Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 7 Jun 1985

Vol. 359 No. 5

Estimates, 1985. Vote 30: Office of the Minister for Education (Revised Estimate).

Minister for Education (Mrs. Hussey)

I move:

That a sum not exceeding £70,594,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1985, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education (including the National Library) for certain miscellaneous educational and cultural services and for payment of sundry grants-in-aid.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, in introducing these Estimates it is necessary to spell out a great many figures to the House and I will, of course, follow that precedent at the beginning of my statement. However, I am glad to say that the major part of my contribution today will be a strong and positive statement of progress, reform and movement, all achieved with the help of my civil servants, both administrative and professional, in the Department, with the co-operation of teachers and school management, and with the increasing involvement of Irish parents.

We have completed two and a half years of hard work which has seen unprecedented progress in education in all its spheres. We have seen education taking a prominent place in political debate and Government policy. We have seen expenditure on education breaking the £1 billion barrier, and we see our school and college population at an all-time high and growing rapidly.

I look forward to the contributions from all parts of the House and would only ask one thing — that Deputies should identify where additional funds will come from if they ask for additional services. Despite the offence this request caused to some Deputies last year, I believe it is a reasonable request to make. It is, after all, one thing for particular interest groups outside this House to press their own case — which is their right — it is another to have Deputies inside the House simultaneously demand lower taxation and bigger spending.

Now, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I will turn to the money figures and policy measures contained in our Estimates. The total gross provision for 1985 in the five Votes of the Education group of Votes is £1,004.5 million including £69.9 million as appropriations-in-aid. The comparable provisional outturn for 1984 is £953 million, including £48 million as appropriations-in-aid. The amount being sought for 1985 represents an increase of £51.5 million or 5 per cent over the 1984 provisional outturn.

In addition to the provision sought in these five Votes, a sum of £27 million is being provided from youth employment levy funds towards the cost of vocational preparation and middle level technician courses. The total overall amount being provided for the education services is thus £1,031.5 million — £53 million or 5 per cent more than the comparable 1984 figure of £978.5 million.

The gross capital provision for 1985 is £95.2 million an increase of £13 million or 16 per cent over 1984. The gross non-capital provision is £909.3 million as against £870.8 million for 1984, an increase of £38.5 million. The gross provision for pay and pensions is £724 million, an increase of £13.2 million or 2 per cent over the 1984 provisional outturn. Pay and pensions in 1985 will account for 79.6 per cent of the total non-capital expenditure as against 81.6 per cent in 1984. The provision for 1985, however, does not provide for any increases in pay and pensions under the 24th round. The cost of the 24th round pay increase will be met from Vote 49 — the Vote for Increases in Remuneration and Pensions. The provision for non-pay, non-capital expenditure is £185.28 million, an increase of 16 per cent or £25.3 million over 1984.

The detailed estimates set out in the various subheads of these Votes for the different schemes and programmes operated by my Department have been framed in accordance with the objectives and within the parameters set out for the three years 1984 to 1987 in the national plan Building on Reality.

The substantial rate of growth in pupil numbers at first and second level which has placed such a strain on resources in the recent past is now weakening. Over the next three years an overall increase of 5 per cent per annum is expected in the numbers at primary level and 2 per cent per annum at second level. Numbers at third level, however, will continue to grow at a much faster rate, at around 4 per cent per annum. The drop in the birth rate since 1981 is such that in the school year 1987-88 the stock of pupils in national schools will have reached its peak. Thereafter, it will fall significantly and by 1990-91, it is projected that the reduction in the stock of national school pupils will be of the order of 6,000. By 1995-96, it is projected that there will be a drop of some 60,000 in enrolments in national schools. The drop in the birth rate will not be reflected in the enrolments in post-primary schools until the mid-nineties and later still at third level.

In addition to providing for the extra number of pupils in 1985, provision is made, despite the financial stringency, for directing additional resources to a number of special areas. These are:

At primary level: the continuance of the special fund for the disadvantaged; the provision of additional remedial teachers in areas of special need; an increase in the grants under the national school libraries scheme of over 50 per cent; additional investment in inservice training; an increase in capitation grants towards the running costs of national schools of 5 per cent; an increase of 33? per cent in the rate of capitation grant for all-Irish schools.

At post-primary level: The scheme for the provision of remedial teachers terminated in 1979 is being reintroduced; Additional guidance posts are being sanctioned in disadvantaged areas; The provision for the free books scheme is being increased; Investment in inservice training is being increased; The expansion of ESF-assisted courses in second level schools is being undertaken.

At third level: The level of real resources being made available in 1985 is in accordance with the commitment to increase real resources by almost 5 per cent by 1987. Improvements are being made in the higher education grants scheme. The maintenance grant will be increased by 10 per cent in real terms that is by 16 per cent overall and income limits for eligibility by 5 per cent in real terms i.e. by 11 per cent overall from September 1985. A tapering mechanism for the first time will be introduced to provide part of the tuition fee to those just outside the normal income limits for eligibility; ESF-assisted middle level technician courses in RTCs and colleges of technology are being greatly expanded.

Adult Education: A sum of £150,000 is being provided in 1985 as the initial step towards an allocation of over £1 million per annum by 1987 to enable VECs to provide courses free of charge in literacy and community education in disadvantaged areas and fully representative adult education boards are being established in each VEC area to oversee the adult education budget. At the beginning of that sentence there is an error. It should be an allocation of over £1 million in three years by 1987 is what we are providing for the special budget for community education.

Sport: As announced in the budget, additional funds for sporting activities are being provided. The total provision in 1985 is £1,360,000 compared with £1,196,000 in 1984, an increase of 13.7 per cent.

My colleague the Minister of State will later on be elaborating in greater detail on that area and many other areas under his direct control.

Capital: A substantial increase is being made in the provision for capital building and equipment particularly at third level.

I will now take the separate Votes. The first Vote that I am responsible for is that for the Office of the Minister for Education. A sum of £70.594 million is being sought for that Vote, an increase of 10 per cent over 1984. This Vote provides for the administration costs of the Department as well as for the National Library and miscellaneous educational services. The increase arises in the main from:

(a) the cost of the higher education grants scheme which will increase by 25 per cent from £11.3 million to £14.1 million in 1985;

(b) increased running costs of the school transport services which at £31.4 million will cost £1.821 million or 6 per cent more in 1985.

(c) provision for consultancy fees in subhead A5 and for the acquisition of hardware in subhead A3 in connection with the computerisation of the post-primary certificate examinations and for the running expenses of the Curriculum and Examinations Board in subhead D10;

(d) increases in non-pay provisions generally.

The administrative costs of the Department, which are provided for in subheads A.1 through A.4, will amount to £14.3 million in 1985, an increase of 1 per cent. These administrative costs represent only 1.4 per cent of the total gross provision being administered by my Department. By any standards that must be considered to be an amazingly low figure.

The grant-in-aid fund for cultural, scientific and educational organisations is being increased by over 200 per cent to £549,000, chiefly to allow for additional grants to organisations involved in adult education, and to provide for a once off grant of £250,000 to the authorities of the Dublin Zoo. I am glad to hear from the administrator of the zoo that thousands of young Dublin children and children from all over Ireland are enjoying free visits to Dublin Zoo during International Youth Year as part of the Government's initiative this year in helping the authorities of Dublin Zoo out of their particular financial difficulties. The funds for the National Library hitherto provided in four separate subheads have been included in one grant-in-aid subhead to allow for greater flexibility and show an increase of 32 per cent over 1984. These funds are mainly for the purchase of books and manuscripts for the library.

The net amount sought for the primary education Vote is £357.995 million, an increase of £10.4 million. Salaries, allowances and superannuation costs of national teachers' account for £317.1 million or 85 per cent of the total gross provision. There are 20,884 teachers serving at present in 3,400 schools. Provision is made for additional teachers as required to meet the anticipated growth in pupil numbers as well as some additional remedial teachers. Pensions and gratuties payable under the national teachers superannuation schemes will cost an estimated £41.3 million in 1985. A sum of £13.3 million is being provided for capitation grants towards the running costs of national schools. This allows for the rate of capitation grant to be increased by a further £1 per pupil, following on the increase of £4 per pupil in 1984, the largest single increase sanctioned since the current scheme was introduced in 1975. That £1 increase was in line with inflation this year, the £4 being nearly 30 per cent of an increase on the previous years. The payment of the special enhanced rate for pupils in special classes in ordinary schools will continue. That special rate was very much increased last year.

The special fund for the disadvantaged in primary education which I established for 1984 is being continued and £0.5 million is being provided for this purpose. Over 50 per cent more money is being provided for the primary school library service to ensure its continued viability. Under this scheme, grants are paid to local authorities based on the number of children enrolled in national schools in their areas to assist them in their endeavours to provide a special library service for national schools.

The special education project in Rutland Street is being continued. This controlled experiment in early education for children living in disadvantaged areas of central Dublin commenced in 1969 as a project jointly financed by the Department of Education and the Bernard van Leer Foundation of Holland. The project formally concluded and the van Leer funding ceased in 1974 but the special arrangements at the Ruthland Street schools have been continued as a resource base to assist in tackling the problems of educational disadvantage generally and in developing an appropriate curriculum for the disadvantaged at the all-important infant school age. Over 20 staff continue to be employed on the project and over 160 pupils are enrolled.

Financial assistance from the van Leer Foundation has also been received for the youth encounter projects in Cork, Dublin and Limerick. This funding has now ceased but provision for the continuation of the projects has been included in the Estimates for 1985.

A net £400.476 million is being sought for the Vote for post-primary education. In addition, £27 million will be provided from youth employment levy funds towards the cost of vocational preparation courses in post-primary schools and middle level technician courses in RTCs and technological colleges, bringing the total provision to £427.476 million.

Salaries and allowances of secondary teachers will cost £162.7 million in 1985. There are currently some 11,900 secondary teachers in receipt of incremental salary. Pension and gratuities will cost an additional £10.5 million.

Annual grants to Vocational Education Committees will amount to £105.4 million in 1985 or £125.4 million if one includes the youth levy subvention. This is an increase of 16 per cent over 1984.

The grants to secondary schools authorities — subhead C — show an increase of 10 per cent from £29.2 million to £32.2 million. The provision for capitation grants for all secondary schools has hitherto been in section (1) of this subhead and the supplemental grants payable in lieu of tuition fees to schools within the free post-primary education scheme in section (2).

For 1985 section (1) provides only for capitation grants for fee paying schools and section 2 contains provision for a composite grant based on enrolment for schools within the free scheme corresponding to both capitation and tuition grants. The tuition grant element of this composite grant is being raised from £100 to £105 per eligible student. The change to this new composite grant will save much paper work both in the Department and in the schools and has been widely welcomed.

An important feature of the past year has been the development of ESF-aided courses for vocational preparation and training in second level schools and the expansion of middle-level technician courses in the RTCs and colleges of technology. This represented a major breakthrough in the educational world. The vocational preparation and training programme was introduced in all types of second level schools in the school year 1984-85. This programme, which is a development of the earlier pre-employment programme, provides for vocational studies, work experience and general studies. It is initially a one year programme but it is intended to provide a second year for those wishing to pursue further vocational training. Some 16,100 young people are attending these courses which started in September 1984. A feature of the programme is the payment of an annual allowance of £300 to participants — 55 per cent of the cost of this programme is received from the ESF as appropriations-in-aid. The European Commission has also approved funding for a major expansion of the middle level technician programme in the RTCs and colleges of technology. Participants in this programme are paid an annual allowance of £400 if living at home or £1,000 if living away from home and are not required to pay tuition fees. These allowances will be increased to £464 and £1,160 from September 1985 in line with increases in the higher education grants. The numbers attending these courses have increased from 4,000 to 10,000 since autumn, 1984. The expansion of this programme means that the vast majority of students of RTCs and VEC colleges are now receiving State grants or scholarships.

As regards the vocational educational courses at second level, I have visited schools where these courses are in operation and I am told by the students, teachers and school managers that they have made an enormous difference to many young people who hitherto either dropped out or went on to an academic stream for which they felt unfit and which copperfastened the poor image they had of themselves. I am glad to report that these courses have meant a great deal to these young people and I look forward to an increased expansion of the courses next year particularly in the secondary schools system.

The net amount sought for the Vote for special schools is £3.938 million. The scope of the services provided for out of this Vote was reduced considerably by the transfer of responsibility for all but one of the residential homes to the Department of Health in 1984. Responsibility for the remaining residential home has been transferred to the Department of Health from 1 January 1985 and provision for the expenditure involved is being included in the revised Estimate for that Department. The amount now sought is mainly to meet the operating costs of the institutions for young offenders at Finglas, Lusk, Clonmel and Whitehall. Some £970,000 of the provision is for capital costs arising from final accounts for Trinity House, Lusk, further developments at St. Joseph's, Clonmel, and the provision of new equipment.

In the area of higher education, £101.8 million is being provided for this Vote. This is mainly for the current and capital costs of the third level institutions funded through the Higher Education Authority. The provision in the Vote does not represent, however, the full resources available to these institutions as it does not include fee income. Neither does this Vote represent the full range of higher education as the provision for the third level courses conducted in RTCs and colleges of technology is contained in the Vote for Post-Primary Education.

So much for the main details of the Estimates. I would now like to make some general comments regarding educational progress being made. First, I would like to tell the House of an extension of the areas of responsibility assigned to Deputy George Birmingham as Minister of State, a position which he has held in my Department, jointly with that which he holds in the Department of Labour, since January 1984.

In the Department of Education, Deputy George Birmingham is now responsible for adult and community education; co-ordination of education and training; aspects of youth affairs still handled in my Department; response to the educational aspects of the Costello report on youth policy and the National Library.

It is my intention that the work of these areas will be co-ordinated within a new community and education division within my Department and I feel that through this division the various areas which I have listed can be handled in a more effective and systematic way.

Before dealing with general matters, I want to refer briefly to some of the major happenings since last year's Estimates were introduced. The first year's progress report on the Programme for Action was published in January. That document speaks for itself. Action has been taken on most of the measures in the programme but it is by no means the end of the action. The progress made demonstrates clearly that we have achieved much despite our financial difficulties. It demonstrates, too, that the educational world is more than ready to respond when given the opportunity. Here I would like to pay a particular tribute to the staff of my Department who, in the best professional traditions of the Civil Service and despite the extra pressures imposed by reductions in staff numbers, have this proud record to their credit.

