In a sense I regret that I had to raise this matter this afternoon. I understand Thursday is not the best evening to inconvenience people generally, because they would sooner be going home. In fairness, the situation which has developed over the last day or two appears to warrant the opportunity of the Minister for Education putting on the record and making it clear to concerned members of the public and of this House what is precisely the position with regard to this school. I do not intend to try to bury the Minister; I would prefer to praise him because I know he is undertaking a very difficult job and has the admiration of many people in the way he is going about it. Therefore, it is a little unfortunate that one feels obliged to raise this matter.
In the East Wall area of Dublin yesterday constituents of mine found that a school was closed because there was not enough money to heat it and the teachers, understandably, decided that working conditions were not suitable. As a result, the school, with the acquiescence of the school authorities, was closed and the children returned home. It is a shameful situation in 1978 in our capital city, or in any part of the country, that such a situation should arise. I do not know the extent to which the Minister and his Department were aware that there was a crisis, even of a minor nature, with regard to the need for finance in this school. I understand that the Minister and his Department had notice of this some time ago and, apart from other public representatives, I asked about this school in the Dáil on the 16 November last. The Minister was then, as he always is, forthcoming and agreeable and seemed to want to do his best to ensure that the school would be kept open and would not be closed for any reason, particularly that of finance. He said that the problem in that area generally— and this is understandable in the context of the schooling situation in the inner city—needed a certain amount of review with regard to possible rationalisation and that after full consideration it might be necessary to close a school or part of a school or in some way to rationalise the educational facilities there.
That is quite a separate issue from the one of the day-to-day expenses of a school and a very harassed management board. Sister Margaret and the other sisters are doing their part in trying to ensure that education is provided for people living in an environment which, under a number of headings, is not up to the standard that would exist in other parts of the country. Instead of an effort to try to make up for years of neglect and deprivation by various Governments, we see the extraordinary situation where a school had to close. That should never have happened except in the most extraordinary circumstances and these must include circumstances where the Minister or his Department would not have been notified in advance. If there was notification in advance then I consider that there was neglect of duty on the part of somebody.
St. Joseph's Girls' National School on East Wall Road has an enrolment of the order of 230 pupils, which varies slightly depending on a variety of factors. They are all local children. In recent educational controversies there have been many references to nonlocal children attending inner city schools as if this were in some way extraordinary or not acceptable or, indeed, a new development. The truth is that the pattern of children attending the schools referred to is the same as it always was and does not justify any action now more than it did two years or 20 years ago.
I discussed this matter today with Deputy E. Collins, our spokesman on education and he emphasised his extreme concern with the problem of urban education and also his concern in respect of this unfortunate incident. We both felt that it would be better to have the matter aired now than to see the thin edge of the wedge. I have no doubt that the Minister will be able to tell us that he acted promptly. I know he has sent an auditor from his Department to the school. I stress that I believe the Minister to be genuinely concerned with providing education in the city, but I would point out to him that, despite these expressions of concern and the enormous amounts of energy he is investing in his job, there are procedures operating under the aegis of his Department which appear to allow this type of disintegration of local educational facilities. This is not acceptable.
It should never be possible for this type of reason for children to go without schooling. Local children in an area like this are entitled to believe that education is as important for them as it is in other areas. Yet the school can be closed down for lack of basic day-to-day finance. Surely the day has long gone in Ireland in 1978 when teachers and children have to sit shivering in a classroom in pursuit of what is, after all, a fundamental constitutional right.
We are talking about primary education. Surveys carried out by Joy Rudd of the Department of Education, before the Minister's time, and by tAthair Mac Gréil show that this is one of the areas of the city where most of the young people do not receive any further education beyond primary stage. This underlines the importance of ensuring that the calibre of their schooling during primary years is of the highest order and is not interrupted because of lack of Government interest or lack of finance.
The possible answers to this type of situation must include a review of the manner in which the per capita grant is paid. Under-enrolled schools have difficulties because of demographic and local socio-economic or socio-cultural reasons in areas which were once thriving environments. Because of the present hostility of these environments these schools are suffering and there is no longer the same number of young people. Schools intended for a larger population have a large shell used for a smaller number of children. This forms a vicious circle. A large building still needs the same amount of maintenance; in many cases it needs more maintenance because it is older. The same amount of attention must be paid to matters of structural maintenance, decoration and heating. But the grant is still paid per head, and that is a problem. I know that the Minister has a difficulty in that regard because if he changes it in one part of the country it would seem logical that it should be changed across the board. Part of my thesis would be that one must take a regional view and take into account specifically local factors. I tried to get this across to the Minister in our brief interchange of views on the 16 November.
