa mhéid sin.

There is an element in the Supplementary Estimate covering primary school management and there are a few questions that I should like the Minister to answer. Is it a fact that the Minister and his Department are refusing teachers the right to sit on the board of management with a vote? I understand that a certain agreement was reached between the outgoing individual managers and the INTO on this matter. Has the Minister any objection to the terms of this agreement being adhered to? Does he object to teachers sitting on the board of management with a vote? I have a question down to the Minister which may not have reached him yet about certain classes of schools. Is it true that there are some schools which will not, even if they have a board of management, command the £6 grant from the Minister? I did not think there was any such category but I have had some correspondence from people who think that even if there is a board of management a certain type of school will not get the £6 per pupil. If this is not so, I should like the Minister to put peoples' minds at rest on the matter.

Judging by the money being provided in the primary Supplementary Estimate I cannot see any possibility of improvement in the pupil-teacher ratio, a cause to which the Minister dedicated himself when he became Minister. There was an improvement in the pupil-teacher ratio and, with all modesty, I think the former Minister, Deputy Faulkner, can claim credit for it, having provided an increased number of places in the training colleges. The Minister will have to attack this problem from both the teacher training and the building angles. He will have the support of this side of the House if he tackles it vigorously as I think he is in duty bound to do.

I do not see much hope for increased research which is very necessary at all levels in education. In particular, the Minister said that he would pay great heed to the results of the Van Leer study on children from disadvantaged areas. I understand that there is a certain disappointment with the results immediately after the primary period, that research elsewhere, and in Britain particularly, has shown that the special treatment does not survive; in other words, the superiority shown by those in the group under experiment as compared with the controlled group does not stand the shock of removal further up the educational ladder. The Minister would be well advised to provide funds for experimentation in this regard.

As regards additional money for the training of teachers, I hope that the Minister is taking account of his blank year. I have already appealed to him to make a statement now on this matter. Will he be taking in, or has he taken in many more graduates to fill the blank year? Will he allow fit primary teachers over 65 years of age to teach? Those he barred this year, will he allow them back? Also, what is the position of teachers who were trained in Britain and were granted recognition here provided they passed certain tests? Will he allow these back into the service to try to cope with the blank year and also to try to improve the teacherpupil ratio? Now is the time to make these announcements because human beings must look ahead and various people must make decisions. The Minister would be clearing the air for all concerned and particularly the three categories I mentioned if he made an announcement now.

I thought there might be something in this Supplementary Estimate about An Foras Oiliúna. That seems to be in some kind of limbo where a good many educational initiatives seem to end up. In the case of students who are going in increasing numbers to regional technical colleges for whom provision is made by way of scholarship, I suggest that the Minister might—I would leave it to him and his Department to decide the standard—extend the grant system to them, not necessarily the same grant system as for university students.

The Government to which the Minister belongs, and particularly the few vocal Ministers who came in to support the proposals of 16th December last in regard to third level education, claimed that it was very important that the technical and technological section of our educational system should be up-graded. That in itself is a sort of implication that it is now on a lower grade than other levels. I do not agree with that; I have my own view on it. If the Minister extended the grant system to the regional technical colleges, he would be helping in a field which is very important as the Minister himself admitted in his last major speech on education.

The community schools and comprehensive schools have attracted some extra money in the Supplementary Estimate. When taking his last Estimate over two years ago the Minister said he was very concerned that the community in the environment of the community school should be involved not merely in the management of the school but in the utilisation of its facilities.

I am afraid the Minister has fallen down on his objective in this regard. There has been serious criticism from the principals and vice-principals of community and comprehensive schools quite recently and I myself am not satisfied that the involvement of the community in the use of the facilities of the school is what it should be.

The provision for year-long courses for guidance teachers has been suspended. The Minister, who is now, I am sure, trying to make an impression for the Estimates for 1976, should not in any way yield on this matter of guidance teachers and remedial teachers because according to his stated philosophy he himself attaches great importance to them. The outside quota facilities, I gather, are no longer available for guidance teachers. The year-long in-service training courses have also been cancelled.

The Minister is also on record as being concerned about adult education. He is not moved in this matter at all. There are a few pilot schemes but the great bulk of decisions with regard to the implementation of the Murphy Report still remains untouched.

The Minister mentioned the National College of Physical Education which obviously will be brought into the new complex in Limerick. The position in which the college found itself with regard to the conferring of the degrees this year should be a warning to the Minister that he should move and move quickly with regard to the National Council for Educational Awards. The proposals which became decisions somehow—the metamorphosis took place between December and March—are in my opinion wrongheaded and incapable to a certain extent of being implemented. I do not know whether it is true that the Minister or the College of Physical Education itself tried to get one of the university colleges to confer the degree which was conferred by the NCEA this summer. It is thought generally that a try was made and that it was a failure. We have the serious situation coming up in the summer of 1976 that the exact same position will apply, if the Minister does not move in the meantime, to the graduates of the National Institute of Higher Education in Limerick.

I understand that the graduates of the National College of Physical Education have pursued a course in Irish studies. The Minister earlier mentioned that a course in Irish studies would be operative before long. I should like to hear the Minister's comments on that.

At column 406 of the Official Report for 23rd October, 1973 the Minister promised a White Paper. At present he does not approve of the use of the term "White Paper". I want to read this for the Minister because he is at the moment, apparently, pushing a study. He refused to tell me in the House under what heads the study was being made. In his speech on the higher education problem the Minister said:

A pre-legislative document is what he referred to the week before last. However, it is the substance rather than the form that I am interesed in. I continue the quotation of what the Minister said on 23rd October, 1973:

I hope to see the proposals published in a White Paper which will be the prelude to the introduction of the necessary legislation to give effect to the proposals.