I was particularly impressed with the extent and the depth of the responses from the educational world to my publication of the document Ages for Learning. I have recently announced decisions on the important issues on which everyone — parents, managers, teachers and young people themselves — needed answers. Questions had been floating around for many years in the educational world and no Minister has tackled them or set out a process by which answers could be found. These decisions will have a major impact on the way in which education will develop to the end of the century. We have removed a source of injustice whereby some students, mostly in the less advantaged areas of education, were only eligible to have five years of post-primary education while others had six years. We have provided for a framework which is definite and consistent while being flexible enough to allow for curriculum development and reform. When fully effective, it is estimated that these measures will involve additional funding of some £20 million per annum. That funding arises from the fact that year by year schools will opt to take on this sixth year and gradually that will be included in each year's Estimates. As schools do so there will be up to 2,000 additional teaching jobs when the scheme is fully extended. I am glad to say that, as Minister for Education, I find myself in the position of being praised by not only management bodies but unanimously by all the teachers' unions as well since I announced that decision.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Minister has become a fairy godmother.

Mrs. Hussey

The ad hoc National Parents Council will hold their inaugural meeting tomorrow. This council will provide the mechanism through which the views and wishes of parents, who have a primary role in the education of their children, can be brought to bear in a formal way on issues at national level. This is a new development and I look forward very much to working with the council. I am grateful to all those associations of parents who gave so generously of their time and expertise in helping my Department prepare a scheme for this new council. I am most grateful to the inspectorate of my Department, at primary level particularly, who worked so hard bringing parents together to elect members to the national parents council.

The Curriculum and Examinations Board issued two major documents during the last year which were received with great interest throughout the education world. The top-level educationalists on the board are working vigorously on curriculum and examinations reform. They continue to be engaged in a fundamental review of the education system and the changes needed for today's and tomorrow's demands. As I have stated before, it is my intention to have the board established on a statutory basis in 1986. We are at present working on the legislation required.

I have already referred in some detail to the development of the ESF-aided courses. I regard this development as one of the major breakthroughs achieved last year and one of the most exciting developments to occur even if only measured in financial terms. I am pleased that the extension of pre-employment courses to secondary schools has opened up new opportunities to such schools which were formerly denied to them. In all, the vocational preparation and training programme has been introduced into some 372 schools, comprising 210 vocational schools, 120 secondary schools and 42 community and comprehensive schools. I should like to praise the authorities of those schools who responded so quickly to the opportunities offered to them when we achieved the breakthrough in Europe to provide such courses.

In accordance with the Government's stated commitment to disadvantaged areas of education, a further £500,000 has been allocated in the 1985 budget for the improvement of conditions and the provision of facilities in areas of greatest need in the primary education sector.

The sum of £500,000 which I had at my disposal in 1984 enabled me to improve the grants for special classes in primary schools, to provide for the payment of special capitation grant supplements and to introduce a series of special measures in 33 selected schools in areas of Dublin City, Cork and Limerick. These measures included the provision of in-service training for teachers, the allocation of over £100,000 to augment the supply of books and materials in the schools concerned and the funding of home-school-community liaison schemes proposed by the boards of management of 31 of the schools. A project in pre-schooling for the children of travellers was also aided from the allocation and enabled much needed equipment, class materials and teaching aids to be provided. In this regard, the number of pre-school centres for children of the travellers continues to grow. Last year seven new pre-school centres were established.

I plan this year to extend the application of additional aid to other areas of educational disadvantage and my Department have already begun the process of consultation with the teaching and managerial interests involved.

My Department adopt a sympathetic attitude towards the staffing needs of schools in disadvantaged areas in view of the exceptional circumstances of their situation and the difficulties experienced by teachers working in these areas, over and above what may be termed normal. It does, therefore, endeavour to maintain in these schools a level of teaching staff sufficient to cope with the special problems inherent in a deprived environment. I shall continue to apply this approach to the staffing of these schools to the limits of the resources available to me.

The question of illiteracy is often mentioned with considerable concern by Members on all sides of the House. Often the greatest incidence of illiteracy is to be found in disadvantaged areas. Accordingly, I want to say a word or two about that problem and to outline the action I have taken to date to deal with it.

I recognise that in our "information society" the inability to read, write and make numerical computations is a greater handicap than it has been at any time in the past. I note that a recent report furnished by the Department of Higher Education and Educational Research in Trinity College recommends that illiteracy should be defined in functional terms. This has long been the view of many literacy workers in Ireland. It is a definition that seems to me to have more merit than those which appeal to standardised measures of linguistic or reading competence. I support the report's recommendation that it should be generally adopted.

Arising out of the report of the Commission on Adult Education, I have already taken steps to implement one of the commission's main recommendations. I have issued a circular letter to all VECs inviting them to take urgent steps to establish adult education boards on an ad hoc basis as soon as possible.

Following the announcement in Building on Reality that the Government would provide over £1 million by 1987 in funds to the VECs to enable them to establish courses — free of charge or at a nominal sum — in community education and in literacy, I have set aside £150,000 in this year's estimates for this purpose. This amount will be channelled to the adult education boards through the VECs. This is the first occasion on which money has been earmarked for this purpose and I am confident that it will mark the development of a co-ordinated approach to the solution of illiteracy in Irish society.

Voluntary endeavour is seen as an integral part of the whole campaign. The literacy scheme run by the Dublin Institute of Adult Education is a good example of combined professional and voluntary action. It is partially funded by my Department through the City of Dublin VEC. In addition, my Department give an annual grant-in-aid to the institute, which this year has been increased by £9,500 to £34,500. The service is planned and co-ordinated by a small core of professional workers and delivered in the main by voluntary tutors who have undertaken special training for the task. Much of the literacy work at present in progress throughout the country is based on this model.

Another example of such co-operation is the National Adult Literacy Agency which has its roots in AONTAS and which came into existance as a specific response to the need for co-ordinated action in the field of adult literacy. I have been impressed by their practical approach to the problem and I have agreed to provide £42,000 in this year's Estimates as a contribution to their general expenses. This represents an increase of £32,000 compared with 1984. I have also increased from £54,000 last year to £95,000 the grant-in-aid to AONTAS whose expertise in the area of adult basic education I am happy to acknowledge. I am pleased also to have been able to increase the grant-in-aid to the People's College, which has a consistent record of performance in the literacy field, from £9,000 to £20,000.

The Programme for Action in Education heralded a return to a policy of renewed emphasis on the need for rationalisation of post-primary education facilities. Subsequently, the desirability of implementing such a policy was among the recommendations made by the National Planning Board.

For a number of reasons, it was almost inevitable that this new emphasis on rationalisation would materialise. The need for rationalisation arises as a logical associate of the following objectives: the need, without increasing expenditure to make educational improvements and meet new challenges through more effective and cost-efficient use of available resources; the need to eliminate in so far as possible duplication and waste in the provision of capital and current facilities; to enhance the range of subject availability for as many pupils as possible; to promote movement towards greater equality of educational opportunity generally and in particular for girls; to promote co-education.

A policy of rationalisation must be associated with anticipated developments in curriculum at second level. The Curriculum and Examinations Board is in operation since January of last year. It has been asked as part of its work to undertake as a matter of urgency a review of the post-primary curriculum generally. The options in senior cycle which are now available following decisions on the Ages for Learning document, will have a bearing on rationalisation. The reduction in the number of smaller schools in favour of larger ones where feasible should result in a greater capability in adapting to a situation where there is greater diversification in the types of courses available for post-primary pupils.

I am fully aware of the sensitive nature of rationalisation and the need to achieve a consensus of all the parties. I and my Department consulted widely at national and local level to achieve such a consensus in individual cases. I am glad to say that agreement about unitary schools has been achieved in many cases. I am grateful to all those who have ensured that local conflict did not arise in these difficult areas.

It is sad where local divisions occur dividing communities casting shadows over what should be one of the most exciting occasions in any community, the provision of a fine new school. But where local agreement cannot be obtained after considerable consultation I, as Minister, conscious of the overriding educational interests of the pupils, must decide between the parties. To procrastinate and to take no action would be a grave dereliction of duty. As Minister for Education the ultimate responsibility is mine.

I am aware of the views of the Irish Vocational Education Association and their fears that rationalisation may lead to a diminishing role for vocational education. I have no fears for the future of vocational education, which has and will continue to have a strong role in the education process. Indeed, time and time again, I have publicly paid tribute to the solid work of vocational education committees in education.

I know that it has long been the policy of the IVEA to seek a greater decentralised form of post-primary education. Indeed, our agreed Programme for Government states that:

Administrative structures within the educational system will be reformed so as to make it more decentralised and democratic.

As a logical step from that, we are at an advanced stage in preparing a discussion paper on some options for devolving responsibility to local education councils and I hope to publish this in the not too distant future.

Is é polasaí an Rialtais úsáid na Gaeilge a leathnú agus a háit sa chóras oideachais a neartú. Mar sin shocraigh an Roinn ar na moltaí sa Phlean Gníomhaíochta don Ghaeilge a chur i gcrích. Chuige sin, bunaíodh coiste sa Roinn féin, agus comhchoiste idir an Roinn agus Bord na Gaeilge. Cheana féin tá athbhreithniú á dhéanamh ar na cúrsaí gairmiúla sa Ghaeilge sna coláistí oideachais. Freisin, cuireadh cársaí speisialta ar bun sa Ghaeltacht chun feabhas a chur ar chaighdeán na Gaeilge sna scrúduithe iontrála.

D'fhoilsigh Institúid Teangeolaíochta Éireann tuairisc ar thaighde a rinneadh — le comhoibriú na Roinne — ar chumas daltaí bunscoile sa Ghaeilge labhartha. Tháinig na príomhoidí le chéile ag cruin-nithe ar fud na tíre chun na torthaí a phlé.

Leanadh leis an gcabhair speisialta a bhí á thabhairt do bhunscoileanna lán-Ghaelacha agus bunaíodh ocht gcinn de na scoileanna seo as an nua i 1984. Tá daichead scoileanna dá leithéid ag feidhmiú taobh amuigh den Ghaeltacht anois. Táim tar éis na deontais a fhaigheann na scoileanna seo a ardú de 33½ faoin gcéad go £10 an páiste.

I gcás na scoileanna iarbhun-oideachais, síneadh an tréimhse chun scrúduithe béil na hardteistiméireachta a reachtáil ó sheachtain amháin go coicís chun go bhféadfaí maoirseacht níos fearr a dhéanamh ar na trialacha féin. Méadaí-odh na deontais i leith oideachas trí Ghaeilge a chur ar fáil sna meánscoil-eanna. Leanfar leis an dea-obair seo sa bhliain atá romhainn agus déanfar gach dícheall chun na moltaísa phlean a bhaint amach.

Mar a cuíreadh in iúl le déanaí ag mór-thionól Bhord na Gaeilge tá sé mar pholásaí ag an Rialtas an Ghaeilge a choim-eád mar chuid éigeantach den churaclam ag an chéad agus an dara leibhéal.

I turn now to third-level education. The Government in Building on Reality propose to provide third-level education for as many young people as possible. They have committed themselves and provided the money for an increase in expenditure in real terms by 1987.

Student grants are being increased from September next by 10 per cent in real terms. Eligibility limits are being increased by 5 per cent in real terms from the same date and will be indexed in the following years. That provision for indexation is something we should consider for a moment because it is the first time that parents and students will be aware in advance that over the next few years the rate of their support in these grants will be kept in line with inflation. They will know exactly where they are going in that respect.

A tapering mechanism will be introduced which will allow for the partial payment of fees for those who were trapped because their incomes fell just outside the normal maximum limit. That sudden cut-off point caused great hardship to parents and I am glad to be able to say that the Government have agreed to provide this special tapering mechanism. These are the first major improvement grants since 1981 when Deputy John Boland was responsible for the improvements then introduced.

I have already referred to the breakthrough this year with the increased funding of middle-level technician courses at third level. Now let me give the facts regarding what I can only term the phenomenal increase in the numbers of third level students in receipt of State grants of one kind or another. In 1980-81, the year prior to the introduction of Deputy John Boland's reforms, there were 11,448 or 27.3 per cent of the student population in receipt of grants and/or free tuition. Now in the present 1984-85 academic year, 23,308 students or 45 per cent of the student population are receiving grants. Higher education grant holders do not have to pay fees. These statistics speak for themselves and are an eloquent testimony of the concern Coalition Governments have consistently shown for our young people, particularly the less advantaged, in third level education. When next September's improvements in the grants scheme are operating with subsequent indexation of income eligibility limits, and a further development of ESF funded courses, I am confident that the situation will be reached where two out of every three students will be in benefit. This is a measure of the progress which the Government have made in the area of student support.

Finally, the national plan confirms the Government's policy to provide additional and improved third-level accommodation. The capital provision this year at £26.9 million represents an increase of 37 per cent over last year.

The national plan listed a whole range of new building projects being prepared both to upgrade existing accommodation and to provide for much needed new places. We said then that we were including in our Estimates and in our plans for the coming years the detailed financial provisions necessary for those facilities. We also said that having provided the necessary money we would consider each proposal separately and its need and justification would be dealt with in the context of the finances available to the Government.

I was astonished that the only response of the Opposition to the provision of these much needed facilities, particularly in areas like Tallaght where there is such a huge young population, was to describe this as an election gimmick. That response was depressing. The young people, and their parents, of Tallaght, Blanchardstown, Dún Laoghaire and so on, must be puzzled to hear after spending years requesting these facilities, when the population projections are definite, when the provision of the facilities was signalled by the Government and when the money was laid out carefully in the planning process, that the only response of the Opposition was to describe this move as an election gimmick. When the national plan was published I clearly signalled that I would be announcing each plan as it came on stream through the Government process.

I should like to tell the House what I announced in recent months. Those decisions were made following careful planning and careful financial provision. I was not really astonished at the reaction of the Opposition because careful planning and careful financial provision is something foreign to Fianna Fáil, something they find impossible to deal with.

