Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 8 Dec 1977

Vol. 302 No. 7

Vote 29: Education.

Minister for Education (Mr. Wilson)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceedings £617,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1977, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education (including Institutions of Science and Art), for certain miscellaneous educational and cultural services and for repayment of sundry grants-in-aid.

The original net Estimates for my Department totalled £291,279,000. A first Supplementary Estimate for £270,000 on Vote 29 was taken in July last to provide £250,000 for a temporary grant scheme for youth employment and an additional £20,000 for the Royal Irish Academy.

Supplementary Estimates amounting to £12,991,000 are now required.

The greater part of these Supplementary Estimates, that is, £9,211,750 is due to the additional cost of increased salaries and wages arising out of the two phases of the National Wage Agreement for 1977, conciliation agreements and the removal of the reminder of the pay differentials which were not provided for in the 1977 Estimates.

Provision is also made in these Supplementary Estimates for an additional amount of £1,615,300 over that in the original Estimate and for £482,700 in respect of teaching posts created in implementation of the programme indicated in the Fianna Fáil manifesto announcements for reducing large classes in primary schools and for improving the pupil/teacher ratio in second level schools.

The Supplementary Estimates also make provision for an additional amount of £2,068,400 for capital expenditure.

The Supplementary Estimates are made up as follows: Office of the Minister for Education, £617,000 Primary Education, £6,873,000; Secondary Education, £1,877,000; Vocational Education, £1,207,000; Residential Homes and Special Schools, £47,000; Higher Education, £2,370,000.

The following are the main items for which additional provision is being made in the Supplementary Estimates and to which I consider it appropriate to make special reference. Vote 29: A.1.—Salaries, Wages and allowances, £178,000; D.3.—Transport Services, £658,000; F.3.—Archaeological Excavations, £25,000.

The increased provision in subhead A.1 is due to the salary and wage increases which took place in 1977.

The extra amount required for subhead D.3 for school transport is due to an increase in the subsidy paid to CIE towards the fares of school children travelling on scheduled services, loss in revenue by CIE on abolition of increases in rates of fares for concessionary fare-paying pupils on special school buses, increases in the allowances to transport liaison officers and increased costs generally.

The extra provision in subhead F.3 is to meet the cost of further excavations at the Dublin civic offices site in Wood Quay during the period to the end of the financial year 1977.

On Vote 30 the increased provision of £338,500 in subhead A.1 covers increased salaries together with an increase of £250,000 in the capital provision for the training colleges. The extra £4,084,000 for subhead C.1 as well as including money for increased salaries also provides for an additional amount as provided in the Budget Statement 1977 to meet the deficit in the original Estimate. It also provides for payments under the trainee-teacher scheme for national schools which has been introduced in the present school-year.

An additional £2 million is being provided in subhead E for the purpose of additional expenditure in connection with the provision of national schools in new housing areas and for the replacement of old and unsuitable school premises.

On Vote 31 the extra £2,303,000 for subhead B includes an additional amount to meet a deficit in the original Estimate and also makes provision for the additional posts required to implement the measures announced in the manifesto for the reduction of the pupil/teacher ratio in secondary schools. A further £26,000 is required for subhead C to meet increased payments to superintendents at the Department's examinations. The sum of £4,000 for subhead F.2 is to provide for increases resulting from the 1977 National Wage Agreement.

£322,000 is required under subhead H.1 to meet the cost of increased salaries and wages, new posts and the improvement made by me in the pupil/ teacher ratio.

On Vote 32 an additional £1,779,500 is being provided in subhead A for an increase in the provision for grants to vocational education committees to enable them to meet the increased cost of salaries and wages, new teaching posts and my improvement there also in the pupil/teacher ratio.

The additional sum of £3,600 under subhead C is required for residential schools of domestic training. An additional £390,900 is required for the increased cost of salaries and wages in the regional technical colleges. This sum includes the sum of £103,000 transferred from subhead A following the raising of the status of the Technical Institute, Clash, Tralee, to that of regional technical college.

On Vote 33, an additional £50,000 is required for subhead E in connection with the construction of group homes.

On Vote 34, the additional provision in subhead A.2 includes £1,632,000 for the increased cost of salaries and wages in NUI, UCD, UCC, UCG, Maynooth, TCD, the National College of Art and Design and the National Institute of Higher Education, Limerick. Provision is also being made for additional capital expenditure of £748,400 under subhead A.3 on works in progress at UCD, UCC, UCG and TCD as well as under subhead A.4 for furniture and equipment for the National Institute of Higher Education, Limerick.