In other words, the White Paper is a pre-legislative document. The Minister said on that occasion at column 406:

It is, of course, difficult to set a time-table for these developments. I would like, therefore, to assure all those who are awaiting a decision that the publication of my proposals will not be delayed longer than is necessary to enable full consideration to be given to all aspects of what is a very complex question.

The Minister, in the same column, said:

Nevertheless, it is my fervent hope that when next I have an opportunity of reporting to the House on the Votes with which my Department are concerned, I will be in a position to record substantial progress and developments in relation to higher education along the lines I have indicated.

The 16th December last did not represent progress. The Minister made no report today. He simply reported that he was providing sums of money to keep the current accounts of the universities and university colleges out of the red or to expel the little letters "o" and "e". I find it very hard to understand why the Minister did not take this opportunity of reporting his present position with regard to the university question. He did promise but he did not deliver on his promise and that is why I started off by saying the Minister's speech was an arid document, a dispirited document, a defeatist document. Indeed, the whole business gets curiouser and curiouser. The proposals on 16th December sprung like Athena from the head of Zeus but, unlike Athena, the Minister did not stimulate any intellectual or administrative activity since. All we have is this fanciful talk. What about regionalism? There was no mention of that, no mention of regionalisation plans which the Minister outlined some time ago. He talked about how good it would be to have a local administration set up which would have the feel of the community. I approve, but there has been no progress. All is barren. At column 407 of the same speech, the Minister said:

I have already emphasised on different occasions that it is the fundamental policy of the present Government, and my own also, that educational development should proceed on the basis of full discussion of all important issues and with the full co-operation and general agreement of the parties involved.

A Cheann Comhairle, how long have I?

Acting Chairman (Mr. M.E. Dockrell)

The Deputy has another 15 minutes. I would say to the Deputy that I do not think the matter he is raising really arises on this Supplementary Estimate. I do not think it is fair or relevant.

Mr. Wilson

With all due respect to the Chair, I submit it is because there is a subhead here dealing with schools, with the building, equipping and furnishing of national schools, and it is with that I am dealing specifically. At the Chair's request, I shall not pursue the matter.

Acting Chairman

It is a matter of opinion with the Deputy, but it would be both wiser and fairer not to continue on the matter.

Mr. Wilson

I just wanted to point out that no particular secular head——

Acting Chairman

It does not arise.

Mr. Wilson

——has a monopoly of concern for a particular Christian people. I just want to put that on the record. I shall make some positive proposals now. It is disappointing to find no facing up to the necessity for development in pre-school education. The percentage of pupils in school before the statutory age is very high. There is no compulsion on them at that age. The Labour Party document waffled somewhat about lowering the age. Most pupils are in school before they are statutorily compelled to go to school. We are now members of the EEC. We should take a look at what is happening on the Continent, not necessarily to follow exactly what is being done there but to find out what is being done and then pick our own way. The Department should encourage voluntary organisations involved in pre-school work and the State should assume some obligation for these schools where that is necessary. In Belgium and particularly in France the courses are somewhat over-structured. This I would reject. I would reject any kind of pressure through over-structuring. I would reject too much of an academic content too early. We should not, at the same time, dignify with the name of school some place in which there is no fixed educational objective. The Fianna Fáil committee on education has already published a document on pre-school education and in that document there is expert advice from one of the leading experts in this field.

The foremost objective in the primary school field should be the pupil-teacher ratio. The tendency, particularly in an underprivileged area, of having a large class is deadly, it is deleterious to the pupil throughout his life. The figures given show an improvement since the sixties but in my view it is a No. 1 serious problem which would entitle the Minister to go to the Cabinet in search of finance to overcome it. The problem can be met in two ways, by providing the teachers and by providing extra classroom space on an emergency basis. I am aware that teachers' organisations have a great reluctance to allow their members to teach in prefabricated classrooms. They are correct in this because what is said to be temporary will become permanent. To break this problem I believe the teachers should give in on that. We should have a qualified teacher and a classroom to help to break down the large classes. Where pupils want as much individual attention as possible this should be a priority. A false picture is given on occasions by averages but averages are no a great help in this regard.

The schools with the large classes must be pinpointed and the problems in them tackled. There will be a difficulty at times in providing space for the classrooms and this is hard to overcome. Perhaps we could do what the New Yorkers did, build upwards, but we do not want to do too much of that either. The period of transfer between primary and secondary schools should be the subject of research. On the last occasion when I was talking in public to my party about education I emphasised that. I also referred to a contribution made at an INTO conference by a delegate from Kilkenny who pointed out that the new curriculum takes a child to a certain point and then he is thrown into a different environment, a differently structured system. There is a danger of misunderstanding between the practitioners on both sides; one firing volleys off at the other for lack of the basic three Rs and for lack of understanding the philosophy behind the new curriculum.

Remedial teaching is very important at all levels but at primary level in disadvantaged areas it is essential. We know that the results of the research in Rutland Street showed that it is advantageous—it is expensive and I am not saying that we can generalise from that—and that it is important to treat people remedially. It is important that we get into the homes and do it also; we should bring the parents in on this. It is sad to think that the general conclusion is that this advantage does not carry on further than the actual experimental period.

I am sorry about the débâcle on audio-visual aids in the primary schools and I am sorry that the Minister did not take the opportunity of remedying the deficiency there. There are unfortunate people with the technology on their tables but without money to pay for it. There is an element of retrospection in one of the matters referred to by the Minister and he should see that his 1976 gaberlunzie carries money to cover those expenses.