In January I announced a new engineering building at University College, Dublin, and major extensions to the Dublin Institute of Technology Colleges at Bolton Street and Kevin Street at an overall estimated cost of just £34 million. Last month I gave the go ahead to two new regional colleges for Thurles and Castlebar at an estimated cost of £9 million, providing 1,600 new places between them. All these facilities have been called for and are needed, particularly in the Dublin area because the population of Dublin is growing at such a rate that we have to make provisions for the young people all over Dublin and the surrounding county.

Yesterday I was pleased to announce five further major building projects. I announced an RTC at Tallaght with 1,200 student places at a cost of £13 million. Tallaght is one area where the Department of Education can be very proud of their planning and provisions. For many years the Department have been ahead of the population shifts in the Tallaght area and I am very happy to visit Tallaght to open the five new second level schools which have followed the very fine primary schools. We are also planning that when those young people are ready for third-level education it will be available to them. We must remind ourselves that the third-level college in Tallaght is an RTC providing a very wide range of technical education, the vast majority of the students of which will pay no fees and will be in receipt of grants.

I announced an RTC at Dún Laoghaire to provide 1,000 places at a cost of almost £10 million, something which has been very badly needed in that area for a long time. I also announced an RTC at Blan-chardstown to provide 1,000 places at a cost of £11 million. I was astonished to read in one of this morning's newspapers that a Deputy from that area criticised the provision of an RTC for his constituency. I am very sorry that the Deputy, who is not in the House at the moment, should have criticised the provision of this type of education for those young people, because education in the RTC area is very much in line with the kind of employment opportunities for which we must prepare our young people.

I also announced phase II of the National Institute for Higher Education, Dublin, to provide an additional 1,000 places at an extra cost of £3 million. These places will be in the areas of engineering, computer science and industrial management engineering in high technology, areas which have been identified as having an acute manpower requirement. The country must welcome the new dental hospital/school for Trinity College on the Saint James's Hospital site at an estimated cost of £17.5 million. We need to have the best in terms of dental training for our dental students and we are providing the best in Europe in this area. It will also provide much needed training of assistants and specialists in different areas of dentistry which will be of enormous benefit to the whole country, not only for Dublin.

The total cost of yesterday's package is £74.5 million, which will provide for 4,200 new student places overall in the expanding technological area. These new commitments, all of which were envisaged in the national plan, involved a total spending package of £126.5 million. At the same time ongoing projects in the third level sector include extension and adaptation works to the Albert College building at NIHE, Dublin, completion and equipping of the second phase of NIHE, Limerick and a new 800 place RTC in course of construction at Tralee. This programme gives effect to our commitment to the programme for action and in the national plan. This policy is consistent with the priority which the Government give to having a well educated population and is an expression of confidence by the Government in the extent to which such a population can contribute to economic growth and to the general quality of life for our young people.

In submitting these Estimates to the House I have demonstrated that progress has been achieved in the last year. A great deal has been happening in education. Much has been done and much remains to be done. I and the Government are committed to providing the best possible educational system which will develop the talents and the potential of all our children. I can assure the House that I will continue to strive for the most equitable and comprehensive system which is within our capacity to achieve.

I commend the Estimates to the House.

Mrs. O'Rourke

It is time for the Minister and myself to take the stage at our annual outing. We have had many outings throughout the year and, while all the world is a stage and we are all players, it strikes me as extremely strange that the Minister has transformed herself in about six weeks from the role of Mother Hubbard to that of the Fairy Godmother.

At the end of April we tabled a motion dealing with educational cutbacks. The theme of the Minister's reply then, and her recurring theme in this House and elsewhere since then, has been that her cupboard was bare because of the profligacy of previous Fianna Fáil administrations. Now everything has changed. With the wave of a magic wand many millions of pounds for education have been conjured up out of nowhere. This very erratic behaviour has left the public puzzled and confused.

I want to tell the House something that happened to me yesterday between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. I was in Athlone doing a detailed canvas for the local elections of a mixed area — one of which might be termed a disadvantaged area and the other a middle class area. I dislike using labels but I have to do it to make my point. I was in various houses and in one there were three young men, two students and one finished school and in another a young woman. I spoke to many young people and parents and they expressed their cynicism at the Minister's exercise in rushing to the papers, television and so on, to announce her new Fairy Godmother role. The public have not accepted this. They do not want to accept it. They do not believe it and such a swift role change has left them reeling from shock.

The Coalition's tactics in the local elections have been to denigrate the Fianna Fáil package. Their programme was based on how spendthrift the Fianna Fáil package would be. The brazenness of the approach adopted yesterday, and I suppose which will be continued up to 20 June, leaves me gasping. I have never seen the like in the political arena before. This erratic behaviour has left people puzzled and confused. We were told finance could not be made available for essential services, such as disadvantaged, remedial, guidance teachers, pupil/ teacher ratio, third level funding and so on, and we have all had representations from the principals of primary schools about the under funding of the capitation grants and of important subjects having to be dropped from the second level curriculum.

The public have grown weary of this kind of cynical posturing and it will behoves a Minister for Education or a Department concerned with young people to be so incredible as to switch from a containment policy to one of utter freedom with funding. This leaves one reeling from shock, but has not fooled the public a bit. One might accept that, I suppose, but not when one hears what is being said by the general secretary of the Fine Gael Party — I am not sure of his title — and various Ministers like Deputy Barry Desmond, Deputy Dukes and so on, who have been stressing how much the Fianna Fáil package would cost. Yet they brazenly, openly and opportunistically announce projects amounting to untold millions, in many cases projects which have been repeatedly announced and will continue to be announced, I expect, for the rest of the life of this Government.

On my journey from Athlone this morning while turning over in my mind the coming events of the day I was reminded of a poem in the senior cycle anthology of poetry by Dryden, entitled Mac Flecknoe who was described in the poem as the last great prophet of tautology. We have had, in the last number of weeks and today, supreme examples of tautology. It is a case of ever repeated indoctrination.

Mr. Dowling

The Deputy is doing a lot better herself.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I did not interrupt the Minister once.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Wyse)

No interruptions, please.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I would expect the same courtesy from the Deputy. We have been very well behaved. The more these announcements are repeated the more the cynicism grows. I wish the Minister would not preach. People can take a lot, but not preaching from on high. In the beginning of her speech she says:

....that Deputies should identify where additional funds will come from if they ask for additional services. Despite the offence this request caused to some Deputies last year, I believe it is a reasonable request to make. It is, after all, one thing for particular interest groups outside this House simpress their own case ... it is another to have Deputies inside the House simultaneously demand lower taxation and bigger spending.

As I have said repeatedly on each Education Estimate debate and at every education forum, I represent my party in Education. Every Deputy is elected to this House by numbers of people who expect that Deputy to represent their interests, both at a national and at local level. If they have a particular case which they wish put forward, the Estimate debate for the relevant governmental Department will be an ideal occasion for such submission. For the Minister to say this cannot be done is overstepping the mark. It is taking from the role of an elected person and thereby diminishing the role of democracy. We have every right, as has every Member of the House, to put forward a submission on behalf of an interest group who wish to have it brought on to the floor of this House and listened to by the relevant Minister and Government secretaries or advisers and, it is hoped, acted upon. For the Minister to say that it is sad and offensive to do this is going beyond her brief.

In general on the Estimate for Education there are some points that I would warmly welcome and some I would castigate. The Minister stated that she was saddened — and that is a word she frequently uses with reference to me — that I had termed as political opportunism the introduction of the huge bonanza of spending for the Department of Education announced yesterday and that no word of welcome was issued. She should check the Evening Herald of yesterday evening and the Irish Independent of this morning in both of which newspapers I say that I warmly welcome the repeated announcement of these policies. This is on public record. Saying that I have not welcomed them is entirely wrong.

For practicality, I shall compartmentalise my contribution into the various sections of education, although I have often said that it is not quite the ideal way to do it. At primary level I shall deal first with the Minister's discussion document Ages for Learning. I am particularly glad that she has on this occasion adopted our mantle and retained the right of parental choice to put children into school at four years of age. If there is one thing on which I might be guilty of tautology it is that — that schools should have the right to accept pupils at that age and that if a child is able socially, educationally and physically to go to school at four years of age and the parent wishes it, it will be done. I was not surprised that the Minister received a great response from the public, teachers and parents in general to the initial discussion document, Ages for Learning. I know about that response because since that document was issued one met everywhere the cry that this four years entry should not be taken away.

For the Minister to claim that no other Minister for Education had ever set out the issues as clearly as she has in her response is quite untrue. If there is one tenet of educational philosophy or thought which has been consistently carried through within the ranks of Fianna Fáil, it is that of school entry at four years of age. We have never wavered from that. That is not to say that we want to adopt an Ian Paisley-like stance on everything. We saw here the danger of the diminishing of the right to education which for so long had been available in this country. Furthermore, we do not have the statutory pre-school facilities which many of the other European countries have. We should never have contemplated the idea. But it was contemplated in the original document by the Minister, complete with very misleading graphs showing the ages at which children go to formal school in the continental countries. These graphs made it appear that we were crudely and cruelly pushing young children into school at four years of age; but on investigation and research it is noted that of the countries where the children did not start formal school until five, six or seven years of age, in most instances there are comprehensive statutory pre-school facilities available. The statistics produced were not comparable.

Lest I be taken for being declamatory and nasty all the time, let me say that I am glad that the Minister has adopted our policy in this regard. Minister Boland in his day tried this tactic and it did not work and Minister Wilson realised that it would not work, but yet we had again the flirting with the idea by the present incumbent of the office. Let that be the end of the matter.

I also agree with the Minister's dictum that children are leaving the whole school system too soon. When my son obtained his leaving certificate at 17 years of age, enabling him to go to college, I advised him that he was too young for the rude world. It was not mother hen clucking. It was a realisation that young men or women of 17, even though they appear sophisticated, mature and would be physically capable, emotionally would not be sufficiently equipped. A lengthening of the educational process to the age of 18 will be of great benefit. The world outside school years ago was relatively simple compared with what school leavers now face when they perhaps go from home to a job, or education, as many must. Many of us in this House may have gone on to third level education at the age of 17, but it was a simpler world, with fewer problems. The response to Ages for Learning was a definite one from the public and it was one the Minister did well to heed. Let that be the end to all of that.

With regard to capitation grants at primary school level, the Minister made much of the large increase given two years ago and the increase of £1 last year which she said was in line with inflation. Like myself, the Minister must have received a vast correspondence from hard-pressed school principals. I cannot just be the only person to whom they are writing: indeed, Deputies in my party pass on to me their letters on this subject. The various groups I have met in the past three years from primary schools, particularly primary schools in the inner city or in the south city area, are putting up with immense difficulties regarding capitation grants. In many instances schools have a large accumulated debt and, while money from the disadvantaged fund has gone to some of those schools, the amount given has no impact on the debt. Giving a sum of £1,500 or £2,000 to a school that has a debt of £30,000 only emphasises the hopelessness of the situation. In addition, in many of those schools falling numbers have meant that the per capita element has decreased. It is still decreasing but, at the same time, schools must be maintained, painted and repaired. Classroom equipment must be provided, and this in the face of a hopelessly inadequate capitation grant.

In her speech the Minister said everything was lovely in respect of this matter but I can only tell her what has been told to me on many occasions by principals and by concerned parents. No matter how many garden parties can be organised, no matter how many sponsored skips, runs, swims or jogs take place, they will not solve the problem. In addition, there is a limit to what parents can do in the line of constant fund raising, particularly at a time when in many of the homes there is no wage earner. Parents want their children to have a good education and this is true no matter how disadvantaged or poor are their circumstances. It is the primitive instinct that parents want the best for their children but on many occasions they have to refuse their children's requests for sponsorship in various activities for the schools. The Minister will have to consider this matter very seriously, particularly in respect of schools in the inner city and in the south city area. In many cases parents are doing excellent work in aiding their schools but they are not getting the necessary help from the Department. Deputy Briscoe will deal with this matter at length in his contribution.

I should like to discuss the principle of early intervention at primary school level. It has been positively proved by research that if a child who exhibits a tendency towards slowness in education or who shows an incompetence in reading and writing can be reached early enough — certainly up to the age of seven years — the educational and social advantages can be enormous. I am not happy that enough has been done in this area. Despite funding for the disadvantaged and the emphasis put by the Minister on special schools and so on, I am not convinced that the matter is being dealt with properly. There has been a switch in the terminology of illiteracy and non-competence to which the Minister referred. There are always new concepts emerging, but what I am referring to is the young child of seven, eight, nine or ten who is not able to read or write. That is a huge scandal and if we do not address this problem it will become a major issue.

The problem is that there are not enough remedial teachers. They cannot cope with the huge classes. Even the most dedicated and devoted teacher cannot have the segregation necessary within a class where children with learning difficulties need to be assessed. When such a child is more than seven years the whole problem becomes even more difficult and the child becomes a potential drop-out This is because he or she has not been reached in a positive way at an early stage. Many such children need never become remedial. I am not saying they could become the brightest but they could take their place if they were reached in time.

As a special point in my contribution I ask that there be a full and comprehensive review of all primary schools. Where it is shown that pupils have difficulty all of that data should be correctly analysed and noted and a comprehensive plan should be worked out. However, such a plan would have to take into account psychological, social, medical and environmental aspects. All of these factors make up the sum of a disadvantaged child. It is not just a question of Mary or Tom sitting in front of the teacher and not being able to read. In many cases the child is seen as rebellious or difficult and as thwarting the teacher. What should be considered is the background of the child. We have failed in many instances to build a close link between the agencies that operate in their individual way for the good of the child and the family. There is great need for an overall plan.

I am not raising this matter in an alarmist way. I know that what I say is true from experience in my area and from contacts I have with people interested in the matter. The problems of the disadvantaged child will have to be tackled, not in a glib, perfunctory way, of dishing out money to schools. That will not do. I make this point with sincerity because of cases I have come across recently. Lives will be blighted because of the lack of intervention at the right time.

I wonder whether in her deliberations the Minister has been made aware of the views of parents and teachers regarding the need for some formalisation in the latter years in primary school. The relaxed carefree atmosphere is ideal for children in the early years of their education. That is a time for constant and happy interchange between the teacher and the pupil but at the fifth and sixth class level there is a need for a more formal approach in order to ensure that a degree of fluency and competence is acquired before the child transfers to second level education. There is a need for standards, regardless of how formal or informal education may be at any level but standards are very important at the transition stage.