Mr. E. Collins

I thank the Minister for being brief. I also intend to be brief. May I congratulate him on his appointment to the ministry and wish him well in his Department? The more money he can get and spend on education the better we will like him. He is a great stirrer of the education pot, and the more I look at developments the more we seem to be at a high boiling point.

I want to get the record straight on a number of issues, because this marvellous manifesto was mentioned at least twice in the Minister's opening speech and it seems to be now the new bible. Presumably we will all be blessing ourselves shortly whenever it is mentioned here. The Minister is misleading the House in regard to certain matters to which I shall refer in a few minutes. First, I want to put the record straight because I will not tolerate facts being contorted in any way where education is concerned, particularly this year in which we have had a change of Government.

The record reads something like this: in 1972-73 Fianna Fáil devoted £110,171,411 to education. In 1977 net expenditure was estimated at £291,510,000. That is a solid sum, a considerable increase. It shows that over a period considerable progress was made by the National Coalition Government on all fronts in education. Massive expansions were undertaken. There was solid progress on buildings. There was solid progress in regard to money spent on teachers. I will not have the Minister coming in here throwing, as he does in his introductory speech, cold water on what has been done.

In relation to expenditure, I note that over £2 million has not been spent under the various votes. That is a considerable sum of money and a full explanation is very desirable as to why that sum was not spent. The exact amount is £2,091,400.

In the last budget £1.8 million was specifically voted in relation to teachers. I asked the Minister for Education if the 1,100 additional teachers for first and second level schools provided for in the job creation programme in the 1977 Budget have been engaged and, if so, if he would specify the sectors to which they have been allocated, and I asked him to make a statement on the matter. I received the Minister's reply this morning and it states:

I would refer the Deputy to my reply to question No. 455 of 10th November. The 1,100 posts created have been filled.

Fianna Fáil did not fill those posts because this was provided for by the National Coalition Government. The Minister should not claim credit for creating 1,100 jobs in education which he did not create.

The other matter relates to the £6 million which was set aside by the Coalition Government under the job creation programme. Of that £6 million, only £4,150,000 has actually been spent. Why? This almost amounts to a dereliction of duty. We are being told about the marvellous job creation programme of the new Government in their manifesto, yet the moneys provided have not been spent.

Regarding the matter of additional jobs created in 1977 on capital works under the Minister, 384 jobs were created. Those jobs were provided for in the job creation programme of the Coalition Government and I will not listen to the Minister claiming credit for it.

In relation to primary education, I welcome the agreement in relation to the Dalkey and Marley Grange schools. The Minister is quoted in today's edition of The Irish Times as saying that the Marley Grange Committee have a good case and that he is meeting them on Monday. That is good. I am pleased that agreement is being reached regarding these two schools. We should always move forward liberally and with an open mind in relation to multi-denominational schools, and the Minister will have our full support for any reasonable moves.

Generally, the Minister should work in harmony with the teaching profession. No progress can be made without proper consultation with the teaching profession. They have a kick like a mule and one must work with them. In relation to the special graduate scheme, that was not done.

Mr. Wilson

That is a lie.

Mr. E. Collins

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I believe that is unparliamentary.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has not said that the Deputy is a liar. To refer to a statement as a lie is a different thing altogether. The Deputy to proceed without interruption.

Mr. E. Collins

I am fully aware that the Minister met the National Executive of the INTO.

Mr. Wilson

And got unanimous approval.

Mr. E. Collins

Fine, but the fact is that the body of members of the INTO kicked out that scheme. It was unfortunate because the objective of reducing class sizes has our full support but the Minister will not make any headway by moving against the general body of opinion in the various trade unions representing the teaching professions. The Minister could have done great damage from the point of view of good relations——

Mr. Wilson

The Minister went against nobody.

Mr. E. Collins

——and from the point of view of future negotiations by the manner in which the scheme was handled, and it could damage the Minister in the years ahead. It is a pity that some scheme could not have been organised to allow them to go directly into the classroom and to reduce class sizes, especially in urban areas. If this kind of approach is repeated in future we could have unrest in the teaching profession.

The question of the governing bodies of the training colleges seems to be in the air, and the Minister should take an open stand on this matter and guarantee that the teaching staff and the students will be represented on the governing bodies of teacher-training colleges. This is a very important matter. I am completely in favour of participation by parents, teachers and students on boards of management and governing bodies. By being involved they will see the problems clearly. The Minister has a part to play, not only in relation to teacher-training colleges but also in relation to secondary schools. Representation for teachers is very important in relation to boards of management that will evolve. Students should also be represented on boards of management in the post-primary sector. The Minister should make a clear statement and point the way forward.