I feel very strongly about the fact that we have not even started in the field of examination science, in the field of assessment. In the secondary system a team of inspectors were always up to their chins in all kinds of administrative work, visiting schools and moving around the country and they were also expected to deal with the setting of examination papers and the marking of them. The system is a primitive one and I regret that the Minister did not mention the examinations' board that was envisaged. In my view there should be a full time examination section with teacher representation to study this business of examinations and assessment.

The Minister should not forget his dedication to the provision of guidance and remedial teachers. He should remember that no matter what kind of pressure is brought to bear on him from the Department of Finance. In this morning's newspapers the injustice of the pay-related benefit clawback from the awards to the secondary schools was dealt with. If, on a technicality, the employer, the school concerned, must be charged the pay-related benefit, then the amount of the pay-related benefit should be added in the first place to the grants provided by the Minister.

I hope the Minister will not be unmindful of community participation in the facilities of community schools, nor merely in the facilities but in the development of adult and community education. Such a school will also be used, inadvertently even, as an instrument of development of community consciousness. With regard to the regional technical colleges and the national institutes for higher education, there is only one way the Minister can effectively deal with them and that is to jettison part of his proposals of 16th December, to put the NCA in charge of assessment and awarding of degrees, as well as diplomas and certificates. I am not asking for a dichotomy between the third level non-university and the university. In a paper in the autumn Studies, Dr. Hession made some good points but if they were carried to their logical conclusion they would mean the elimination of the technological sector leaving the university to deal with the whole situation. An important field for study and research is the relationship between the technological colleges and the universities in the third level. The kind of crude shorthand solution attempted by the proposals on 16th December, in my opinion, is totally wrong. He points out that in Germany the conceptual part of technological training was omitted originally and purely technological training was given, but when retraining was given the people without this conceptual background found it difficult to acquire new skills.

That is what I would expect to happen. It is not necessary that only the universities can concentrate on this idea of the conceptual: it can be given in the technological colleges as well. I am asking the Minister to allow the technological colleges to do their own thing. If he provides the money to pay the staff for it at the university level and also the accommodation and the equipment the university people have, the staffs of the technological college will not be the poor relations in the third level field.

I am asking the Minister to allow UCC and UCG to become independent universities in their own right. I am asking him to increase grants for students in accordance with the percentage increase of inflation that has taken place. I am asking him to present a stronger presence in the Government. At the moment he is adopting the attitude of "Hit me now with the child of economic recession in my arms." He should beard the Minister for Finance for his own particular domain. He should come out with some meaningful programme in accordance with the Murphy Report. He should not allow the Irish Academy to sink beyond trace in a large overdraft.

I commend AnCO for their new apprenticeship course and for making allowances for apprentices who have already got the leaving certificate. That has been my philosophy all the time. On the European front, I should like the Minister to push for some kind of——

Mr. Richard Burke

I will be in Brussels next week on that.

Mr. Wilson

We have shared an interest in that for a long time back. It is more than disappointing from the educational point of view the impact Europe has had here. I am disappointed with the Estimates. They should have filled up the gaps that have been pointed out in this House in the last 12 months. They have done no such thing. The biggest tragedy of all would be if they gave an indication to the public that some of the ills had been remedied when they have been left untouched by this Supplementary Estimate. All we have got is a patching up of a very poor Estimate in the original Book of Estimates.

Mr. McDonald

I should like to support the Minister on this Supplementary Estimate and to compliment him and the Department and the people who provide education throughout the Republic. When we think of education we automatically think of the teachers in the various grades. In rural Ireland especially they are the most highly respected profession. In recognition of the fact that they do tremendous voluntary work on behalf of the communities in which they live as well as the great work they do in the schools. Their leadership has always been looked to.

It is a tribute to the Minister, who comes from this profession, that such considerable progress has been made by the Department since he assumed office. He has given to the Department the leadership they require in this difficult period to develop education significantly on all fronts. This has called for considerable extra expenditure. When we hear Opposition spokesmen on this Estimate, are we to take it they are against paying increased salaries to the various grades of teachers in the present financial year? They cannot have it both ways.

The Minister has committed himself to providing a university degree for national teachers. Attempts have been made to credit this achievement to all and sundry, but those who follow closely educational debates and various conferences will willingly apportion the credit where it rightly belongs. The INTO for more than a century have been looking for this kind of qualification and I am glad they are getting it. It is a credit to the Minister that for the first time since national schools were established more than 150 years ago he has introduced these boards of management which give parents a say in school management. This furthers the concept of parent intervention in education. In doing this I feel sure the Minister was not in any way casting a reflection on the management system we had known heretofore. Rather has he given to the parents a new involvement and this is welcomed by all.

I should like to pay a word of tribute to the school managers of both Catholic and Church of Ireland schools for the tremendous amount of unpaid, unselfish work they have contributed to the education of successive generations of people. Especially in recent years there has been a tremendous amount of adverse criticism of school managers, I suppose because of the difficulties they had to face in financing school extensions. They have done a magnificent job and I wish to place on record the community's great indebtedness to them. I hope that the creation of the new boards will ease the burden on both clerical and lay managers and, at the same time, give parents a greater say and interest in the education of their children.