When referring to the disadvantaged I overlooked referring to the Rutland Street project. I am glad the project is going ahead but perhaps there is a need for an all embracing consideration of that whole project.

The Minister referred to parents committees in the primary schools. This concept seems to be very much on a haphazard basis because I know of many areas in the country in which there are no parent committee meetings. I have spoken about this in public but I do not know what the reason for the situation is. Perhaps the fault lies with individual managers, but for some reason there are no such meetings in many areas and this deprives the parents of continuing representation from year to year. While the idea is ad hoc and will remain so until the present group set up elections for the next representation, there has not emerged a truly representative parents council. The idea is very good because of the importance of encouraging parental involvement in education.

Every Member of the House is aware of the cutbacks in medical cards. I have learned that according to the recent guidelines from the Department of Health to the CEO of each health board there are to be no exceptions so far as cases for special leniency in the issue of medical cards is concerned. This will mean that fewer pupils will qualify for the special waiver in respect of school transport that is applied in the case of medical card holders. This will impose a further hardship on parents and, despite the many demands on parents, they are anxious to do everything possible for their children.

There is the question, too, of the pupil-teacher ratio at second level. Because of the unsatisfactory situation in this regard essential subjects have been lost in second level schools. There was a time when these subjects might have been regarded as non-essential when compared with basics such as Irish, English and mathematics but in most instances they are subjects that are very pleasant so far as the pupils are concerned and which allow them the opportunity later in life of a wider range of options.

The cutbacks in education, starting with the budget 1983 and continuing through 1984 and 1985, have meant the loss of some essential and very important subjects at second level. This will militate against curriculum reform also. There have been rumblings in that respect, but perhaps there will be another fairy godmother to wave a wand and make everything all right. The choice of subjects is being limited to biology with either history, art, music or some other subjects whereas about five years ago it was perhaps biology and history. This cannot be good for the education system because it curtails the range of experiences and educational activities in which young people engage and it causes enormous problems for school principals in devising time tables.

I regard as genuine the Minister's personal commitment to the concept of equality in education but I am disappointed that she has not carried this through to her ministerial responsibility. I am differentiating between her personal commitment to a philosophy and her failure to have that commitment implemented when she is in a position to do so. One tires of hearing that girls should take such subjects as woodwork, honours mathematics, physics, science and allied subjects when these subjects are not available in the schools because of the lack of the necessary numbers of teachers to teach them. These are subjects that would prepare girls for training courses later with AnCO. The public are aware of this but I have a problem explaining to them that I am not in a position to take steps to rectify matters.

The completion of a sixth year at school level will leave young adults much more prepared when they leave school. It is customary for a Minister when replying to a debate of this kind to give precise answers to precise questions put by the Opposition spokesperson so on that basis I look forward to my questions being answered when the Minister is replying later.

A few weeks ago the Minister announced the creation of 2,000 teaching jobs. This delighted every unemployed teacher but it emerged later that the jobs would not materialise in September this year nor in September next year nor the year after. I am seeking a precise answer from the Minister as to when those 2,000 new jobs will be available to unemployed graduates. No doubt the jobs will be announced again several times.

The cutback in respect of guidance at second level is having a severe effect on young people. Some time ago there was career guidance, but that was when the business scene and the job scene generally was good. Unfortunately that is not longer the case. However, that is not to say that young people do not need guidance. They need both career guidance and guidance in social matters. They need guidance in regard to considering whatever options may be open to them, what training courses they should opt for and so on. There are many implications as a result of the cutbacks in the area of guidance teachers. In the Joint Committee on Women's Rights we pinpointed the adverse pupil-teacher ratio at second level as being one of the deterrents for young women following courses they should be able to follow. We mentioned especially cutbacks in the area of guidance particularly at a time of changing sexual mores in society.

The ESF, or VP courses, have greatly enhanced the options open to young people at second level education. Fortunately the fear I expressed initially regarding these courses has not materialised, that was, that there would be a push by parents to put their children forward for those courses in respect of which there is payment. That began, but thankfully has not spread. Perhaps it was initially attractive to some parents.

I come now to the reservation I have, not about the course at all because they are fine and serve a particular need extraordinarily well. Indeed, may I say: long may the EC continue. But there is now a very sharp delineation being drawn. Let us say a pupil goes on to intermediate cert level — there is now going to be no group certificate — all being equal up to that level. At post-intermediate certificate level there is a variety of funded courses on offer at second level. Allied to that there is the formal academic type of education continuing. I do not want to see a scene develop, á lá Dale Tussing and his report on education some years ago, in which the idea of charging for the senior cycle of second level schooling would obtain. I may be sounding a warning note where there is no need. Thinking about the situation and viewing the whole educational scene that could develop in two or three years time, when a pupil would have left compulsory school education, the whole thrust of the various documents, comments and writings on education is that up to compulsory level it should be as available and as free as one can make it.

We have had the growth of the ESF-aided courses for vocational preparation, which are of enormous benefit to particular pupils. There is then the academic stream. I wonder if there is a scene developing in which that sharp delineation will have a price tag on it. Let us say, for want of a better description, the academic senior cycle schooling will be priced. If that is germinating in somebody's mind it should not be allowed develop because it would lead to elitism of the very worst kind. That would mean there would be pupils who would be genuinely academically inclined, who would want to go on and would find that they could not do so because of the fee structure. I do not want to hear the idea even being floated as a discussion document. I am very suspicious of discussion documents, because in many instances they end up as policy documents. This would need to be examined. I had reservations earlier because I was afraid it would happen to existing courses. It has not happened but, if fee structures were introduced, it would.

The Minister referred to the Curriculum and Examinations Board to be statutorily set up in January 1986 and which has now been functioning on an ad hoc basis for the past year and a half. They have issued two major documents —Assessment and Certification and Issues and Structures in Education. What led me to my earlier reservation about the delineation between compulsory and voluntary education was that, while initially they were to examine, I think, the leaving certificate, so far they have come up with a few pages only on that subject. Principally they have come up with a review of the intermediate certificate and of the courses relating thereto.

We are in a unique position here to learn from the mistakes made in other countries, particularly in England and Scotland where there are always huge developments taking place in education because of their unique educational structure. We are in an ideal position to learn from reports that have come to us from other countries, how they entered bald-headed into curriculum reform and are now retrenching. I am thinking particularly of the Dunning report in England. We can read the educational supplements in those two fine newspapers we get in our Library, the Manchester Guardian and The Times where I have noted recently, in England and Scotland, a retrenchment towards formalisation of education, when they had run somewhat amok, with all sorts of courses being available to everybody in an unstructured way through their various education boards.

I could not have been a party to the educational process for 20 years without recognising the need or welcoming the introduction of the curriculum reform signalled in the White Paper prepared during the term of office of Deputy John Wilson as Minister for Education. We are now poised to evaluate what has happened in other countries in regard to curriculum reform, to note the caveats they have now entered and to learn from them. I sense a pulling back on the part of the Curriculum and Examinations Board. These are ideas in my mind only. I have no direct contact with anybody on that board. Just reading and thinking about it I sense a pulling back from the brightening dawn of January 1984. It may not be a bad thing at all. I said then, and repeat, that the correct balance, formula, mix would have to be found before we threw out the baby with the bath water. We must adapt, making school more relevant to the needs of the present day world; but in doing so we must not throw out the window everything we have won along the way.

The parents' council at second level which is to be formally inaugurated over this coming weekend is to be welcomed, one aspect of which is the role of the CSPA. I am aware of the number of seats offered to them on that council. I am aware of their reservations, of their future input on that council vis-á-vis their present position, being truly representative of a particular group of parents. Their reservations should be noted, and I hope they will be, in the compilation of that parents' council.

Referring to second level, in particular the role of the VECs, the Minister spoke of the role of the local education authorities, how the need for these had been recognised and that there would be a discussion document issued thereon. I and my team on education have been examining all of this. It is interesting. The whole idea of democracy at local level is interesting to any public representative. I look forward with interest to that discussion document, to the models it might propose, how it might chart a way forward. It is something that will constitute a welcome and interesting development if and when it comes about. I do not know how the overall role of second level, voluntary schools and the work they have put into the community can be fitted into that parameter. That is probably something for another debate in this House.

Reverting to the statutory establishment of the Curriculum and Examinations Board, I note that the Minister said that the relevant legislation was at present in course of preparation in her Department. When replying this afternoon I should like the Minister to tell me how far advanced is that legislation and what is the timetable for its introduction in this House. I shall have an enormous amount of preparatory work to do for its introduction. It is rare that legislation in regard to education is introduced in the House. In itself that is probably good and is an omen that the system is operating satisfactorily. I and my party want to be prepared for this important development and I should like to have a precise time-table.

The Minister made much of the introduction of the rise in third level student grants which will be operative as and from September 1985 with its subsequent index-linked, tapering mechanism. It is four years since there has been a rise in third level education grants. It is ridiculous for the Minister to announce the increase with a fanfare when one puts it in the context of the rates of increase which are necessary having regard to the fact that it is four years since the grants were increased. Whenever grants are raised there is always a huge outcry from students who are already doing courses because their grants date from the date on which they started the course and they are not included in the increases. I know it might mean huge retrospective payments but I would be glad if something could be done about it because it leads to discontent and worry among parents. For the Minister to say that this rise shows the high regard the Coalition have for third level students is a silly statement because this is the first increase in four years. Parents are finding it increasingly difficult to allow their children to go on to third level education. Even worse than the lack of increase in the grants is the low level of eligibility for grants.

I would also like an explanation as to when the announced RTCs will come on stream. Have sites been acquired? When will building commence and what will be the exact cost when these colleges are built? The precise details would help to lift the fog of euphoria. How many pupils will be catered for in these colleges and how many teachers will they employ? I would like definite answers to these questions.

I received an urgent telex this morning from a representative group of students attending RTCs who had read that the Education Estimate was to be discussed today, in relation to student representation on boards of management. For two years I was embroiled in a controversy with the Westmeath VEC and we successfully passed a motion that there would be a student representative on the board of the Regional College Management in Athlone, to have it reversed by Fine Gael and Labour members at a subsequent board of management meeting. This is extraordinary behaviour for democrats. The Minister at some Fine Gael conference recently said she would look at the situation of student representation on RTCs. Some RTCs have student representation and some have not. We should have amending legislation to give students a right to be represented on boards of management. Both the students and I understood that this would be introduced prior to the local elections this year to enable it to come into force when the sub-committees of the various local authorities are being set up. What is the Minister's time-table for her announced decision at the Fine Gael outing? It is not good enough to leave it to the goodwill of various areas. The students should have a statutory right to be represented. The students would contribute to the running of a board of management. I am committed to this idea and I would like a commitment from the Minister.

Since they have been established, RTCs have contributed to the economy, to infrastructure and to the business climate of a region but it is now time for them to be reviewed. There should be a liaison officer attached to RTCs to liaise with the IDA and other employment oriented agencies. A liaison officer in an RTC or in a college of technology would play a huge role in advising students of the many schemes available and this in turn would benefit the wider commercial and industrial areas of life.

The RTCs wish to have autonomy and to be separate from the VECs. This proposal should be considered. We all sympathise with mature students in third level colleges and universities because by giving up a job and going back into mainstream student life they have shown a huge commitment. They contribute to the life of a college by their maturity. They have been along the road on which many young people are setting out and they give another dimension to college life which is very valuable. Funding for mature students is very ambiguous. There should be funding for mature students and I agree that the applicants should be well vetted for this funding. The Minister should give special attention to that proposal.

I am sometimes troubled by attacks on universities by people who consider themselves technologists or scientists and who cannot see the importance of the universities. We cannot channel all our resources into one area. We must recognise the role that universities play and the fact that courses on the humanities, for instance, leave one ready for further education and are a great advantage of later life.

I will end on a political point. I have a right as Opposition spokesperson to put forward the viewpoints of the interest groups who come to me recognising that I am the main Opposition spokesperson on Education. Without leave of the Minister I have the right to come into this House when the House has ordered a debate on Education to put forward the points which have been made to me and not to be preached at by the Minister and told that I should not say this in this House. I am dependent on the voters of my constituency and while I am sent here from my constituency I will continue to put forward my views and those of my party on education. The Minister said with regard to the Ages for Learning that she was echoed by the teachers' unions and various groups. The exercise into which she entered yesterday and upon which she has been engaged has left most people with a sour taste in their mouths and particularly young people. Since I started my contribution her role has been transformed from that of Mother Hubbard to fairy godmother and that sits ill on her. To say on the one hand that there is no funding and on the other hand that there are unbelievable millions goes beyond the point of belief or comprehension. Lest I be accused of sexism for mentioning the fairy godmother or Mother Hubbard, I suppose the term Santa Claus would be non-sexist.

Minister of State at the Department of Education (Mr. Creed)

As the Minister has dealt in broad outline with the Department I propose to confine myself to the areas of my responsibility because I understand that time is restricted in this debate and other Deputies are anxious to contribute in the time available.

The first of these is Sport. In the last few years there has been a major increase in participation in all kinds of sporting activity. This may be attributed to more leisure time, extensive coverage and attractive presentation of sport in the mass media and the better awareness of the value and importance of physical fitness.

These welcome developments are evidence that the Government's policy of encouraging people to participate in sporting activities is achieving its objective. However, having created an awareness of the value of physical recreational sport, there is an obligation on Government to provide the necessary back-up services to ensure that sports participants have the best advice available to them in relation to coaching, training and injury prevention as well as ensuring that talented sportspersons have adequate opportunity to achieve their full potential at the highest level of international competition.

The Government's commitment to the provision of these services is evidenced by the fact that since they took office the financial provision for the promotion and development of sport at national level has increased by 68.5 per cent. Having regard to the current economic climate and to the resulting restrictions on public expenditure, I am satisfied that the Government allocation of £1.36 million to sport at national level in 1985 has been an extremely generous one. Of this amount, a sum of £864,780 has been allocated in direct grants to national sports organisations to assist in the areas of coaching, administration, equipment and special projects designed to increase participation or improve standards. I believe that this commitment from the Government to voluntary sports organisations is testament to the work done by those organisations which must be regarded as the backbone of sport in Ireland.