The provision of audio-visual aids should be encouraged. The previous Government made a dreadful mistake in reducing the moneys voted for this purpose. Young children benefit especially from audio-visual aids because they are provided with images which they can see and understand.

We are all committed to ensuring that voluntary secondary schools will have sufficient funds at their disposal. The method of financing needs to be examined in order to ensure that such schools have adequate financial support. As it is, I believe that they are not getting sufficient moneys. Greater emphasis has been put on vocational and community schools, and voluntary secondary schools are not getting their fair share of the cake. They are not being discriminated against but a different method of financing is called for and perhaps the Minister would initiate some study of this very important matter. They are crying out for money to do good work. We have a clear obligation to give them our whole-hearted support.

There is need for full mobility between the primary, secondary and vocational sectors of teaching. The B.Ed. degree has now turned out to be unsatisfactory. The National University have not accepted people with this degree for further study in the universities. That is most unsatisfactory. The effort made to classify primary school teachers as teachers with degrees is correct because it will lead to much better mobility within the primary and the post-primary sectors. Something will have to be done urgently to correct the situation which has now arisen because of the NUI decision in relation to the Bachelor of Education degree.

The training period for national teachers may have to be increased to four years. It may have to be a three year academic course and a one year practical course. That would allow them to have a full degree as Bachelor of Arts or Bachelor of Science. I would like to see that taking place. There may be other ways. I would like to hear the Minister's views on this. There is no point in giving a primary degree from a university to people who have just graduated and then find out that the primary degree is not worth being called that. It is only, in effect, being granted the status of a diploma. That is about the standard the university recognise it as.

This calls for immediate clarification by the Minister and it calls for action to correct what has been done. I do not believe we can continue to have B.Ed. degree as it is now constituted. It will not lead to the greater objective of full mobility within the teaching service. I would like to hear the Minister's views on this.

With regard to the vocational sector the position regarding apprentice and technician training is not satisfactory. The Minister is well aware of the impasse which has been reached because of the new apprenticeship scheme. The regional technical colleges are not quite clear of the direction in which they will move in regard to apprenticeship training. The Minister should become actively involved in resolving the present impasse and clarifying the matter so that those involved, AnCO, the RTC and the colleges of technology are fully aware of the direction in which the Department are going and are fully satisfied of their position within the scheme of things.

I am not particularly familiar with the residential homes and special schools aspect of education. Obviously money spent here has the full support of the House. There is a great need for adequate remedial teachers in primary schools. It is vitally important that primary school children be monitored every year so that any slow learners and any children who have problems are examined. If their problems are allowed go on until they are 15 or 16 years of age it is very hard to rectify them. It is vitally important to have a continuous monitoring system during primary school education. Money spent there will have the full support of the House. I do not believe we are tackling this question in a professional way. There is need to have a foolproof system and professional monitoring of retarded children, slow learners and people with particular drawbacks. The sooner those children are monitored the better chance they have of overcoming their problems.

The third level sector of education gets most publicity because of the very articulate and organised students' union and of the way in which protestations can be made. The question of the higher education grants under the 1968 Act is a very live issue.

Mr. Wilson

That is not covered in the Supplementary Estimates.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Higher education grants cannot be discussed as they are not involved in the Supplementary Estimates. The Deputy knows very well we can only discuss what is in the Supplementary Estimates. There is no amount in the Supplementary Estimates, as far as I am aware, for higher education grants.

Mr. Horgan

The Chair has been lenient with the Deputy up to now.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is very difficult for the Chair with six Supplementary Estimates to be aware of everything in them. He would need to study them more than the spokesmen. There is nothing in the Supplementary Estimates about higher education grants. There is no money allowed for them so they cannot be discussed on the Supplementary Estimates. The grants can be discussed on the main Estimate whenever it comes.

Mr. E. Collins

I abide by your decision, but I am disappointed that in moving these Supplementary Estimates the higher education grants are not included.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is getting it anyway.

Mr. E. Collins

There was a clear and unambiguous statement in the famous manifesto. The Minister has been asked to make a statement.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There will be an opportunity to discuss that at a later stage.