As we are now in the last quarter of the 20th century there is no other facet more important than education. I am happy in the knowledge that my colleague, the Minister, has a great and deep appreciation of the magnitude of the task with which he has been entrusted on behalf of the Government. I was happy to note also that last year the Minister advocated the same type of management boards or committees in respect of vocational schools. After some initial hesitation on the part of many of the committees, I was glad to note recently that the chairman of the IVEA, a constituent of mine, Mr. Jack McCann, said that the boards of management in vocational schools would be in operation in the very near future. Reading the Minister's speech at the ASTI conference in Galway I noted that much the same kind of structures had been proposed in secondary schools. This should be of tremendous benefit to education generally. Certainly it will spread the load and ought to increase the interest of more and more people in education.

I should like now to refer to an aspect of educational affairs which, in my opinion, does not receive sufficient attention. I would call on the Minister to resist the pressures to change for the sake of change, to continue to conserve our heritage and ensure that all our educational structures are moulded within the Christian principles. In saying that, of course, I also expect the Minister and his Department to provide for the nonChristians, such as the Jewish community schools, as successive Ministers have done, guaranteeing equality and justice to all. Christian ethics I think, are being ignored in many cases. Many of the old traditions are being attacked or bent on all sides. Actually, it has become quite fashionable to be seen as a liberal.

I spent one-and-a-half years as Vice-President of the European Commission for Cultural Affairs and Youth when I had an opportunity of seeing different systems in operation not only in EEC countries but in many of the African states as well and of assessing the value of our system. The one thing we can say about the Minister for Education is that we know exactly where we stand with him, despite the fact that he is very often under attack for his principles and the serious way in which he tackles his task. His philosophy is consonant with his ability as Minister in charge of the operations of the Department of Education. That can hardly be said for Fianna Fáil when the increased capital grants for secondary schools were being discussed in this House on 16th April last. The Minister placed on record the statement of Deputy Jack Lynch in which he spoke about restoring the responsibilities for control of secondary schools to the pluralist community. With the permission of the Chair I should like to quote from column 1842 of the Official Report of 16th April last.

Mr. Tunney

On a point of order, might I ask the Chair to indicate the relevance of this to the Supplementary Estimate being discussed.

Acting Chairman

I am not entirely sure of the relevance but the Deputy is following on a line the previous speaker, Deputy Wilson followed. Therefore, the Chair thinks the Deputy could continue on it, perhaps briefly.

Mr. Tunney

I would not presume to take issue with the Chair. But I was here earlier when the Leas-Cheann Comhairle was present. He was very specific and precise that he would only tolerate reference to that which appeared under the various subheads. I just want to know whether there has been a departure from that in deciding the matters to which I might refer later on.

Acting Chairman

It is somewhat difficult to adjudicate too finely on it. Perhaps the Deputy would confine himself more closely to the subheads.

Mr. McDonald

I shall bow to the Chair's ruling. But perhaps I may give the quotation I was about to give because it is an important facet of the entire——

Mr. Tunney

As long as the Deputy can indicate, through the Chair, the subhead to which it is relevant, I am quite happy.

Mr. McDonald

In this House on 16th April last the Minister for Education quoted from The Irish Times of 11th April last, in which Deputy Jack Lynch, the Leader of the Opposition was quoted as saying:

We are now witnessing the restoration of the responsibility for education and its control to the pluralist community. The people and their representatives are being asked to take direct responsibility.

Further on the same quotation read:

In the development of a new partnership in education between the Churches and the State, we must preserve the best traditions of the existing system while we promote the new and more exciting systems of inter-denominational education, ...

If I were to quote the Minister at column 1843 of the Official Report of the same debate he asked:

Could I, perhaps, get some enlightenment from Deputy Faulkner, who spoke in such glowing terms of the Christain Brothers' school in Dundalk, terms in which I wholeheartedly concur, as to whether he can identify the "pluralist community" to which the Brothers are to "restore",—"restore" mark you— the responsibility and control of that school?

I am quite content to take a fleeting glance at the expenditure the Minister proposes to invest in my constituency. I should like to compliment the Minister on providing the finance and having the plans prepared for the extension to the Convent of Mercy secondary school in Tullamore which was erected this year. A further extension is planned to provide overall accommodation for 600 pupils. An important improvement scheme was recently carried out to the Portlaoise Presentation Convent secondary school. Planning has been initiated for the provision of new accommodation at Edenderry to provide 500 secondary school places and 400 vocational school places. This will be a major scheme.

It is also proposed to extend the Rathdowney vocational school and the Brigidine Convent in Mountrath. Planning for these works has already commenced. Surely this indicates great progress. Great credit is due to the Minister to the Department, to the Office of Public Works, to the community, to the two vocational education committees, to the managers and the clergy and religious orders involved, and all who played an important part in ensuring that progress in the provision of educational facilities continues in the constituency.

Now that we are very much a part of the European scene, now that our leaders are highly respected partners in the European Community, we should endeavour to become more outward-looking. We should try to direct the eyes of our young people eastwards towards the mainland of Europe a little more. This is very important having regard to the fact that this week a decision to hold direct elections to the European Parliament has been more or less confirmed for May, 1978. During the period I had the honour of being Vice-President of the Cultural Affairs Commission, we visited very many art galleries and libraries and saw the services provided by our community partners.

It should be possible for the Minister to encourage county libraries to provide for their school services a selection of slides of well-known works of art which could be sent around to the various schools and thus introduce our students to the great works of art of the pre-Renaissance and the Renaissance period, and modern art. This should be extended to discs with a selection of music both classical and modern. If countries like Denmark and Holland, who are comparable in land mass with us, if nothing else, can provide these services for their children, we should seriously contemplate extending our services to embrace those types of services. County councils should be encouraged to provide accommodation which would enable the National Gallery to lend pictures to them.