If we are to allow the present per capita grant system to continue as it is, undoubtedly the degree of deprivation and under financing in these schools will not just continue but the situation will deteriorate. The school buildings, play facilities and local amenities will also deteriorate. Why should a child from my constituency— an area of genuinely good hard-working Dublin people who want for their children the same as everyone else wants—have to be taught in shells of buildings in the fear that if someone somewhere does not give, as in the case of today, a voluntary contribution towards heating, they may be sent home? Is that justice.
I know the Minister could not have been expected to solve the educational problems of the nation in the few months he has been in office, and I want to be reasonable about it, but we brought this to his attention months ago and I am not aware of any new approach in the meantime in the per capita grants system. The school has a board of management. Prior to the general election, when it was not as fashionable, perhaps, to be as concerned with education as it now is, I had discussions with that board and I saw from the accounts, which they provided willingly to anybody who wanted them, that there was a crucial problem. They warned then that if there was not a change of heart the school would be closed, for financial reasons. This is a school catering for 220 pupils.
That position has not altered fundamentally. There has been an increase in the capitation grant to £8 and the local contribution has been increased from £1.50 to £2, but because of the dire exigencies which this school finds itself in, it has already spent its £880 for the next six months. Why should Sister Margaret or the other Sisters or the board of management have to spend part of their nights worrying about what tomorrow holds —how they will heat the school, how they will provide the basic facilities to give the children an opportunity to compete with others all over the country, an opportunity of fulfilling themselves in a manner which the educational system should allow them to do?
Is that not too much of an imposition on people who are engaged in this work voluntarily? Perhaps that is what is wrong in this case. For decades the State has been able to rely on a massive voluntary contribution, financial and in other ways. It is clear that contribution is no longer as steadfast or as firm as heretofore. Therefore, the writing is on the wall: in an unprecedented way the State must take up its statutory and its moral responsibilities in this field so that the children of the nation will be provided for equally. When I recall that phrase from the 1916 Proclamation I have to smile because the children in this area are not being treated equally.
The reason is that the grant system, the method of financing the school, is not appropriate in the local circumstances. I appreciate this must be taken in a wider context, that there are schools in other areas throughout the country which could plead as strong a case, and I have no doubt some of them have. I am aware there are schools throughout the country which do not have basic hygiene facilities. That is a shocking situation and it should be changed. Perhaps it points to the need for a totally new approach, to massive investment in education. That is not a popular political policy—it may be for the Minister for Education but other Ministers seem to influence financial allocations towards more immediate results—and the result is that through the years education has been underfinanced. But is it not taking things to a ludicrous state when children are sent home from school because the heating cannot be turned on? It is particularly sad when ample notice was given of this.
On 16 November last the Minister expressed concern. He has done so on a number of occasions. He has said, and I appreciate it very much, that where schools of this nature are closed down and where there is a need he will build and open new schools to replace them. I know that that fighting spirit typifies the Minister and it will help him to cope with this problem. I regret that I had to call him in here this evening to put to him this matter of grave local concern. There are parents, teachers and young people in this area who expect better from the Government, whichever party are in power.
Therefore, I should be grateful to the Minister if he would outline to me the proposals he has for coping with this situation in the context of East Wall. It is an area, as the Minister probably knows, which cannot be said to be luxuriant in too many environmental, social or educational comforts. It is an area struggling to survive, threatened from all sides, an island community in many respects, and if certain planners and local authorities get their way it will be even more of an island. Let us, for God's sake, give the children there at least equal opportunities with those elsewhere. Do not let us have the children there ask the Minister or their public representatives or their parents: "Why was I sent home from school today"?
I have no doubt the Minister shares my concern. That is the essence of what I have to say. I appreciate that the Minister has a difficult job ahead of him and I know he is getting down to it, fighting hard at it, and I should like to tell him that he has our admiration and respect. Deputy Eddie Collins and I were very concerned about yesterday's turn of events, and in discussions I had today with the management I discovered they were not any closer to a solution. Today the Department expressed interest in trying to work out some arrangements for them, but by lunch time today the only thing that had happened was that an auditor had gone out there to check the books. Perhaps I could be wrong because I am not privy to all that has been happening, but that seems to be all that has been done. I hope the Minister shares my sincere concern in this matter of children being deprived of their schooling. If it were not for those 220 children this matter would not have been raised.
