Yesterday I had the opportunity of paying a tribute to the people who produced the report which gave rise to this motion. It is well to give praise where praise is due. This motion is an example of how democracy works at local community level. Whether you agree with the report or not, it contains a great deal of wisdom. The people who produced this report asked Deputy Dowling to consider the possibility of tabling a motion in Dáil Éireann in Private Members' time. For that reason alone, apart altogether from what the motion seeks, the idea is a good one and is an example to other communities who have thought out their problems as well as the Ballyfermot Community Association did that the Dáil Chamber is not the preserve of Deputies only. If a local community request their Deputy to raise a matter in the Dáil which is considered reasonable—in the final analysis Deputies have to make their own decisions—there is no reason why he should not articulate a point of view on their behalf.
Deputy Dowling put down this motion in a non-political fashion. It should have been met by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education in the spirit in which it was moved, but it was not. It was treated with an attempt at high political manifestation. Last night we were treated to what could only be described as an extension of the budget debate. As I said, this motion was put down in a non-political fashion. I am not making any apologies for being a politician. I am very proud of the profession, as is everybody else in this House. In no way am I underrating the profession of politics.
This motion was put down in a community non-political spirit. That is the way Deputy Dowling sought to have it debated but, unfortunately, it was treated in a very high political fashion by the Parliamentary Secretary who told us that there are some plans some where for the college which the community association are seeking. We were told that the Harp site where the community association are seeking to build their community monument is available and that the Parliamentary Secretary is willing to build the community college there.
Deputy Wilson and I asked the Parliamentary Secretary at what stage was the building of the community school. We were told, not directly, that there was not even a brick upon a brick, not even the foundations have been dug. However, it is all down on paper in the Department. We hope and pray that the reality to which this motion will give effect will lead to the building of a community centre and the provision of other desirable amenities in a built-up area.
My views are that planning in the past, present and future in any built-up area must include a number of very important items. It should be mandatory on local authorities and consequently on the builder—I do not want to interfere with the concept of private enterprise—to include in their plans for a built-up area, whether it be a private or local authority estate, a community centre and adequate open space surrounding that centre. If we are sincere about integrating our old people into the community—in some areas we have a high aged population, not necessarily in newly built-up areas—we should have a special care centre for them. Equally important, we should have creches for those women who want to go out to work, as is their constitutional entitlement, in which to leave their children during the day.
These are some of the ingredients which should be included in the planning of a housing estate. One does not build a housing estate and say "We have built 150 or 200 houses and so say all of us" and go on to the next project. That is not what a housing estate should be about. It should be a thriving community with these additional features. One hears very often in suburban and city areas that people do not know their next-door neighbours. One hears of people who have been living beside one another for months, or possibly years, and they never get to know their neighbours. The reason for that is a lack of community awareness and community facilities.
We are discussing now the published report of the educational sub-committee of the Ballyfermot Community Association. Among other things, the report requests the Government to initiate as a matter of urgency, a special programme to provide employment and educational opportunities in Ballyfermot and in other areas of Dublin city where a similar need exists. As I said yesterday, as a Dublin man I am concerned with any part of the city or county of Dublin. As a representative of a constituency, elected and sent to this House, one's first duty lies in one's constituency. I know from experience that throughout the city and county of Dublin similar problems exist but that is no consolation to the people of Ballyfermot.
The Parliamentary Secretary suggested, again as an extension of the budget, that there will be a number of youth employment programmes, employment premium schemes and so on. We wish him and his Government in the national interest the best of luck so far as the success of those programmes is concerned. Like the phantom community centre on the Harp site, we suspect that this time next year we will be talking about a considerably worse unemployment situation. The real problem is that while the youth unemployment is a national malaise, it is, nevertheless, a city and county disease in the sense that there is a greater burden on the youth in the Dublin city and county areas than in any other part of Ireland.
This is not in any way to under-rate the problems which relate to other areas but the greater burden of youth unemployment is in the Dublin city and county area. This is a very worthwhile report and is a document of high sociological value. It indicates that the youth unemployment situation in the Ballyfermot area is extremely serious and it has one of the highest elements of unemployed school leavers in the city and county of Dublin. This is an indictment of something or somebody and one has only to look around to see who is responsible. In the final analysis the buck stops with the Government. This is what motivated the Fianna Fáil Party in tabling this Private Members' motion.
I do not want to take up the time of the House but I want to remind the Parliamentary Secretary once more that we need, first of all, adequate facilities. We need good facilities in which to educate our children. The psychologists will tell us the kind of accommodation we need. I am not an expert in that field although I know what my own children need in the context of educational facilities and I certainly believe they have such facilities at the national school which the two youngest children attend. Having provided proper facilities, the proper number of class rooms and proper utensils for the pursuit of learning then there must be an appropriate number of children in each class. I understand from an expert that the appropriate number for the correct teaching of children is 25, at the maximum. The Parliamentary Secretary might remember that in quite a number of cases in Dublin city and county there are classes where there are 35, 40 or 45 children being taught by one teacher. This is a problem for a young teacher who may be just out of a teacher training college. He or she must establish authority, though it must be very difficult in a class of 45. The reality of such a situation is that the teacher spends most of the time attempting to control the class to the detriment of the learning process.