A greater effort should be made to encourage the study of languages in our schools. Financial support for school groups who go to Europe on educational trips should be increased to encourage a greater number of our young people to go to mainland Europe. The European Parliament extend grant aid to groups who visit the Parliament during plenary sessions. In relation to this I should like to refer to an article in the Irish Independent of last Saturday written by Bruce Arnold, one of our leading columnists. He was discussing the health question and stated:

Let us ask: Could it be the politics of the thing? Could it be that the Minister for Health, acting on behalf of the Coalition, as a whole since he has no Labour Deputies in that particular area, is giving a "smaller" general hospital to Portlaoise in order to help the local Fine Gael Deputy, Charles McDonald, who lives in Portlaoise and relies on that town for a major part of his support, and is often absent at the European Parliament?

This man is suggesting that when one attends the European Parliament one is absent, and, therefore, not as active on behalf of constituents, and there is a need to give one a lift. If we are to remain a part of Europe, we should devise our educational facilities in such a way as to give the people an appreciation of the new environment in which we live as a community and also prepare our children for competition in the greater Europe in the last quarter of this century.

The European Parliament extend grant aid to groups and also to journalists. I hope this will be taken up by my friend, Mr. Arnold, so that he can come and get a greater appreciation of what the thing is about and will not find himself talking about Deputies when they represent their constituents, whether it is in the national Parliament or the international forum that he would describe them as being absent.

Acting Chairman

The Chair finds the Deputy is going outside the scope of the Estimate but the Chair would say to Deputy McDonald that if he could relate it to subhead B.1, international organisations, he then might find himself completely within the ambit of this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. McDonald

I was just coming to that. I should like very much to avail of the opportunity of complimenting not only the Minister but also the Assistant Secretary of the Department who has represented our country in a very exemplary fashion, particularly in the provision of the European university in Florence. The Minister's representative there has won not only for himself but for the country great credit for the great work he has put into the educational establishment in Florence. Already some Irish personnel have taken up duty there in preparation for the opening of this university next October.

I would like to see the allocation for that heading increased because it is only when we have our people abroad playing an enlightened role in the international scene that we can derive full benefit from our participation in the European Community. The social and economic thought of the Fine Gael Party has been moulded by the social doctrine contained in the Papal encyclicals. Most people in public life will state their acceptance of the teaching contained in those encyclicals but two dangers exist. Firstly, such acceptance amounts to lip service and, secondly, these principles may be used as an excuse for inaction. I am confident that the present Minister will keep foremost in his mind that aspect of Fine Gael policy which we find enunciated back in 1965.

Acting Chairman

Fine Gael policy does not arise under this subhead, dear as it is to the Deputy's heart and not unknown, perhaps, to the Chair either.

Mr. McDonald

I am confident that the responsibility for education as we go into this important period, the last quarter of the 20th century, is in safe hands with the present Minister and I wish him continued success.

Mr. Kitt

I welcome this opportunity of making some brief comments on this Supplementary Estimate on education. The Minister mentioned the increase in capitation grants and the grants in lieu of tuition fees which he made last May. Before that there were many meetings of parents, teachers and public representatives who were very concerned about the situation. One teacher summarised it very well when he said that it would take a mighty cry from the people to get the Minister to act. Thanks be to God he acted although I would call it more a reaction, that in so far as we have a policy I am afraid it is a policy of reaction to events. We waited a long time for this action but we are glad it came.

I would like to deal with the subhead concerning school transport. Over £1 million has been allocated for operational costs under this scheme. I, like many other Deputies, have heard many complaints about the school transport system. I feel that all the new buses we had are getting rather old and we will have to look seriously at this matter. In rural areas I do not believe there is much point in having large buses on many of the narrow roads that serve our schools. Many of those large buses are literally taking corners on Hail Marys. I would prefer a system where we had smaller buses to serve these schools.

I notice there is an increase provided for school books. We should be very concerned about this area because we seem to have a system where the school books change every year. Perhaps a system of the schools renting the books to the pupils would help in this regard. A library service is needed here. We were very disappointed in County Galway that the grant for primary school libraries was discontinued last year. We hope we will be able to obtain a grant again next year. We welcome the new colourful books that have been brought out for children in all schools.

Deputy McDonald referred to the boards of management which have met informally. Would the Minister give an option to the smaller rural schools, those which have smaller numbers than their counterparts in the city, of continuing with the old system where they got grants on the area of the room? They will not benefit under the £6 grant from the Department when the local contribution of £150 is put up. The mentally handicapped schools will be particularly affected because they have a small pupil-teacher ratio. School transport is very desirable for mentally and physically handicapped children. Such children should be given priority.

Cuts have been made in education. Last year the grants for summer courses were cut and also the grants for audio-visual aids. Many teachers were refused those grants because, they were told, funds were exhausted. Above all, we need more money for building. Last July I tabled a question as to the number of pre-fabricated buildings used as classrooms in County Galway in the 1973-74 year and the number in the 1974-75 year. The figure for 1973-74 was 183 which increased to 201 for 1974-75. At the same time, the Minister pointed out that it was the policy of the Department to phase out prefabs and to replace them with permanent structures. It is very hypocritical to talk about education being child-centred in primary schools if we are not providing classrooms and if we are not consistent in our policy of phasing out prefabricated buildings.

Of course, education means more than just providing money. I believe teachers should be encouraged to teach dancing, music and so on. Surely Telefís Scoile could play a bigger role in providing suitable programmes. I believe the allocation to Telefís Scoile has been greatly reduced. "Sesame Street" which is produced by an American corporation, is a programme that has captured the imagination of young children. It caters very well for young children. RTE have not produced any programme like this. I would ask the Minister to consider this matter. On Saturday mornings particularly RTE should be showing programmes suitable for children.