The major beneficiary of the increased allocation for sport in 1985 is the Olympic Council of Ireland which has received a total grant of £240,000 this year. This is the most substantial and significant contribution ever made by a Government to the development of athletes of Olympic potential from the commencement of the four year Olympic cycle. The allocation of this grant to the Olympic Council of Ireland is in response to a joint submission which was prepared, at my request, by the Olympic Council of Ireland and Cospóir, the National Sports Council. This submission contains specific proposals as to the best means of meeting the requirements of our elite athletes leading up to the 1988 Olympics and also relating to Olympic sport in the long term. I am convinced that this grant will have a major impact not only for our most elite athletes but also for the identification and development of the potential of junior athletes in the various Olympic sports.

Other non-Olympic sports have also received substantial grant aid towards the cost of sending teams abroad to international competitions or for hosting major events at home. Three major events being hosted in Ireland this year to which I have given my fullest support are the European Special Olympics, which will be held next month, the European surfing championships and the world women's squash championships. Apart from helping to boost national pride, the major spin-off effect of success at international competition or from hosting major events at home is that it inevitably inspires young people to become involved in sport.

I might mention at this stage that next year it is hoped to hold the Council of Europe Sports Ministers meeting here in Dublin. This was agreed some six months ago, and while many other nations in Europe were looking for the hosting of this conference, we were the nation selected to host it.

Another scheme brought under the auspices of my Department is the provision of five sports scholarships annually to young athletes of high potential. These scholarships are tenable at any third level college in the country and the scholarship holders are rigorously monitored and tested to ensure that they are given every opportunity to reach the highest levels of their sport.

Side by side with these developments in the field of organised sport is the spectacular increase in active participation in non-competitive sport. In the last decade, under the influence of the "Sport for All" campaign promoted by Cospóir, the National Sports Council, sport has become an increasingly important social phenomenon. The main theme underlying sports policy throughout Europe has been the realisation of the "Sport for All" idea.

The year 1985 has been designated International Youth Year and this year, special emphasis is being placed on youth participation in sporting activities. With the co-operation of the sports advisory bodies of the 38 vocational education committees and the national sports organisations, a national youth-sport week is being held from 24 to 30 of this month. Youth-Sport Week is designated to provide our large young population, particularly those who currently do not participate in sport or recreational activities, with an opportunity to do so in the hope that this experience will lay the foundations for continued participation in later life. I am confident that many thousands of young people will participate in many of the events which are being organised throughout the country.

The promotional campaigns of Cospóir will continue to give a high profile to sport as a healthy and enjoyable leisure activity, and programmes and literature will continue to be developed to advise and assist the non-participant to get involved.

In addition to the funds available to aid sport at national level, a sum of £812,000 will be allocated to vocational education committees to enable them to respond to the needs of youth and sports clubs and organisations at local level. This is a very important aspect of funding for sport and it should not be overlooked when considering the provisions in this area. I would like to pay tribute to the sports advisory bodies of the VECs who do a very good job in the promotion of sport generally.

Sport has achieved a particularly prominent place in the headlines in one form or other this year. Sadly, in recent weeks, it has not always been the achievements on the field of play that have come to prominence but it is the happenings surrounding some major sporting occasions which have made the headlines. The tragedies which we have witnessed both in Bradford and Brussels have made us acutely aware of the difficulties facing sport today. Closer to home, some ugly incidents in sporting events in the recent past give us every cause to be less than complacent about the potential for violent behaviour at such events. Football violence is not an isolated social phenomenon but it appears to be, unfortunately, only one manifestation of a broader malaise which society must control and cure.

The Government have participated in the development of European guidelines on the reduction of spectator violence at sporting events and in particular at football matches. These guidelines, which have been prepared by the Council of Europe, have been brought to the attention of law enforcement and relevant spectator sports bodies in this country. The guidelines deal with matters such as inter-agency co-operation, policing, penalties, lay-out of football stadia, sale of tickets, identification of trouble makers, alcohol sales, crowd control, control of implements capable of being used as weapons, stewarding, international co-operation, role of the media, etc. It is my intention to bring together in the near future all the agencies; both Government and sporting, who have a responsibility in this area, so that we can take the necessary precautions to ensure that any threat of injury to spectators, either by violence or by unsafe grounds is removed.

While crowd violence, rioting and general anti-social behaviour is practised only by a small minority, the potential consequences of their actions are both horrific and far-reaching. I believe that one remedy to this situation is to encourage to the greatest possible extent active participation in sport for our young people. The energy expended, the training, the discipline, the rewards and benefits to mind and body by participation in sport should be a major factor in improving the quality of life and broadening the horizons of young people who might otherwise seek to expend their energies in anti-social behaviour.

It is wise to recognise that sport provides a viable and realistic alternative to misguided and anti-social behaviour among our people. At a time when Irish society and, indeed, society in general is faced with many challenges in providing suitable outlets for the energies of its young population, an increasing number of whom may never pursue employment in the traditional sense, it is important that in educating our young people, both in the school and out of school context, we should provide them with the capacity to create for themselves a sense of self-esteem and fulfilment whether at work or out of work. The positive attitudes and the skills which can be acquired through sporting participation can contribute towards the goal of "sport for all" and also, I feel, help to reduce the fearsome prospect of violence in the sports arena.

I am proud to say that this Government's contribution to the promotion and development of sport in the current year is the most substantial and significant ever and ensures that the voluntary bodies can continue to pursue their development plans and expand their programmes to meet the needs of their members and the community in general.

On the question of sport generally, very rarely do we recognise the major voluntary contribution made by many people. I should like to place on record my appreciation of the contribution made by a number of people and a number of organisations towards the promotion of sport generally for our young people. I want to refer briefly to the Sport For All Day at primary school level. I am very grateful to the Irish National Teachers' Organisation for the way in which they have organised a very successful sports day for the children for the third year in succession. This is one of the areas I was very concerned about. Cospóir, the National Sports Council, recommended that we should extend the whole concept of sports to the primary school children. I am very grateful for the way in which the Irish National Teachers' Organisation carried out a very successful Sports for All Day for the third time at all the primary schools throughout the country.

I am grateful for the voluntary contribution made by so many people to sports generally and the very generous sponsorship which is available for sport. This is rarely recognised. I am grateful for the voluntary contributions, for the sponsorship and the goodwill. The fact that there is increased funding from the State for sport is a recognition of the importance of sport generally. There is a strong economic case to be made for further grant aid to encourage young people to lead a healthier life style. This is the whole idea behind the Sports For All Day in the primary schools. If we can keep our young people away from anti-social behaviour and get them involved in sport, we will reduce the demand on our prisons and the demand for the detention of young people. There is a general awareness of the importance of sport.

I want to turn to another area in which I have responsibility, that is, the area of special education. The area of special education is one which immediately commends itself to Deputies on all sides of the House as an area which must be dealt with sensitively and imaginatively and one about which I am sure there would be no disagreement in according it a very high priority. We have reason to be proud of the developments in special education services which took place under successive administrations and which resulted in a network of special schools, special classes and special services to provide for children in need of such. It is against this background that I would wish to mention a number of matters which arise out of the present Estimates and will have implications for future Estimate provisions.

The first matter to which I would refer is the question of special classes in ordinary national schools. The earlier years of development of special education services were marked by a strong orientation to providing such services in special schools, categorised by the nature of the handicap experienced by the children attending them. Thus we have special schools for the mildly mentally handicapped, for the moderately mentally handicapped, for the deaf and hard of hearing, for the blind and partially sighted, for the physically handicapped, and so on. It is appropriate that I should commend the dedicated and unselfish work carried out by the teachers and other personnel in these schools and recognise the magnificent contribution they are making to the welfare and development of the children under their care. A feature of special education policy in recent years in other countries as well as in our own has been the extent to which the education of handicapped children can be integrated into normal educational provision and thus provide a setting where the handicapped children and their more fortunate peers can grow and develop together and both be better prepared for life in the community where they must live as adults.

The practical manifestation of this policy in Ireland has been the growth of special classes attached to ordinary national schools, principally classes for children with mild mental handicap. Hitherto the financing of such classes proved a hindrance to their formation and operation and the capitation grant available in special schools was more than twice that available for similar children attending special classes in ordinary national schools. This position has now been rectified by bringing the capitation grant for pupils in special classes to the same level as that obtaining in special schools.

The extra grant made available will not only enable the ordinary schools to equip themselves with the extra resources they need for such special teaching, but should also be of considerable help to those schools which are contemplating the formation of special classes. Within this policy of encouraging the provision of special classes, it is seen that the special schools have a continuing role in respect of the more severely handicapped children and as reference and support centres for the network of special classes.

I would like to refer too to the special provisions made for the education of the children of travellers. The report of the Review Body on the Travelling People had many recommendations to make about the education of the children of travellers. These recommendations were mainly in the direction of intensifying the efforts already made to provide through special classes in primary schools, through expansion of junior training centres and through expansion of training facilities for adolescent travellers. A feature of these recommendations was the importance they attached to pre-schooling initiatives for young traveller children which are already being aided by my Department. The provision of such services in the first instance depends on the initiative of voluntary groups who are often inhibited in their efforts by the difficulty in raising the relatively small sums necessary for start-up costs.

The allocation for the building, equipment and furnishing of national schools for 1985 is £30.33 million. This programme has to cope with many competing priorities, from new schools in new housing areas to additional classrooms in existing schools and the upgrading and improvement of schools which do not meet modern requirements. A significant number of the new buildings replace prefabricated and other temporary accommodation and a proportion of the available finance is also reserved for the renewal and improvement of basic facilities such as sanitation, heating, lighting and furniture.

The programme of primary school building continues apace and a target for the provision of 18,500 school places has been set for the current year. Present indications are that this target will be achieved. At present 370 projects for new school buildings, extensions and renovations are being dealt with in the various stages from grant sanction onwards through detailed design, tender action and construction.

A further 246 projects are under active consideration while 220 more are at the state of preliminary investigation. There is no reduction either in the size of this programme or in the pace at which it is being handled. Indeed, the Government's concern is to ensure the expeditious handling of primary school building projects and to minimise administrative delay. This is at the base of its decision to transfer the responsibility in respect of primary school buildings, hitherto exercised by the Office of Public Works, to the Department of Education. Discussions are taking place as to how best this decision might be implemented without interfering with the ongoing progress of the programme of school building work.

A significant increase in the capital for post-primary buildings is envisaged in the national economic plan. The provision for 1985 is £37.0 million, for 1986 £41.0 million and for 1987 £47.0 million. Compared with expenditure of £36.31 million in 1984, the provision for 1987 is very substantial.

The continuing capital investment in second level school buildings forms part of the ongoing programme designed to meet the growth in enrolments arising through population growth as well as population shifts, to replace unsatisfactory and uneconomic accommodation, and to meet the backlog of places for which short term arrangements were made in the late sixties and early seventies, mainly in the form of temporary prefabricated accommodation. Over 60,000 places were so provided, and with age, this temporary accommodation has become a liability. It is part of our policy to replace this accommodation as speedily as possible.

Replacement of unsatisfactory and uneconomic accommodation has been ongoing under strict criteria with replacement only taking place as part of a needed major expansion of a school and where there is no economic alternative. The main priority is the provision of student places. In the period to the end of this decade, it is estimated that up to 65,000 places will be required in second level, 30,000 to meet new enrolment growth and the balance in replacing unsatisfactory and temporary accommodation. About 25,000 places were provided in permanent accommodation within the last two and a half years. The ongoing programme is estimated to yield a further 30,000 places by the end of 1987.

To meet this requirement there are 56 projects at present under construction. There are about 180 projects where planning has been initiated and is proceeding. Accommodation proposals in respect of some 48 other schools are also being considered. It can be seen then that there is in hand a substantial capital investment programme at post-primary level.

The school transport service continues to achieve its basic aim of enabling children who might have difficulty doing so, to attend school regularly. The provision for school transport in 1985 is £31,414,000. This represents an increase of £1,821,000 or 6.2 per cent on the cost to the State of operating the service in 1984. A total of 154,000 pupils who are eligible for school transport benefit under the school transport scheme of which 70,000 are primary pupils who are carried free. Of the 84,000 post-primary pupils who are carried, 39,000 are carried free by virtue of their parents being in possession of a medical card. The remaining 45,000 post-primary pupils pay charges. These are £17 per term in the case of junior cycle pupils and £28 per term in the case of senior cycle pupils. In order to take account of the circumstances of large families this Government have restricted the maximum charge for any family to £57 per term.

When one considers that the average cost of providing school transport is over £220 per annum for each eligible child, the benefit to the parents is enormous even in the case of those who are required to pay the charges. As Deputies are aware, these charges were introduced in January 1983 as a result of an inherited shortfall in the 1983 provision for school transport.

The total cost of operating school transport services in 1985 will be of the order of £34,414,000. It is expected that the shortfall of £3 million between this amount and the provision of £31,414,000 will be made up by the yield from the charges. It was found necessary to impose a modest increase in the charges in January 1985. The increase was in line with the increase in the rate of inflation. The yield from the charges still constitutes less than 10 per cent of the total cost of the services.

Parents who wish to pay the charges by instalment may use the pre-paid vouchers system, which is operated by CIE. Under this scheme, vouchers may be purchased in units of £5 from designated CIE Offices. I arranged for CIE to introduce this system in 1983 as a result of representations which were made following the introduction of the charges. It appears, however, that few parents avail themselves of the facility.

The school transport system is a complex one involving the movement of 154,000 eligible pupils each school day. About 2,500 vehicles are engaged in the system. They operate over 6,000 routes to 335 post-primary centres and 1,490 primary schools. Because of the complexity of the system which involves a massive outlay by the State, it will be appreciated that it is necessary to keep it under constant review to ensure that it is operated as cost-effectively as possible.

The rules for national schools provide for the establishment of schools in which the general training and instruction of the pupils in the subjects of the school curriculum other than English is given in the Irish language. Such a school can be established where the Department are satisfied that there is sufficient demand to indicate that the school will be educationally viable. It would be expected that these schools generally would become sufficiently large to maintain a staff of eight teachers so that each standard would have an individual teacher.