Mr. E. Collins

I await the Minister's statement with great interest. I am sorry he did not take the opportunity to include it here. In regard to the National Council for Education Awards the Government have decided to establish the NCEA as the degree-awarding council for non-university third level education. The Minister, in doing this, has reversed the previous Government's policy in this respect, which was to have a comprehensive and unified approach to this problem. I am wondering what consultations the Minister has had in this regard with the National University, with Trinity College and with the Higher Education Authority. Recent reports in the national newspapers would indicate that to date there has been very little consultation. Unfortunately, one gets the impression that the Minister's decision to constitute by statute the NCEA is purely political. That is something that is not to be welcomed in education. A decision has been made and the relevant Bill will be brought before the House. At that point I will examine the Bill in detail.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We cannot discuss legislation on any Estimate, Supplementary or otherwise.

Mr. E. Collins

The question of the NCEA should be cleared up once and for all. When the matter is before the House we will give it our close scrutiny.

A continuing problem that needs urgent attention is the question of pressure on the National Library. Perhaps the Minister would tell us when replying whether he has had a consultant's report in this regard and, if so, if he intends to publish it. The library is bursting at the seams and unless steps are taken to relieve the pressure it may grind to a halt.

There are problems, too, in connection with the National College of Art and Design. The staff there are unhappy so far as a number of appointments are concerned and they are anxious, too, in regard to the direction that some courses are taking. There is a case for a broadening of the board of the NCAD to allow for wider representation. It is a college of great potential and one that should contribute if treated properly, in a positive way to industry.

There have been a number of complaints throughout the country in respect of the working of the school transport scheme, a scheme which, as I appreciate, is very costly. Apparently a consultants' report on this scheme was to have been made to the Minister. Can he say whether he has received this report and, if so, whether he intends publishing it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not like interrupting the Deputy but he has been speaking for 25 minutes and as the debate is very limited— only one-and-a-half hours—other Deputies will not have a chance to contribute if any one Deputy goes on for too long. I have no power, though, to direct the Deputy to conclude.

Mr. E. Collins

We discussed this matter at the commencement of business today so I appreciate the point made by the Chair. There are a number of other matters I would like to raise but I am precluded from doing so by reason of the agreement we reached. I was disappointed to hear the Minister speak in such a political way on this Estimate. I trust that I have put the record straight from the point of view of money and of job creation as embarked on and carried through by the last Government. It is regrettable that the moneys provided were not spent. Of the £6 million voted only a little more than £4 million has been spent whereas we could have spent the remaining £2 million on education. However, I shall await the Bill to discuss all these matters in detail.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Before calling Deputy Horgan I should like to express my anxiety about something that happened during the Deputy's speech when I thought he was referring to something said by an outside organisation when there was reference to a lie. I take it that the Minister was not suggesting that the Deputy was telling a lie.

Mr. Wilson

I was not suggesting that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would suggest that the Minister with-draw the word. He could say, for instance, that the statement was inaccurate or was not in accordance with the facts but it would be totally out of order to suggest that a statement made by any Deputy was a lie.

Mr. E. Collins

Is the Minister withdrawing the word?

Mr. Wilson

The statement that the Minister did not consult with the INTO is not true. I know that the Deputy is not the teller of untruths.

Mr. Horgan

As I am on the record already as having congratulated the Minister on his appointment I shall not delay the House by indulging in unnecessary repetition.

What we have here in these Supplementary Estimates is basically a housekeeping document. There is not much in them beyond the soupçon or flavour of the manifesto which occurs here and there. I would go further and say that this Education Estimate is not worthy of the Minister. I am disappointed that on his first venture before the House with an Estimate he should be bringing in one that is so innocuous and which bears such little relationship to the rhetoric of the past eight months. I must protest at the cavalier attitude of the Minister in declining to take the opportunity open to him to include in this Estimate figures for the higher education grants that Deputy Collins mentioned. It is all the more odd that we have been informed by the newspapers that the Minister is about to make a statement in this regard tomorrow.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As this question is not before us, we cannot discuss it.

Mr. Horgan

I seek the guidance of the Chair here because it would seem to me—and maybe to you, too, Sir—that making an announcement of this kind outside the House amounts to disrespect for the House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has no power in that matter. The Chair is pointing out merely that it is not in order to discuss on a Supplementary Estimate something that is not included in the Estimate.

Mr. Horgan

I accept the Chair's ruling but would suggest to the Minister that, if this is the way he proposes going about his business, he is starting on a bad footing and that, consequently, we would be watching him very keenly from this side of the House in order to ensure that the exercise is not repeated.

The students will be lucky to get more than the 11 per cent that the local authorities are getting. If the Minister chooses either to clarify or to deny this point when he is replying, we should be grateful for the information.

Mr. E. Collins

Indeed we would.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No more than the Deputy the Minister would not be in order in replying to that. I would ask the Deputy to move away from the question of higher education grants.