The pupil/teacher ratio still seems to be a big problem in primary schools. There is also the fact that teachers who had reached retirement age were compulsorily retired and of the 238 untrained teachers only those over 30 and under 55 with the necessary experience were selected for the course. That has ensured that the pupil/teacher ratio will not be greatly reduced. I cannot understand why teachers under 30 have been discriminated against. Surely a teacher of 27 or 28 is as good as a teacher of over 30 provided he or she has the teaching experience. There is also a lack of remedial teachers to deal with problem children in all schools. I hope more attention will be given to the pre-school development because I believe it is very important and nowadays we have the facilities and the media to promote this development.

Mr. Tunney

One of my first reactions to this Supplementary Estimate was: "Where will the Minister get the money"? It is not our function here to worry unduly about this but I understand that moneys are rather scarce at present. The facility with which money can apparently be discovered often surprises me. If the promises made by the Government generally when taking office had been respected, especially in the matter of keeping down prices, there would not have been any need for the moneys being sought here because they arise in toto from the fact that prices have not been kept down.

I shall now endeavour to speak on the subheads and also, with your permission, make general reference to this thing called education. I think the time has come when we must ask: "What of education and why?" What do we need the money for and why? Have we not enough education in the country at present? This is something to which we should be applying ourselves. As I see it, in certain areas at least the country is overflowing with education. We have thousands of leaving certificate holders, hundreds of university graduates, all wondering, as I am now, about this thing which we call education. They are saying to themselves: "I was told what it was. I went and sought it. I found it. Now I have it but what does one do with it?" That is a fair comment on the position at present and it must be especially relevant to the fact that the people have already spent or committed themselves to an expenditure of £200 million and we are now looking for an additional £26 million.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair does not wish to interrupt but I am sure the Deputy is aware that on Supplementary Estimates we are confined to the subheads. The general question of education may be discussed on a token estimate which the Chair understands, the Minister has said he has no objection to introducing. Therefore, education as a whole may be discussed later.

Mr. Tunney

I did not propose to develop that but I think it should be accepted as being very pertinent to the subheads and all we have before us that we should stop and ask what is it required for? Is this the avenue through which we get money to subsidise the teaching profession, money for all the purposes indicated here? Even though the discussion on the philosophy of the matter must await another day I think it is at least to some extent relevant to what we are discussing here.

I propose to move on to primary education and the moneys sought here in respect of it. My first comment relates to subhead C.10, grants towards cost of painting of schools. There was no provision in the original Estimate and I should like to know why. Is it the policy that we do not make any annual provision for the painting of schools? I should imagine that there would be such an annual provision. The Department have within their ranks many educated people and one would have assumed that having regard to their resources it would have been possible to predict more accurately the amount of money required for their various operations. I relate that specific question to this subhead.

We talk of moneys in respect of salaries, buildings and painting, but surely it is possible to have a word regarding the children attending primary schools. There has been talk of a student/teacher ratio of 1:40 and 1:35. Certain averages have been given. In the schools in my constituency the ratio is much higher. I think the tragedy of education is that the unfortunate children, of whom 250,000 do not go beyond primary education, are not getting a fair deal from the total of £220 million being spent on education. A standard primary curriculum is being applied overall and no regard is had to the special position of certain areas or to the fact that, say, in the Tolka Valley area a new population is moving in with children coming from other schools, with disruption of domestic and family life. The Minister promised me that adequate facilities in the way of buildings would be available for them but we have a situation where already the school that allegedly would provide those facilities is filled and the Department are transporting children from that area to other areas around the perimeter of a city.

I link this comment with a reference to school transport. I had occasion some months ago to report to the Department that in respect of the children to whom I have referred I had seen a total of 187 primary school children being transported in one double-decker bus, the overflow from that new school. Having brought the position to the notice of the Department and of CIE the position was corrected but it had obtained for at least a week. How long more would it have obtained if it had not been brought to notice? Who is worrying, or is anybody worrying about these children, many of whom are still being transported out of that area?

We talk here about equal rights and facilities being available all round. I do not know if in the Minister's constituency the position is such that children attending primary schools have not what is regarded as the normal standard. I doubt it very much.

Reference is made here to moneys required for second and third level education. The first obligation on this House is to ensure that ample provision is made in respect of the branch of education that all our children must avail of and most of whom must depend on, primary education. There is much talk about boards of management and those with children attending primary schools know of the requirement from now on of the payment of a fee in respect of primary education, something unknown in this country and something contrary to the Constitution. Every week there is a collection in one form or another to defray the running expenses of the school. We might do well to dwell on the fact that there is no such requirement in the case of university students who do not have to make any special contribution. Their parents do not have to get together to organise the collection of money in respect of the management of the university. It might be said that these students are paying fees but their fees do not in any way pay for the service they are getting. At present there is a per capita subsidy of about £1,000 in respect of every university student. Why do we expect so much from taxation for that level of education—which I know is very necessary but which concerns what I would regard possibly as the educational elité? Why are we so generous with money at that level and at the same time so niggardly with money at the level of education affecting all our students?

Imagine a situation in a school in Finglas with children coming from homes where the educational start they have got leaves something to be desired, and 45 of those children being pushed into a room with a teacher. That is the position that obtains with those children until they reach the age of 14 or 15 when they are released with the hope that they will do the best thing they can for themselves.