Apart from the all-Irish model schools there had been little development in the establishment of all-Irish schools up to fairly recently. Scoil Lorcáin, Monks-town, was established in 1952, Scoil Bhride, Ranelagh, was established in 1961 and Scoil Neasain, Raheny, was established in 1969. Since 1971 thirty all-Irish schools have been established, twelve of these in the last two years. There are at present, outside the Gaeltacht areas, 40 national schools in operation in which all subjects are taught through the medium of Irish.

The State is prepared to purchase sites for and to fully finance the provision of all-Irish schools. This would, of course, mean that the State would be the owner of any such school provided in this way although it would be managed on the same basis as other national schools. An additional teacher, over and above the number which would be warranted by the enrolment of pupils, is sanctioned for these schools and each member of the staff is paid an allowance for teaching through Irish, which at present amounts to £315 per annum. With effect from the school year 1978-79, all-Irish schools are paid an additional 50 per cent of the normal capitation grant. Free transport is provided, subject to the usual conditions, to the nearest all-Irish school for children wishing to pursue their primary education at such a school.

Mr. Briscoe

I feel the Minister for Education should be in the House to hear what I have to say. There are only a few hours allocated to this Estimate.

Mr. Creed

The Minister for Education has to have her lunch too.

Mr. Briscoe

Only five and a half hours are allocated for this Estimate. I feel strongly that the Minister for Education should be here.

Mr. Creed

I assure the Deputy that his views will be conveyed to the Minister.

Mr. Briscoe

I accept the undertaking from the Minister of State because there is a tendency for civil servants to overprotect their Ministers. Perhaps Ministers are not always clear as to the exact state of affairs.

Mr. Creed

That is an unfair comment.

Mr. Briscoe

I shall concentrate my contribution on the primary schools within the inner city and in the areas immediately surrounding it. The south city primary school parents group was set up in March of this year. It was formed at a meeting in the Presentation Primary School, Warrenmount. The parents who were elected to represent their schools at the National Parents Council met and decided that their problems were mainly the same and that it would be helpful to meet regularly and discuss them. They represent 17 inner city schools within the Dublin area and those immediately outside the inner city.

I will read into the record the kind of problems they focused attention on. At Presentation Convent, Warrenmount, windows are falling out. There is a structural crack in the assembly hall. It was inspected by the Department of Education two years ago and condemned. Nothing has been done since. I wonder how many other schools are in this category not just in Dublin but throughout the country.

St. Brigid's, Holy Faith, The Coombe, has a debt of £40,000. This was incurred after a fire there and the insurance company will not pay as the school was not properly maintained. Who will have to pay for this? We hear about "the pride of The Coombe" and St. Brigid's is an old school with a long tradition in that area. They need more teachers and particularly remedial services. CBS, James's Street have a debt of £10,000 entirely due to running costs plus repairs of windows which amounted to £4,000 in two years. They have discipline problems. Conditions there are very dirty and they cannot afford cleaning. They have had a temporary teacher for four years. There is enormous unemployment in that area which is well above the average. The people try very hard to raise funds through fund-raising activities but they have very limited resources. We hear about disadvantaged areas but these schools do not seem to be getting any benefit.

Scoil Treasa, Donore Avenue, need help with cleaning, heating and repairs. The Convent of Mercy, Lower Baggot Street, need help with cleaning, heating, painting and repairs. Mater Dei, Basin Lane, do not have enough furniture for their pupils. If all the pupils attended the school some would have no seats. They also need remedial teachers. It is most important that the Minister is made aware of this.

I see that Deputy O'Brien is present. He was at the meeting which we had with the south city primary school parents' group in Scoil Íosagáin a few months ago and was very enthusiastic about helping them with their problems. I am very pleased that he is here to listen.

In CBS, Westland Row, the teachers and children wear their coats in winter. The Department of Education checked the wiring of this school two years ago and it was condemned but no action has been taken. Paint is peeling off the walls but the school is waiting for rewiring. It needs a good cleaning but they have no money. Will we have to wait for a fire disaster to occur there before something is done? These are matters of considerable urgency and I am glad to be able to put them on record and monitor the progress that will be made in relation to them.

The Taoiseach visited St. Enda's, Whitefriar Street, some time ago. They have what is called a no walking principal. The principal is the teacher, administrator, remedial teacher and so on. If the principal is teaching a class he can then be called away if there is a problem in the school or if someone wishes to see him. This does not benefit the children. They have a debt of £34,000 due to running costs. This is another area where there is high unemployment.

Scoil Íosagáin, CBS, Aughavanagh Road, have discipline problems. They have no remedial teachers. They had a temporary teacher for two years but will lose him this year because they are four pupils short of the quota. Sancta Maria, CBS, Synge Street, have 537 pupils but only one remedial teacher. Due to a fall in numbers they will lose a teacher this year. The last teacher was the remedial teacher. They have no hall for gym and no library. They need help with cleaning.

The Loreto Convent junior school, Muire Ógh II, have very young children. Painting is in very bad state and heating bills are very high. They need remedial teachers. Muire Ógh I, the senior school, is 50 years old and needs rewiring and painting. Lighting is in a bad way. St. Brigid's girls school, Haddington Road, have a debt of £3,000. This was built up in one year as a result of running costs. They have physically handicapped children. Senior classes have to be held downstairs. They were assessed two years ago by the Department and it was agreed to put in a lift. However, no action has been taken and the school is still waiting for a lift. St. Michael's, Inchicore, have a debt of £14,000 due to running costs and £23,000 for rebuilding their hall. The floor caved in. There is an unemployment rate of 70 per cent in that area. The City Quay national school have a debt of £3,500 as a result of running costs. They have double classes and no walking principal. The principal is the teacher, administrator, discipliner, etc. St. Audeon's Cook Street, have a large bill for heating, repairing and so on. They have a debt of £7,000 as a result of running costs. They have had six temporary teachers in one year for the same class. Temporary teachers are told around August whether they will be kept on.

St. Mary's boys school, Haddington Road, share a remedial teacher with St. Mary's girls school. They have no walking principal. The principal is teacher, administrator, discipliner, etc.

Walking principals are needed in every school. I do not suppose it is possible but they would like to have a pupil-teacher ratio of 1:20 which would do away with discipline problems. They feel there would not be any need for remedial teachers. No school can afford to repaint as the Department stipulates nor can they afford to clean windows. About 25 per cent of all children in these schools need remedial teaching.

When will the Minister implement the discipline report? I understand this has been held up because three inspectors are reluctant to give their agreement to the recommendations contained in it. This is a very urgent matter and it is about time the report was implemented. There are grave difficulties at present in these schools because of disciplinary problems.

It would be helpful if grants could be paid earlier to schools. The last minute delay to which I referred in giving temporary teachers notice of employment causes problems in arranging the school programme. A principal cannot plan classes in advance if he or she does not hear until August that the teacher is staying or moving on. Temporary teachers are not given an opportunity of applying for a job somewhere else as they are not told what their prospects are in regard to employment. They should be informed in April of each year whether they will be employed the following September.

Remedial teachers are needed for disadvantaged and slow learners. In many schools, the teacher is in a dilemma with regard to bright and slow pupils in the same class and has to decide whether to leave the bright pupils to find their own way and to concentrate on the slow pupil. Unfortunately, the slow pupils hold back the brighter pupils. It is more natural for teachers to concentrate on the slow learners because they feel that the brighter pupils will advance of their own accord. However, this is unfair to our bright young pupils and we leave a lot to be desired in the way we are building foundations for young people in primary education. In second and third level education, people are more independent but the primary level is vital, especially for people who come from homes where there are problems in relation to alcohol and marital difficulties. Very often, the only stable factor in that child's life is the primary school and the teachers have to do much more than teach, they are social workers and, in many instances, take over the role of parents.

We have always prided ourselves on recognising that the first priority after eating is education and we are neglecting it at the earliest and most vital stage. Large buildings and falling numbers are causing problems in regard to finance. Perhaps the Minister would consider examining the capitation grants as the system does not always work. I will give an example of what I mean. In my constituency, the primary school in Mourne Road, Drimnagh, face a bill of £200,000 for heating repairs which has been approved by the Office of Public Works but is held up by the Department of Education because they are not prepared to allocate that sum. It is apparently a very big school and it is not possible to close some classrooms. The maintenance costs are the same as when there were 600, 700 or 800 pupils. The cost of painting and repairing windows is the same. The principal told me that the pupils had to sit with their overcoats on in winter because of the draughts coming through some of the windows. The Department are well aware of the problems and know that schools cannot afford maintenance costs on the present funding.

The south city primary school parents group have written to the Minister asking for a meeting. I ask the Minister to accede to their request because these parents are not hysterical, they are deeply concerned about the education of their children. The only communication they received from the Minister's office was that the matter would be brought to the Minister's attention and that a meeting would be arranged in due course. The group represent 17 inner city schools which cater for thousands of pupils. If repairs are not carried out to schools in the very near future, the cost will escalate at an enormous rate. We all know that if we neglect to paint a window in our homes, rot will set in and a new window frame will be required. Schools must not be allowed to deteriorate to the extent that they become tenements.

In spite of the allocation of extra money for schools, education has never been so deprived. The methods of heating schools should be examined and perhaps the oil fired central heating is not the best proposition. Dublin Corporation are now deciding whether to install gas central heating in their houses and perhaps this would also be suitable for schools. I know we had the oil crisis but as there is natural gas off our own shores there should be no problem in that regard. I reminded the school manager in Drimnagh the other night that, when I went to school, our only source of heat was a small fire. Although it did not supply much warmth, it gave the illusion of heat. It would certainly be better than cold radiators in the depth of winter.

The Constitution guarantees free primary education to everyone but we are falling down in that regard. Some of the schools are becoming day care centres rather than places of education, with boys and girls of different age groups in the same room. In some cases two different classes are accommodated in one room. We must take a hard look at the primary section where the position is very bad.

I received a letter from the Dublin South West Branch of Cumann na Méan-Mhúinteoirí about the recent spending cuts and the effect they were having on educational services in my constituency. The letter stated that since the cuts were introduced, post-primary schools in the Dublin South West branch of the ASTI have suffered. As a result of the cutbacks there were larger class sizes, reduced subject choice, reduced guidance facilities and fewer remedial classes. It said that in view of the large young population in the area those cutbacks represented a very short term view. Statistics had shown that the recession had a greater effect on early school leavers and on those who left without certification. An enlightened Department of Education, according to the letter, would recognise the need for remedial and guidance facilities in post-primary schools. The letter pointed out that it was ironic that the Government, faced with financial difficulties, should choose the most vulnerable and least articulate members of society on which to exercise fiscal rectitude. It concluded by asking me to highlight these injustices and hardships being suffered by young people in my constituency.

It appears to be a pattern with Coalition Governments that the first Department to be subjected to cutbacks is the Department of Education. I hope the Minister will read my speech and I should like the Minister, Deputy Creed, to ask her to do something about the condition of schools in my constituency. I suggest that the Minister carry out a personal inspection of some of the schools. She will not be mauled if she visits them. In fact, the principals would be very pleased to meet her and show her the conditions under which they must work. I plead with the Minister to do something quickly about the problem in Dublin, north and south, because many of the teachers cannot cope. Parents are taxed to the limit trying to raise funds for local schools. They are also being asked to contribute to many worthwhile causes. An injection of about £1 million for school maintenance in Dublin would make all the difference.

Mr. Dowling

I should like to congratulate the Minister on her successful two and a half years in the Department of Education. She has been responsible for many innovative projects. Progress may be slower than some of the teaching organisations would like but nevertheless a lot of new thinking has been introduced into the area of education. That was long overdue. Expenditure for 1985 will be sizeable and we must consider that between 82 and 83 per cent of the budget, in excess of £1,000 million, will go on salaries and pensions for teachers. That leaves a small percentage of the total budget to introduce the type of improvements all areas in education are crying out for. I have no doubt that if the money was available it would be availed of but we must cut the cloth according to measure. Quite a substantial amount has been achieved in very difficult times.

There are many changes we would like to see taking place. We would like to see many more teachers taken on but any additional teachers must be usefully employed. There is little point in taking on teachers just for the sake of having people in charge of classes, there only in the name of disseminating information to students. The Minister has examined this area. I accept that the embargo on recruitment in the public service has hit some schools very hard but most have come to grips with it. It is obvious that in some areas there was a lot of waste of resources.

We are all interested in the capital provision and while there has been a sizeable increase in the allocation under that heading for the current year the pace in growth of new school developments is slower than I would wish. I appreciate, as the Minister of State outlined, that there has been a substantial increase in the number of new buildings but in my constituency there are many schools where students are being deprived of the facilities they are entitled to under the Constitution.

The Minister of State dealt with the question of pre-fabs which we were told in the sixties would solve all our accommodation problems. I accept that the introduction of free post-primary education meant that students stayed on longer at school but, as the Minister stated, it has proved to be a great liability. Most of the pre-fab structures are so dilapidated that they do not deserve to be remotely considered as classrooms. In the period of the plan, up to 1987, the capital programme will be increased by £47 million and that is to be applauded but the Minister should consider increasing that amount to take account of the fact that some students are being denied what is their just entitlement.

The Minister told us that there will be an increase in pupil numbers in 1985. In recent years we have heard a lot about the damage cutbacks in Education are doing but it is difficult to assess that criticism or judge how accurate it is. I do not see any serious damage being done but the resources available could be better utilised.

Deputy Briscoe referred to remedial teaching and disadvantaged areas in Dublin's inner city. Many areas in rural Ireland are also at a disadvantage. I do not think the provision of additional teachers would make an iota of difference because of the structure of the curriculum and the way our educational system is used. The change under way in this area will, to some extent, come to grips with this problem. All forces must be combined to work towards the elimination of the problems. We could achieve a greater result if there was more flexibility in the system. I did not have any input into the primary sector as far as remedial teaching was concerned, but I have seen at first hand the effect the lack of proper remedial facilities has in primary schools, particularly in the early stages. Children who are denied this additional facility in the early stages lose out through the whole educational sphere. Parents have a great responsibility in this area and if they do not measure up to their responsibility the child suffers. We all have a responsibility to ensure that where parents opt out the vacuum is filled by properly trained teachers. This is not easy, but I hope it will be considered in the context of curriculum development which is under review.