Mr. E. Collins

We could give the Minister special permission to answer.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is not possible.

Mr. Horgan

I have referred already to the basic theme of this Supplementary Estimate, which is a housekeeping exercise of a comparatively minor nature. But there is running through the Estimate also, as I have said, the soupçon of the manifesto. Not only that but it seems that something that is basically the same is turning up in several different places in the Minister's speech so that the misguided or semi-literate reader might be forgiven for assuming that different matters were being talked about whereas there is merely a series of repetitions. For example, on the second page of the speech there is a reference to an additional amount of money in respect of teaching posts created on implementation of the programme indicated in the Fianna Fáil manifesto. On the next page we read about payments under the trainee teachers scheme for national schools which is being introduced in the present school year. We all know that that relates to precisely the same thing as that which is referred to in the previous page in relation to the programme in the Fianna Fáil manifesto.

In the fourth page of the Minister's brief there is further reference to measures announced in the manifesto for the reduction of the pupil-teacher ratio in secondary schools. These are all effectively the same thing but they have been spread, like so much margarine, over the substance of the Supplementary Estimates as a whole to try to give political substance to them and to give the impression that far more has been done than actually has been done. The office of the Minister for Education is a very important office, not least because we have such a highly centralised educational system. I am in favour of a more decentralised system, but if we are to have a centralised educational system for the foreseeable future it must be efficient. If it is to be efficient it needs the administrative and financial resources to enable it to do the job properly. One of the things that has been wrong with the famous faceless bureaucrats of the Department of Education is that there are not enough of them. The efficiency of the administration of the office of the Minister depends not just on the quality but on the quantity of public servants employed there. Looking through the State directory for 1977, published at a time when the preceeding Government were in office, I note that, even at that stage, a substantial number of posts in that Department remained unfilled.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As the Deputy is a new Deputy he may not be aware that we cannot discuss administration on a Supplementary Estimate. Even though money is allowed for salaries, wages and so on, we cannot discuss the administration of a Department on a Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Horgan

Is it in order to discuss the staffing?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No. That would be administration. The Deputy can refer to staffing. I will give the Deputy a fair amount of latitude, but we cannot discuss administration.

Mr. Horgan

In relation to staffing the Minister will have my support and perhaps the support of Deputy Collins in applying the sort of moneys we are voting now to redressing the situation within the Department in general especially in relation to the post primary inspectorate where there are still a substantial number of vacancies. When replying would the Minister indicate whether the proposes to re-establish within the Department the development branch whose operations were terminated during the period of office of the last Government?

There are a number of points in primary education which are very pertinent to this Supplementary Estimate. We have in the Supplementary a saving of capital in the school transport area and an increase in current expenditure. It is time that we knew the result of the consultancy survey carried out at the behest of the previous Government into the school transport system. What decisions, if any, does the Minister propose to take on foot of that survey? The school bus transport system is essential, but it has grown over the years and it was obvious that a consultancy study was needed. It was obvious that the whole situation needed to be looked at afresh. We would like evidence that the Minister is doing that.

The Minister in his speech in relation to primary education referred to the measures that he is taking in line with the manifesto to reduce the numbers in classes in primary schools. Not long after he assumed office I asked the Minister in a Parliamentary Question what he was proposing to do about the substantial numbers of children who were still in classes of over 45. In his reply the Minister said that he regarded this as a very serious situation and that because of the seriousness he proposed to have a special investigation made into this problem. Will the Minister let us know whether that investigation is yet completed? If it is completed could the Minister let us know the result and what action, if any, he proposes to take on foot of it? The Minister is probably aware that large classes in primary schools are more prevalent in the county Dublin area than anywhere else. Figures that the Minister gave in reply to Parliamentary Question indicated that the average pupil/teacher ratio in county Dublin is something over 35. These figures mask the reality of the situation to a certain extent because these figures include all teachers in the assessment of the pupil/teacher ratio, and in the suburban areas, which is where most of the county Dublin schools are situated, the schools are very large and there are a large number of non-teaching principals. If we subtracted them from the total of teachers and took into account that in county Dublin there are a substantial number of small rural schools with very favourable pupil/teacher ratios we will see that the pupil/teacher ratios in this suburban belt running from Dún Laoghaire to Howth in a great arc around the city is the worst in the country. I suspect that many of the classes of over 45 are to be found in these areas. The pupil/teacher ratio in county Cavan which forms part of the Minister's constituency is something like 27.5 to 1 on average. While there are special circumstances there by virtue of the geography and the demographic distribution of the people, I hope we can take it that the Minister would like to see county Dublin ratios reduced to the level in his own constituency.