We must from now on pay much more attention to the fact that more children than ever are dependent upon that first step and that it is that first step which conditions every other step along the road. I want to see a reversal of the generosity in the matter of moneys until such time as we are satisfied that the very best has been done for primary school students. That is not the position at the moment. I have referred on another occasion to many shortcomings in respect of the curriculum, many shortcomings in respect of other aspects. Repetition of my arguments in those respects will be postponed for another occasion.

I am happy that the Parliamentary Secretary is here. I do not want him to assume that that is the prelude to any form of attack. In the matter of school transport, I cannot understand why it is not possible to increase the subsidy to CIE in respect of students living in Dublin city and on the perimeter of the city who must travel elsewhere for education. Take the case of students who lived in Pimlico and who because of inadequate housing in the area have been transferred to Finglas, Ballyfermot or Tallaght. I speak with direct reference to school transport and education, forgetting for the moment the social aspects which affect children just as they do adults. It will be accepted that educationally it is desirable that such students should continue their education in the area in which they had been living. The student who is transferred to an outlying area finds that there is no school accommodation for him there and the authorities will transport him to a school in the vicinity where there are vacancies. That is the only consideration. It is a question, to put it bluntly, of where can you shove him in. That is not the correct attitude. The moneys given should be devoted to assisting that child to travel back to the centre where he had been attending school. There is an obligation on us to ensure that he will get that form of assistance. It may be suggested that it would be difficult to administer such a system. I do not think it would be. I do not think it is a matter beyond the competence of the Minister's advisers. Having regard to the amount of money being spent on school transport, a very good case can be made for assisting the type of student to whom I refer.

With regard to the question of school buses to which Deputy Kitt has referred, Deputies must have noticed on every road, at practically every hour of the day, school buses lying idle. Having regard to the capital investment in those buses, we should have inquired further and without much difficulty we would have discovered areas where those buses could be put to greater use. For instance, they could be used to transport children to centres of historical interest and, especially in the case of second level students, to industrial centres. They could be used for what might be described as geography classes and nature study.

It would be an interesting exercise to plot the number of hours during which school buses are used as against the number of hours during which they are idle. School buses involve large capital outlay. The full utilisation of the bus is the best return on that investment. In the case of an aeroplane the least return on the capital outlay is during the time when the plane is left idle. The same applies to a bus. With the provision of additional moneys there could be full utilisation of school buses.

There is an examination fee for second level examinations. Unfortunately, we will be living with examinations as they are for a long time. It will be always necessary to have a system with which to measure the achievements of one student as against another. It could be done in a more sympathetic fashion but this is not the opportunity to discuss alternative systems. An opportunity is provided on this occasion to refer to, say, the fees in respect of the group certificate, the intermediate and leaving certificate examinations. It may be suggested that the fee is not high, that it does not place an undue burden on parents. Again, I am searching for the attitude towards examinations and examination fees at that level as against the higher level. How does the examination fee at second level compare with the fees payable at third level? There is a fee of £2.50 for a boy or girl sitting for the leaving certificate examination. It is worthy of note that, having passed the examination with four or five honour grades, there is no guarantee in the matter of earning one's livelihood of sure employment. Compare that with the situation in the universities or in the other third level colleges. What fee is charged? Is any fee charged at all?

There is reference here to university scholarships. What I am about to say now will not be popular but I do not believe saying what is popular is part and parcel of education. I am not happy about the situation of children in our primary schools whose parents contribute to central taxation out of which money is paid to subsidise students in university. I see neither equity nor justice in that especially when I know that the student who emerges from university with a profession—let it be that of doctor, lawyer, dentist or what-have-you, I might make special reference here to the legal profession but I do not think it would be right to isolate one from the others—earned through his own industry admittedly but contributed to materially in large measure by the parents of what I describe as neglected children because I think it is true that the university graduate is subsidised to the tune of about £1,000. I know fees are paid but I know the fees are not sufficient to meet the cost of university education.

I do not think it fair that the parents of primary school children should be asked to continue subsidising university students when we do not get any admission from those who benefit from third level education that they owe anything to the rest of the community. There is an acceptance in the matter of service that they owe something and will give it but I do not think there is any acceptance or even any understanding of the price at which this education should be made available. I know a child of poor parents may attain to university but the percentage is very, very small. I believe that the system is such that such children merely fill a gap that cannot be filled by other sections. I am not saying the Minister holds identical views with me but I have sufficient faith in his judgment to assume he accepts there is, perhaps, something in what I say.

Have we reached the stage now at which we should be evolving a new scheme particularly in respect of those who are my first concern, the weaker section in our community, the intelligent, industrious boy or girl coming from a home where money is not available in any great measure whose higher education cannot be financed by parents? Could we not have a scheme under which a loan would be available to this type of student? We should not concentrate too much on whether he got seven or eight grades A, B, or C in his leaving certificate because it does not follow that that type of student is the best suited for university education. Let us see now if we cannot redress the balance and correct the undoubted injustice which exists at the moment, not by taking more money from those who already have to pay but rather by making money available to them. The successful graduate should be under obligation to return the compliment and pay back the money loaned.

On the subject of the universities, I have found myself in association with these people especially in the last few months. I do not want to give the impression now that I am in any way critical of these people. I am not. I take people as I find them. If they impress with their sincerity, their regard for their fellow citizens, their intelligence, logic and common sense, then I am quite ready to be impressed. That is the yardstick which I apply.