The Department have had a 10 per cent increase in expenditure in the current year, but higher education grants have had an increase of 25 per cent. While students complain and criticise the level of grants, in my view they are substantial and more than enough to carry students through any year at university. Their fees are paid, £1,000, plus £1,000 maintenance, which will be increased from the next academic session.

We have a very impoverished group in our society — the middle income group in particular and the higher income group, who find themselves just outside the qualification figure for grant aid to third level institutions, whether they be regional technical colleges, higher education colleges or universities. These people get no aid from the State either directly or indirectly. On numerous occasions we have made representations and passed motions at scholarship committee meetings for some flexibility so that assistance could be given to those parents who may not qualify for help because they are a few pounds above the limit. These parents may have two or three children being educated and do not get help while parents with one child but whose income is just below the limit get all the aid available. The Department of Finance should provide tax relief for parents who have to face this major expenditure. It costs £2,500 to £3,000 per year to put a child through university and many Members recognise that. These parents pay their taxes in the normal way and still have to pay to educate their children. Where children's education is being financed by their parents while at university, some tax allowances should be considered. The Minister did admit that consideration would be given to the case where a parent's income was slightly outside the limit but in my view it would be better if some form of tax allowance were granted.

Who are the people being best served by the high level of grant aid which is available? About 45 per cent of those attending third level institutions are being grant aided, but the people getting grant aid are not necessarily those in greatest need. I have served on scholarship committees, and I am sure other Members have too, and we have seen that if the PAYE person who submits his P60 is £5 over the limit, there is no way he can qualify for the grant, but the self-employed person can find ways to qualify for everything while his children attend third level institutions.

I do not intend spending too long discussing primary education because it has been well covered. We have to take into account the availability of funds when we are discussing primary school buildings, and this is covered in the action programme for education. If we are to spend extra money we must get it by imposing additional taxation, and we all recognise that.

This brings me to an area to which I have given much thought. A considerable amount of money is being raised by the 1 per cent youth employment levy. We have seen another tier of educational bureaucracy set up, as if we did not have enough already. The vocational sector are performing admirably. I congratulate them for having done such wonderful work under very difficult conditions since 1932. They provided an educational facility for many deprived students. This year we saw a transfer of £27 million from the Youth Employment Agency to education. I commend this move but consider that more of that money should be transferred so that the vocational sector could put their schools and equipment to help young people. This would save us setting up a Manpower service, running to AnCO and then setting up yet another tier. This area has to be examined in the context of expenditure on education to see how we can use the resources available to the best advantage of all concerned.

We have had pre-employment courses under the supervision of the vocational sector. Recently that was extended to secondary schools, and rightly so. Why should they not have that facility also? But the question now arises as to who is responsible for insurance. Perhaps the Minister may be able to answer this. I have had queries about this from a number of my constituents. Two employers in particular who always encouraged these courses have had claims processed against them because children were injured under the pre-employment scheme. If that matter is not dealt with, that the Department of Education or the school take responsibility with regard to insurance, there will be an end to pre-employment courses. I cannot see small industrialists taking on this additional cost.

There was a little conflict during the year — I hope only teething troubles — between the IVEA and the Department of Education in relation to the amalgamation of schools. I have always promoted the best interests of the community in the setting up of new schools. When the vocational sector or the private school cannot go it alone, we have seen the best results in amalgamation, which has worked admirably. However, the vocational sector see themselves losing out there and perhaps a new localised structure of controlled education may be on the way, and I hope it is. It would remove a great deal of existing disquiet.

I must refer to the pioneer venture of amalgamation between St. Kieran's College, Kilkenny, and Kilkenny Vocational School. It took a little time and persuasion for this to happen in the best interests of providing better quality education for all the students in that area. There is a problem in relation to staffing in that the teachers have retained their separate identities. The Minister, who opened the school, was extremely pleased that co-operation could exist between a long established private seminary school and the vocational sector. This is the kind of co-operation which is needed for the best utilisation of available resources.

There has been controversy with regard to staffing of that school since its inception. They have pedalled along, so to speak, but eventually matters will come to a head and I hope the Department can stave off that conflict, taking account of the savings to the Department in terms of capital expenditure. They did not have to provide a new vocational school for Kilkenny city, perhaps costing £1 million, at a time of scarce resources. I have never seen resources other than being scarce, whether it was Deputy O'Rourke's party who were in power or the Coalition. We cannot find too much fault with each other in that regard. We have all been working for the better availability of resources for students and that is as it should be and should continue. This amalgamation is the first of its type and has saved the Exchequer money. A few extra teachers were involved. The Department might say that they have solved that problem, but I do not think that they have.

Deputy O'Rourke tacitly accepted the provisions in this Estimate and was extremely pleased that everything had gone so well for the Minister. She did point out, however, that her constituents were somewhat schizophrenic about the announcement of the major building projects yesterday. They should be quite happy that this is happening. It is not opportunistic. We have seen that type of thing happen before. Whenever an announcement of additional expenditure for education is made it is worth-while and must be welcomed, whether it be prior to a national election, a local election, or at any other time. The students, the country and the economy benefit from the result. Education has been an area in which a number of Ministers have been involved over the last five or six years — perhaps too many. I should like to see continuity and hope that the present Minister will be able to stay on in this office for a further four or five years.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I do not join the Deputy in that.

Mr. Dowling

I say that with all due respect to the Deputy. I am glad that the question has been resolved as to whether a child should attend school at four years of age or at five. I have my own views on that. I have seen first class results from students commencing school at four years of age and very bad results from pupils starting school at five. It depends on the student, the quality of the home, the influence of the parents and the child's educational development. To have the right to send a child to school at four years of age is important. Perhaps in 1981 a mistake was made, but it certainly has been sorted out. The INTO, who are a very important national educational organisation, have done tremendous work at primary school level and have given their imprimatur to the new arrangement. I hope it will work successfully.

I would still say to parents who can keep their children in their own home environment for longer than four years that they should do so. Unless the child is advanced, with a good IQ, he or she loses out in the streamlined educational classroom atmosphere at too early an age. There is disagreement as to whether there should be one time during the year for enrolments. That is a matter for the small schools. The INTO will look after the interest of their teachers in that regard. The arrangement works in small schools and with smaller classes. Perhaps it matters for the teacher if enrolments are carried out at Christmas, but any difficulties in that respect have been overcome.

The three year infant phase is welcome. I hope that will work and equally that no student will leave the national primary school scene until after the age of 12, even 13. They will then be joining the rat race leaving certificate programme to which we have become so accustomed.

I am not against having a form of formal examination system. This is the only thing which excites and motivates children to become interested in the whole school system. It does the opposite to a minority, but for different reasons.

I would be somewhat concerned about the three year intermediate certificate phase unless the assessments are uniform and carried out by properly trained people who will do them well. Otherwise, the scheme will fall down. One advantage is that the student will now know that the teacher is assessing him or her and this will assist in providing a greater level of discipline within the classroom.

Deputy Creed brought us through the building programme, in which there is no reduction. However, I should like to see more money allocated for the provision of schools. I know that there has been a considerable increase for 1984. For 1985 the amount is £37 million, in 1986 there will be £41 million and in 1987 £47 million. With inflation running at about 6 per cent, that is a reasonable increase. I hope that will provide the necessary educational infrastructure. There will be a large increase in the numbers attending school over the next ten years, but then it appears that it will even off.

I would love to see undertaken an in-depth investigation into youth employment schemes and am glad that the Minister has now appointed Minister of State at the Department of Labour, Deputy Birmingham, to a co-ordinating role to bring the two sides together. He is involved in both the Labour and Education area and it is time that we brought the two areas together. They have much in common and someone must have responsibility for the liaison between them. I hope we will see more money in the youth employment area being spent on training courses; whether they are under the aegis of the Department of Education or the Department of Labour is immaterial. What is important is that young people are getting the benefit of more time at school, a higher level of qualification and development of their skills. At the end of that they will be better equipped to face the reality of life. I hope that it will not be unemployment but no one can say for certain, whether on the Opposition side or in Government, what will be the position in the next ten or 15 years.

The Minister of State, Deputy Creed, has outlined his programme for the area of sport. The money spent here is most welcome. It has been usefully and gainfully employed by all concerned. The VECs have got considerable grants in the past few years and that money has been of very great value to local community organisations. I hope that will continue.

We do not appear to be able to do anything significant in respect of the high pupil-teacher ratio. Every attempt should be made to reduce it and that should be the primary objective. It will require additional funding for education. Where that is to come from is something the Department will have to consider, perhaps in the context of the European Social Fund. In her speech the Minister said that if we wanted additional money we should try to point out where it will come from. The question we must ask is whether we have been getting the best value from the European Social Fund with regard to educational services. The Minister may say that fund has been totally utilised but it is something that should be considered.

There is a very poor quality in-service training for teachers, if it exists at all. Deputy O'Rourke, as a secondary school teacher, and Deputy Faulkner, as a primary school teacher of long standing, will only too well realise that ten years in the classroom can be like 20 years anywhere else. I can honestly say that teaching is more difficult than political life, which is not in itself an easy one, agus bhí tusa, a Chathaoirligh Gníomhach, ag múineadh scoile uair amháin chomh maith. In-service training is vitally important to bring new techniques, new equipment and so on to the notice of teachers. All of this begs for investment.

Some years ago when new mathematics and the new geography course were introduced there were some excellent programmes on television and, as a teacher, I used those programmes. The students found them most stimulating and it interested them in the subjects much more than the blackboard and the chalk could ever have done. We have fallen down totally in the area of broadcasting. Young children today are so accustomed to looking at television that to them it is the real world. Why can the Department of Education not examine the possibilities of establishing a proper television schools network which would be of immense value to students?

Much has been mentioned of deprived areas. A former president of the ASTI told me he was speaking with the headmaster of a Dublin school who told him that at one time they could not get the students to school. They decided to dispense with the rigid curriculum of inter certificate and leaving certificate examinations and they set up their own curriculum. They encouraged the students to make things whether it was in the art room, the woodwork room or the metalwork room. In the end they had to open the school on Saturdays because the students were so anxious to continue with the work they had started. These are the things that will improve discipline within schools.

On the national school scene, the Office of Public Works and the Department of Education are involved. There is much to-ing and fro-ing before a simple, not too costly extension can be got off the ground. The local authorities should be able to handle this kind of work. In the post-primary sector in Kilkenny there has been a significant investment in the provision of school buildings and in this connection I must applaud the Department of Education. Offhand, I could name five such buildings in the past ten years. However, that is not enough. All of the schools were necessary in their own right. There is also the matter of vocational schools and in that connection I mention the school at Ballyhale which has been the subject of correspondence with the Department since 1976. I was a member of the VEC at the time when they were going to close the school. Then they decided to provide a school for 200 students. In 1981 it was announced that a school would be provided in the area. It was a political ploy by Deputies who were seeking re-election. However, the foundation stone has not been laid for that school yet. I am inviting the Minister to come back to Ballyhale during the next 12 months to turn the sod for the new school. His commitment is great enough to enable him to do everything possible to ensure that the work goes ahead.

Mr. Creed

I was there before and some progress has been made since.

Mr. Dowling

The Minister recognised that this was one of the worst schools of its kind, one in respect of which there was an urgent need for a high level of departmental input, financially and otherwise. I hope that input is on the way.

Another school needing attention is the one at Mooncoin which has contributed greatly to the educational advancement of the community. The project for a new school in that area is at stage 3 on the programme so when that stage is discharged, the work can go ahead. There is not a huge expenditure involved. If the Minister delivers on those two schools we can talk about the others during next year's debate.

Mrs. O'Rourke

We will deliver on them.

Mr. Dowling

I was pleased with the Minister's contribution. She has made a significant impact during her term in office. I do not mean that in any flattering way but clearly she is prepared to turn everything in the Department upside down if necessary in order to ensure a greater level of involvement on the part of all of us who are associated with education.

Tá áthas orm go bhfuair mé an deis seo chun cúpla focal a rá. Gúim rath agus sonas ar an obair atá ar siúl ag an Aire agus tá súil agam go mbeidh sí san Roinn le tamall fada.

Mr. Faulkner

As the debate is limited I shall confine myself to some areas of educational disadvantage in which I am specially interested. The principles involved in the aims for primary education impose the obligation to provide for the development of each child's talents and capacities to the fullest potential. As talents differ, provision must be made to enable each child to develop at his own rate. Some years ago provision was made for the education of the mentally handicapped. The service was designed in a network of specialised institutions where the special needs of the handicapped would be catered for. This was a major advance on what had been the situation up to then.

In more recent times there is the notion that educating handicapped children in isolation is creating a barrier and, consequently, efforts are being made to provide for the education of these children in ordinary schools but these schools must have available to them the facilities and the resources necessary to enable them to cope with these extra responsibilities. We would all accept that integrated education, where feasible, should be provided because it enables individual handicapped children to participate fully as members of society. There are problems involved in that respect but these problems can be overcome with co-operation and with proper financial support and that is a vitally important aspect of this whole matter.

There has been rapid expansion in the facilities for the education of the mentally handicapped in the past couple of decades. This is one area where the Department and successive Ministers for Education can be pleased with the developments in a relatively short time. This progress is an indication of what can be done in the area of handicap once public consciousness is aroused and positive action taken. The main thrust in the past few years has been towards overcoming the sense of stigma under which many parents laboured, then in arousing the public to face up to their duty towards young people who are mentally handicapped and in developing a system of education suitable for their needs.

The next step must be to gear our system towards assisting the integration, where appropriate, of those who are mentally handicapped into the ordinary life of the community, so that they can live as full and meaningful a life as possible. This whole matter of integration has become a more immediate problem in recent years because advances in medical science have resulted in mentally handicapped people living much longer lives than heretofore and the matter of ensuring that mentally handicapped people are treated with dignity and as people with rights is very important. While there is a much more enlightened attitude towards mental handicap today than was the position some years ago, the feeling persists that a person who is mentally handicapped is different from others. He is not different. I would underline the fact that to achieve real progress in educational changes and proposed developments in respect of mentally handicapped children, their parents or representatives of their parents must be involved and, where possible, mentally handicapped children might also be involved as well as teachers and other professional people working in the area of special education. There must be development in post-primary as well as in the primary school area.