Will the Minister ask the teachers in all schools whether they would be prepared to co-operate in the assessment of children to find out before they leave primary schools what children are educationally at risk, and what children cannot read or write? These are the children that will be the losers all the way through the rest of the educational system. I have evidence from the INTO that teachers will co-operate in this. I believe that a simple assessment to identify such children, carried out by the teachers, could do more to identify the real problems in our educational system and to remedy them before they become too expensive to remedy than anything else.

I notice that in relation to primary school education there is a very welcome increase in aid towards the cost of school books. Is the Minister aware of the degree of dissatisfaction with the scheme that currently exists? I do not receive many queries directly about education apart from queries about class size, but of the queries I receive seven out of ten are about the free book scheme. Even very impoverished parents are first of all required to buy all the books without any absolute guarantee that any part of the money they are spending will be refunded. They find the scheme difficult to understand, and they find that in some cases it can be operated in a way that appears discriminatory.

The teachers themselves, who under this scheme are responsible for deciding who gets the money and how much each person gets, are put in a very invidious position. I ask the Minister to reconsider this area and see whether or not a better scheme can be evolved. We are now discussing a Supplementary Estimate. In the not too distant past, indeed under the previous administration, I can recall an occasion on which not all of that allocation was taken up. Now not only is the whole allocation taken up but there is more pressure on it, and the more pressure on this scheme the more we can see that the scheme is not adequate. It is giving way at the seams.

Referring to subhead H.1, in regard to second level education we would like to hear from the Minister some statement of his policy in relation to comprehensive community schools. The running costs have gone up. This has largely to do with salaries, but we are anxious to know if the Minister is simply going to regard the situation of second level as one in which many schools are competing with one another. Such a situation is often discriminatory against children and wasteful of resources. Is the Minister satisfied with this or is he going to press ahead with further relaxation in this matter? If he does not I suspect that the financial cross he will be required to carry will eventually bow even his stout shoulders.

Again at second level I note increased payment of £26,000 for examination certificate level. Is the Minister aware that the whole structure of the examination system at second level is currently under threat of industrial action because of inadequate payments for examinations? Can he assure us that parents of children who are doing examinations this year and the children themselves will not be put through an experience of tension before decisions are finally taken to make realistic sums available to the people who look after these examinations?

On the third level side there are a couple of relatively minor points on which I would like some clarification. For example, in Vote 30 a certain amount is provided for payments under the trainee-teacher scheme for national schools. It is unclear from the Minister's speech what payments precisely are involved. I imagine that this is the payment of salary to as many of the teachers as are taking up the course in the training colleges.

Mr. Wilson

Did the Deputy mention third level in connection with that?

Mr. Horgan

This is the trainee-teacher scheme, Vote 30.

Mr. Wilson

The Deputy mentioned third level.

Mr. Horgan

In so far as trainee teachers are attending third level institutions; I was not referring to the third level grants specifically. How many of the 398 people who signed on for the course in the training colleges initially have completed satisfactorily this course, and how many of those 398 have indicated to the Minister that they will proceed now to the full course which is being run from now until next December? I also ask the Minister to reconsider the financing of this scheme, because it is not a generous scheme by any means. These trainee teachers are not only to go on three-quarters of their salary—frozen salary indeed—for three years but they also have to find college fees and perhaps some other expenses out of that. Perhaps the Minister could look again at the generosity that that scheme embodies. I believe it is not generous enough.

Turning to third level proper— although in effect we are still at second level and we are talking about regional technical colleges under subhead I.1—could I ask the Minister whether he is now making provision for the urgently needed extensions to some of the regional technical college? One of them in Letterkenny, a town the Minister must know well, is considerably overdue and as a result of its not being provided to date there is severe overcrowding in that college. In other colleges where extensions have been provided, basic facilities like canteen, library and ancillary facilities have not been scaled up to match the huge increase in the student population, with the result that the amount of education facilities available per student has gone down sharply because the number of student places has gone up.

On third level I do not propose to say much on this Supplementary Estimate because I hope we will have the opportunity of a major debate on higher education when the Minister brings in his legislation, but I ask him to make sure that this Higher Education Authority exercise a reasonably close scrutiny over the expenditure of funds granted in this fashion to some of the third level institutions. One third level institution in the recent past managed to find somewhere in their budget a figure of £25,000 for tree surgery. We are all in favour of trees, and surgery on trees if necessary, but think of the number of higher education grants that £25,000 could have funded. We will ask the Higher Education Authority to keep a beady eye on the expenditure patterns of the institutions under their care. I trust the Minister will make his views plain to them in this matter.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We have now given 15 minutes of the 90 to the Opposition. I want to point out that I have no power to stop them.