I do not accept that someone who has a chain of degrees is automatically superior to other friends I have in other areas. In the main I find these people sound products and good advertisements of what might be called third level education. In respect of others I am at a loss to see where the much paraded benefit of third level education is to be seen. I am sure that if invited to co-operate and examine the situation—it would appear that for far too long third level education has been cornered, and monopolised—we could anticipate the assistance and the co-operation of the universities.

It is indefensible for the Minister to underestimate to the extent of £1 million for comprehensive and community schools. The original Estimate was for £3 million and the additional sum now required is £1 million. I thought the additional sum was in connection with matters which were more or less identical with third level colleges and for that reason I wondered why the error of underestimation is not the same. It is more than extraordinary to be out £1 million on an original Estimate. In thinking of the 13.5 per cent failure by the officers of the Department to anticipate expenditure I recall that some years ago when I was an important—in my own estimation—clerical officer in the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries if I was responsible for the preparation of the Estimate which referred to the section in which I worked and was out to that extent my EO and my HEO would have been asking questions.

Reference has been made to increases in salaries which represent the biggest factor in the overall shortfall but surely the Department realised that negotiations were taking place and in some cases had been finalised and that inevitably that meant a fairly substantial increase. The Minister should indicate the provision made in that regard in the original Estimate.

Mr. Richard Burke

What subhead is the Deputy referring to?

Mr. Tunney

I am talking about the 13 per cent shortfall in the Estimate and the reference to salaries. I am being critical of the extent to which the Estimate failed to indicate the true financial position in respect of this year. Originally, the Minister looked for £198 million and now he is seeking an additional £26 million, a substantial increase. I am critical of the Minister's officials who did not realise, in respect of primary and secondary school education, they were dealing with, or had dealt with, applications in respect of salary increases which would have to be met and would require the moneys now sought. They should have been obvious last year. This is not an omission which is peculiar to the Department of Education; we have had it in respect of other Departments.

One wonders whether it was part of general policy that estimates at the beginning of the year, or last year's budget, did not necessarily have to paint a true picture. Occasionally, my wife complains if I do not compliment her on her cooking. I tell her that any time I do not like it I will tell her but my wife says that is not enough. That thought strikes me in respect of these estimates. I hope the Minister is not expecting that contributions from these benches will in any way be different from the traditional contributions. In Opposition one indicates shortcomings and acts as an opposer rather than a complimenter. Ideally, it would be better if we complimented the Minister rather than opposed or criticised him but I am following the traditional function of this side of the House.

To depart from that, I compliment the Minister on what he has done in the matter of capitation grants. It might have been better had it been done earlier. The Minister can say it might have been done when Fianna Fáil were in Government. I say yes. So long as we accept the situation in which there are capitation grants we must also accept that there will be variations, that if the capitation grant is £15 one year and if, as has been indicated by the Minister, there is to be a 13 per cent increase in the matter of the moneys he wants, the same thing can be said for increasing these grants by the same percentage, or at least there should be a mechanism through which the capitation grant would be increased in accordance with ever-increasing costs.

Goldsmith wrote about the hare whom horse and hound pursue, panting to the place from whence at first he flew. I flew from the national schools and I return to them now before concluding, to the national schools in the areas around Dublin which are being newly developed. Earlier I resisted the temptation to ask for details about the second school which should have been built or is to be built to accommodate students in Finglas South. I avoided referring to the position of the secondary school of St. Michael knowing that the Minister has given an assurance that the extension of that school is being expedited.

In respect of the primary schools, I ask the Minister for heaven's sake to set up some special unit which will examine the position in Dublin. I make no apology about concentrating on Dublin because here we have the biggest number of primary school students and these students are not getting value for money. We are exposing them to the new curriculum and the manner in which we are treating them under the guise of education is not bringing from the students and will not bring from them when they are adults the recognition which should be. We are not entitled to any public recognition from those students or their parents. We are assuming that that which is appropriate to what might be regarded—one must be very cautious about terms—as suitable for shall we say sophisticated "betterclass, more educated areas" is automatically suited to that particular area. It is not.

In the matter of good citizenship, of respectability, of industry, of decency, the parents to whom I refer compare with the best, but, unfortunately, some of them, in the matter of what they can do for their children within the educational framework, are not competent and, therefore, there is an obligation on us, which the rest of the community will accept, to endeavour to fill the gap, to make up for this deficiency. That has not been done.

In those areas we have bigger classes. The school to which I refer originally had 17 classrooms, 16 plus a communal room. The communal room went in the first year of the life of the new school because the manager had to put a class into it. That should not have happened. I am being asked to agree to the voting of money and conscientiously I cannot let the opportunity pass without referring to this. Every school in the country has a communal room or a library. Those children have not got it. In their first year that free room has gone because the manager had to use it to put in more children, and other children who were going to the school had to be transported to other areas, children who already had been mobile in the matter of housing. Surely these children deserve not just the same but more attention than the non-mobile students in more secure areas?

I thank the Chair for the tolerance shown to me in referring to matters which, though very directly concerned with the Estimate before us, might be difficult to identify with any special subhead.

Mr. Clinton

I do not like to interrupt the Deputy but does he know that in his Government's time schools were much too small even before their building was finished by about two or three years? Is he not aware that it can happen at any time with any Government because of the enormous increases in population?

Mr. Tunney

I am only talking about what is happening now. It would be a useful survey to undertake, to find out the number of schools that have been built by the Board of Works and which, within one year of their completion, were found to be too small. I do not think that is the fault of the previous or present Government. I do not know whether any committee has been set up to examine it. Had the Minister been here earlier he would realise that in respect of that topic—contrary to that which obtains in other fields—we have had very quiet, sober contributions.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 4 Dec 1975