Mr. Horgan

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle has anticipated me. I was going to sit down. I will sum up by saying that this is only a housekeeping estimate. In a sense it is not worthy of the Minister or of his party's manifesto, and we look forward to better things from him in the future.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would ask the Minister to finish at 2.28 p.m. I want to put all these Estimates without encroaching on Question Time. He has of course until 2.30 p.m.

Mr. Wilson

I thank the Fine Gael spokesman for his good wishes, and I thank the two spokesmen for their contributions.

I start off by refuting Deputy Collins's statement that the facts regarding the expenditure on certain teachers' salaries are contorted by me in my paper. Contortion did take place, but it took place in the Book of Estimates prepared by the previous administration. As the Deputy correctly says £1.8 million was mentioned in the budget in a job creation context, but the 1,100 teachers which this £1.8 million was to cater for additional pupils and were in respect of people who were retiring during the year. That is a fact. There is no contortion. If the Book of Estimates had been honestly compiled this £1.8 million would have been there already. My predecessor, the unfortunate man, was caught in this. There was a letter from the Department of Education to the Department of Finance dated 27th January, 1977, and I wish to quote the relevant paragraph for the benefit of the House. If there is any accusation of contortion it should be from this side of the House. The letter stated:

The restoration of these amounts totalling £1.8 million does not allow of an improvement of the pupil/teacher ratios in first- and second-level schools. It would merely maintain the existing pupil/ teacher ratios. In this connection attention may be drawn also to the observation made by the Minister for Finance at page 12 of his budget statement:

"Because of the continuing increase in the number of pupils, teacher numbers have had to be expanded to maintain pupil/ teacher ratios and rose by more than 5 per cent in 1975 and by approximately 4 per cent in 1976.

Similar circumstances apply in 1977 in the case of a continuing increase in pupils affecting teacher numbers as applied in 1975 and 1976 and the full amount of £1.8 million is required to meet such a situation."

The second point made by Deputy Collins was in connection with capital expenditure. Similarly, although not to the same extent, there was a certain contortion here because while the capital programme made allowance for the increase in the consumer price index the £6 million referred to in the budget for the most part had to be spread over projects already in hand. Again, if the Book of Estimates had been compiled properly the officials in the Department of Finance would have had two to three months more and they could, and I can, spend the full amount if full notice is given.

The Deputy also referred to the trainee-teacher scheme. I want to say now that I decry very much the attack by Deputy Collins on the executive of the INTO. This executive was democratically elected, the general membership is experienced in teaching and they are teaching at the moment. Its officers are among the most experienced people in education and I consulted with them. They made a very useful contribution to the debate that we had in the Department of Education regarding my scheme. Certain modifications were introduced as a result of their suggestions and in the end these people, in a representative capacity, democratically elected, experienced and sophisticated, accepted the scheme. I deny that there was any lack of consultation. The general body, in accordance with the rules of their trade union, were entitled to do what they did. We went into consultation again and helped to get over that problem.

Mr. E. Collins

I never at any point attacked the executive of the INTO.

Mr. Wilson

I consulted with them in the way I stated. I interpreted the Deputy's remarks that I did not consult with them as nothing other than an attack on an experienced and sophisticated executive.

Mr. E. Collins

The Minister is contorting what I said.

Mr. Wilson

The Deputy is overusing the word "contortion".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is in possession.

Mr. E. Collins

He is contorting the facts and it is very difficult to accept that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has no power in that matter.

Mr. Wilson

The Deputy referred to the situation regarding B.Ed. degrees. I may be a little out of order on this matter but the Chair allowed the Deputy to refer to it. As far as I can see, I am in agreement with the Deputy. To me it appears to be completely illogical that somebody with an honours B.Ed. degree is not allowed by the universities to do a master's degree in that field. The Deputy and I are agreeing on one point.

Mr. E. Collins

That is nice, but what can be done about it?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair does not think it was in order at any stage to discuss this matter. I have given both the Deputy and the Minister an opportunity to raise the point.

Mr. Wilson

I am sorry for following bad example. There are problems with regard to the school transport scheme. I agree with the Deputies that it is a very expensive scheme. I know that at one stage a kite was flown by the previous Minister for Finance, Deputy Ryan, about the abolition of the scheme. There was a big brouhaha and there were no changes except that certain restrictions were imposed. Significantly in the early part of the year some of the restrictions were lifted. Deputy Horgan, and perhaps Deputy Collins also, asked about the report. It has not yet been received. I think that the person who was working on the report fell ill and this delayed it.

Mr. E. Collins

Will the Minister publish the report?

Mr. Wilson

I do not know what I will do until I see it. I am sorry Deputy Horgan came into conflict with the Chair on the question of grants but it was mainly due to his ignorance of how the scheme works. We do not pay in 1977 for the 1977-78 grants. He should know that central government only come into it a year later and this is why there was no reference to it.

Mr. Horgan

Will they get more than 11 per cent?

Mr. E. Collins

The figure is £875.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We cannot discuss higher education grants. Both Deputies referred to it and I am allowing the Minister to reply briefly to it.

Mr. Wilson

In this House of humane people the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is the most humane. I did not like the reference to my "faceless bureaucrats"——

Mr. Horgan

The reference was ironic.

Mr. Wilson

I can tell the Deputy that many of my bureaucrats have very beautiful faces. I appreciate the Deputy saying I should have more in my Department, and I shall quote him in my discussions with the Department for the Public Service. With regard to the development branch which Deputy Horgan said was abolished——

Mr. Horgan

I said discontinued.

Mr. Wilson

——or discontinued by my predecessor, it does not exist as a development branch as such. Some of the people who had been working in that branch are still working in the same line of country and we have the benefit of their experience.

With regard to the question of large classes, as was pointed out I am very concerned about it no matter where such classes exist. As I have said in this House before, I am always very suspicious of averages. There can be one town; two schools in it; there can be 50 in a class in one school, average, 20 in another; one can get an average of 35 and it does not tell one very much.

It is of particular concern to me. The trainee graduates will bring about an improvement. Also, next summer, we will have 300 extra teachers trained—apart from my trainee graduates—over and above the normal replacement of retiring people and the numbers that have to be made available for increasing pupils in the schools. This is not going to solve the problem. But, if one takes 30 pupils and multiplies by 300, one gets 9,000 and if my trainee graduates can cope with 9,000—and I am putting the ratio low—that is at least 18,000 extra who will be catered for in the year 1978-79. I am not complacent about it; I do not intend to become complacent about it until I have dealt with the problem to the best of my ability and in accordance with all of the resources available.

I am glad Deputy Horgan is doing some research on my constituency. However, if he wants some of his pupils from Dublin South County to change places with the little ladeens and lassies who are climbing Glangevlin mountain on frosty mornings, we will arrange a suitable pupil exchange.

Mr. Horgan

We have mountains in South County Dublin also.

Mr. Wilson

I know there are but they are ambitious in calling themselves mountains.

I am glad to tell the Deputy that the money provided—and it is a small amount right enough—for school books is an indication that the party's policy has been that where people cannot afford it books should be supplied and that, where they can, we think they should purchase their own.

With regard to Deputy Horgan's reference to community and comprehensive schools, my main concern, unlike that of Deputy Horgan, is not to become an arbiter in places where there are disputes but in fact to supply school places. From what Deputy Horgan has said he would be indicating to me that there might be areas where there would be too many school places, but particularly in the Dublin region, we are not going to reach that stage——

Mr. Horgan

I know that.

Mr. Wilson

I do not think we will reach that stage in the near future. I do not believe we will ever reach that stage. I am pleased anyway that he tried to help me carry what he called my financial cross. I am sure he will be suitably rewarded for this aid.

The point about the examinations was made also by Deputy Horgan. He mentioned anxiety amongst parents. I want to assure the Deputy that the examinations will be held, superintended and examined under the auspices of my Department, and nobody need break out in a rash over them. He was, I thought, rather unkind to me in his reference to the trainee graduates scheme. He said it was not a generous scheme. My contention—— and I put it on the record of the House —is that if a number of graduates, a good number of them who are unable to find jobs, who have not been able to find jobs, who are anxious to teach and feel they have a vocation to teach, are taken, provided with salary, trained and put into the schools, I do not understand the word "generosity" if one cannot predicate it of that scheme.

The final point made by Deputy Horgan was about regional technical colleges. It is a particular delight to me to know that the regional technical colleges are expanding, that there is demand for more facilities in them.

My Department are determined that we will not be found wanting in regard to making provision for them. The spokesman for Fine Gael is the chairman of a board of management—a very good one from what I hear, and I have examined its record—of a regional technical college in Waterford. We in Fianna Fáil are particularly proud of having set up a committee which recommended the establishment of these regional technical colleges; we have sustained them and shall continue to do so.

Vote put and agreed to.