Special schools have now been in operation for some time and are doing exceptional work. I would be interested to know from the Minister what research has been carried out into the working of these schools to see what areas have shown themselves to be a success, where improvements might be made and what information is being passed on to teachers in ordinary schools now that more and more mentally handicapped children are being placed in ordinary schools. I must stress the importance of this interchange of information if handicapped children attending ordinary schools are to get the full benefit of the educational development achieved in the special schools over the years and also the benefit of research already applied in special schools. It is important that this benefit should be transferred to ordinary schools. Teachers should have the benefit of in service training in this area of special education.

It would appear to be generally accepted today that handicapped children should be educated in as normal an environment as possible and that children should be sent to special schools only when, after proper assessment, it is agreed that a child cannot be properly catered for in an ordinary school because of a special educational need. Pupils should be placed in special schools only after the parents agree to such a course and, of course, much more than intellectual ability should be taken into account: the family situation, the environment in which they live are also important factors. Those of us who are closely associated with and interested in mentally handicapped children are aware of the fact that some of these children are also emotionally disturbed and that very special educational provision must be made for them.

There have been very considerable advances at primary school level in educational development for mildly mentally handicapped children. Much more needs to be done in respect of post-primary facilities for such children. Such children need also to have their learning ability stimulated by social and material environments outside school. It would be useful if greater educational use were made of the learning opportunities afforded by shops, swimming pools, playing grounds and so on. These children should have the opportunity to interact with their peer group in ordinary schools through games, community activities and so on. When it is proposed to place a child who is mentally handicapped in an ordinary school, it is necessary that full discussion takes place with the staff of such a school so that the best possible approach can be made not only to the educational advantage of that child, but to the total development of all the children at that school.

The Warnock report into the special educational needs of handicapped and young people states:

Since the aim of integration is to enrich the education of both the handicapped and the non-handicapped... ... before a child with a disability or severe difficulty enters ordinary school, the teaching staff should discuss among themselves and agree on a plan for securing the maximum educational and social interaction between him and the others in the school and should strive collectively thereafter to implement the plan.

In any such efforts at integration the Department of Education must play its part by providing adequate finance, back-up support and services. This is a vitally important aspect. It is important in ordinary schools that there be close co-operation between the schools and the parents. It is particularly important that there be close links between schools and parents of mildly handicapped children and every effort should be made by the Department to foster and encourage such links. Parents should be helped so that they are capable of helping in the education of their children. Consultations between parents and teachers is vitally important.

I might ask the Minister what research has been done in relation to parental involvement with special schools and if the results of such research have been applied. Any other information she may have in that connection will be appreciated.

In reply to a question to the Minister for Education I was informed that there are approximately 5,500 children of travelling people between the ages of four and 12 years, of whom the Minister can account for 1,000 attending special classes attached to primary schools and approximately 220 attending special schools. The Minister stated further that there are no separate records of travelling people's children enrolled in ordinary classes in national schools. In effect this means that there are approximately 4,000 children of travelling people unaccounted for so far as primary education is concerned. I am aware that some of these children attend ordinary classes in primary schools, but it must be obvious that a considerable number of them are likely not to attend school at all or attend only intermittently.

That is not good enough. The Department should carry out a survey to ascertain the number attending school. They would then be in a position to know the extent of the problem and be able to take steps to ensure that young Irish citizens — as the children of travelling people are — are given an education, which is their right. Unless we can be certain that all children of travelling people are attending school the problem of integrating them into the settled society will never be overcome and young people who now travel from place to place will have no opportunity of breaking out of the system in which they are reared. I would be interested to know what percentage of those who are at present regarded as illiterate and who sought education in later life to overcome this disability were young people whose parents are travelling people.

In another reply from the Minister for Education I was informed that data on parents' occupations in respect of students attending post primary schools are not collected by the Department of Education. It is now time to seek such information. I have no doubt but that it will demonstrate that very few travelling people's children will be found in second level education; but it will not be possible to tackle this problem unless we know its extent, the reasons for it and what action is planned to deal with it. Many of the problems arising from the activities of some of these young people result from the frustration they feel because they cannot even visualise a new future for themselves. Subconciously they feel their future will be simply a continuation of the life led by their parents and indeed by their ancestors. It is my view that education is the key and education they must have.

In my speech on this Estimate last year I spoke of the problems facing the children of travelling people with regard to their education. We have large numbers of itinerant families living under difficult conditions, and because of the lack of serviced sites near our cities and towns, there is a very special problem so far as the education of their children is concerned.

It is time to say that it has been the general experience throughout the country that progress in the settlement of the families of travelling people is very much dependent on the existence of active and purposeful bodies of interested voluntary workers. Their help is needed, not only in the development of favourable public opinion, but in the establishment of a relationship of friendship and trust with travelling people. Such dedicated voluntary workers, in co-operation with school management boards, teachers and welfare officers, can play a vital role in the education of our itinerant population. They can do so by persuading parents to take advantage of the available educational facilities both for their children and for themselves and by encouraging them to send their children to school regularly and punctually.

As I said on a previous occasion, it is the national aim to integrate the travelling people with the settled community. Educational policy must envisage the full integration of the children of itinerant families in the ordinary classes of ordinary schools. We have got to recognise, however, that the extent to which this can take place varies with the circumstances of the families concerned and with the circumstances of the localities in which they live.

Some children are reasonably well integrated socially and educationally in ordinary classes in a number of schools throughout the country. However, it is a fact that the great majority still need the benefit of some pre-school training and more favourable conditions at school than are generally available. Co-operation between the Department, school authorities and voluntary associations can help fill these needs.

It is true to say normally special educational arrangements for itinerant children of compulsory school age are made in association with ordinary national schools. However, where there are exceptional circumstances special schemes must be put into operation. The acid test, of course, in any special arrangement, whether it is made in an ordinary school or not, is the extent to which pupils are ultimately integrated in ordinary classes with other children of the community. This is the criterion which everybody concerned with the education of the children of travelling people must keep in mind.

Let me again refer to the need for the organisation of out-of-school activities for the children of travelling people in order to compensate them for the social disadvantages of their home environment. This is a field of activity in which local associations could very usefully interest themselves. I am not aware that the Department give financial support for such activities but, if they do not, they should and I would ask the Minister to give favourable consideration to that aspect of the travelling people's problems.

We must also concern ourselves with the education of adolescent and adult travelling people. It may be that we should be most concerned with the educational welfare of the younger children because it would appear that our hopes for successful integration must ultimately lie with them and equally that it is the young child who benefits most from education. Nevertheless the potential benefit of suitable programmes of education to adolescents and young adults, who missed the opportunity of attending school, cannot be overlooked. Evening classes providing suitable programmes of general education as well as courses in home management and appropriate vocational skills could help the settlement of travelling families.

The major problem in respect of this is to ensure that adolescents and older people attend these classes where they are available. First, they must be made aware of the fact that such courses are available and they they are welcome to attend them. Methods by which this matter is attended to must be well thought out. Putting advertisements in the papers is of little use to people who may not be able to read. Second, travelling people must be encouraged to attend the classes. Their experiences, over the years, have not been such as to make them feel in any way confident that they will be welcome to partake in any activity in which settled people are involved. It is vitally important that they should be made to feel welcome at the classes I have referred to and indeed that they should realise that attendance at such classes is their right. While the main responsibility rests with the Department of Education, local voluntary associations can do much with the co-operation of the vocational education committees to organise such classes and to ensure attendance at them.

I strongly urge the Minister to take special interest in the education of the children of travelling people. In education lies the key to the rehabilitation of travelling families and it will go a long way towards helping to integrate them in settled society. It is all too easy to blame itinerants for problems which arise in our society, but, the facts are that, even if a higher proportion of them are involved in clashes with the law than is the case with the settled community, we, ourselves, are responsible if we show an unwillingness to cater for their basic educational needs. This is so, even if it results from our neglect of them rather than from any antagonism.

To get back briefly to the question of remedial teaching of children of travelling people, the situation is that while many of the younger children, in the main, can be said to be on an equal footing with the children of more affluent parents and can hold their own in ordinary classes, investigations have shown that the percentage of travelling people's children who are making satisfactory progress in ordinary school classes drops from 45 in the under eight age group and 20 in the eight to ten age group and plummets to 13 in the over-ten age group. The decline could be explained, I suppose, by the irregular attendance of the older children or by the late start at school of these children. I appeal, therefore, to all organisations working in this area of human need to do their utmost to encourage travelling parents to send their children to school as early and as often as possible. They will thus be better equipped to avail themselves of a suitable post-primary course. Apart from housing, the provision of suitable post-primary courses is probably the most important factor in the solution to the itinerant problem.

Much progress has been made over the years in most areas of educational handicap, but I am afraid that we are to an extent neglecting our duty towards the children of travelling people, who are citizens of this State who have a right to proper educational facilities. Unless we can bring public opinion to bear on this matter, little of any consequence will be done. We have all seen what could be done in respect of the education of mentally handicapped children in a relatively short space of time. The conscience of our people once moved worked wonders. The helplessness of the handicapped children eventually touched all hearts. Let us concentrate now in a similar way on children of travelling people.

They, too, are to a large degree helpless, poorly housed, poorly clad, moving from place to place, living an unsettled life, where opportunities for continuing education are adversely affected, and perhaps worst of all the sympathy which might be expected from the public is reduced as the image of the children is tarnished in the public mind because of the misdeeds of a small sector of adult travelling people. The public must make a major effort to clarify their mind on this matter. The children are simply children labouring under a handicap, just as physically and mentally retarded children labour under a handicap.

Just as the public in the past overcame the fear they had of mental handicap and faced up to their responsibilities, so, too, we today, must equally face up to our obligations to the children of travelling people and ensure that they are given all the facilities necessary to provide them with an education, which as I said earlier is the surest way to help them along the road to integration with the settled community. It is very important that representatives of the parents of travelling people should have a voice in developments geared towards the education of their children.

There is a lot more I would like to say on other issues but the time is so brief that it would not be fair to other people who might wish to speak. I will briefly conclude on this note.

Tábarraíocht béime go fóill ar scríobh, léamh, litríocht agus gramadach na Gaeilge sna bunscoileanna agus sna rang-anna soisir sna scoileanna iar-bhunoid-eachais. Caithfear béim níos treise a leagadh ar chomhrá agus ar bhunstructúir na teanga agus tá sé bearthaithe againn i bhFianna Fáil gur mar sin a bheidh sé amach anseo. Tá sé thar a bheith tábhachtach atmosféar Gaelach a chruthú sa scoil. Caithfear i bhfad níos mó cabhair a thabhairt do mhúinteorí i dtreo is go mbeidh sé ar a chumas ag an niúinteoir an teanga a úsaid i ngnáth chumarsáid sa scoil le mic léinn agus len a chomhmhúin-teoirí agus i dtreo is go mbeidh sé ar a chumas ag an múinteoir abhair speisialta a theagasc trí mhean na Gaeilge. Caith fear cur go mór le líon na gcúrsaí inseirbh-íse a bhainfidh leis an Ghaeilge agus le modhanna múinte na teanga. Ní leor na príomhoidí a thabhairt le chéile ar feadh lá amháin anois agus arís chun ceist na Gaeilge a phlé. Sin an meíd atá ar fáil faoi láthair. Tá sé thar a bheith tábhachtach chomh maith go mbeidh áiseanna teag-aisc agus fearais oiriúnacha ar fáil sna bunscoileanna a bhfuil cuid den churaclam á dhéanamh trí Ghaeilge acu. Tá cúrsaí a dhíth go géar ina léireofaé na slite a bhféadfaí an Ghaeilge a chomhthathú le gnéithe eile san churaclam. I gcúrsaí ceard oideachais fresin caithfear béim níos treise a leagadh ar an nGaeilge.

Ba mhaith liom a lán eile a rá faoi cheist na Gaeilge. B'fhéidir go bhfaighidh mé seans am éigin eile, ach chun seans a thabhairt do dhaoine eile labhairt, sin an méid atá le rá agam inniu.

Mrs. Barnes

I support what Deputy Faulkner said in relation to the investment commitment we should have towards the children of travelling people and about the difficulties they experience. Deputy Faulkner is right in that we cannot expect the travelling people to feel part of our community unless we make the effort to put resources into it. I know the Minister will take Deputy Faulkner seriously in what he said on that issue.

It is a matter of satisfaction to debate this Estimate because, as Deputy Dowling said, all sides of the House showed an interest and commitment in Government. Every Member of the House would like to have more resources to bring about the changes even faster. It gives some comfort and it spurs us on to achieve the investment we need when we recall the progress we have made over the years. I was reminded of that when I read a quotation from a speech that Deputy Noel Browne a Member of this House made only 30 years ago in 1955. The lack of equality and equity then was not alone depressing but must have had serious implications for all the people who were denied second level education. It was a privilege then to get second level education and to be allowed to continue even up to leaving certificate. Third level education was outside the reach of most people. There was a lack of opportunity with the result that we wasted the potential of clever, ambitious children who knew that they were doomed not to have that potential realised.

When we talk about education we are talking about eliminating waste and using our financial resources, especially regarding our building programme, in the most effective and efficient way possible, but above all else the motivation of that is that the potential of the young — the people who wish to achieve success and contribute to this community and to learn not just in the narrow academic sense but to be able to play a full part in life and contribute fully to society — be realised. That must be one of the overriding commitments and ambitions of all legislators, which the Minister shares and in her Estimate today in many areas goes a long way to achieving.

When we look back on education we see that there have been progressive steps all the way, but in the context of my remarks about lack of opportunity in education up to the recent past, one must realise what the late Minister, Deputy Donogh O'Malley, brought about in one vast leap when second level education for all and the transport to enable children to avail of it were introduced. It was a revolution in the real sense, a gentle revolution of the most positive sort, and in the work and effort and the gentle revolution that the present Minister, Deputy Hussey, is trying to bring about I am reminded of that.

Changes and reforms to cope with our changing society must be seen in our educational system. One big change which we must take into consideration in our projections and planning in our Estimates for education is the very dramatic drop in the birth rate. I do not want to go back too far in history, something which politicians sometimes are inclined to do. I do not want to go back to the famine days, but formerly we had to make a tremendous effort here to keep up with the growing young population and their needs in the area of education. Now we must very quickly change our projections and plans to take into consideration the continuing and dramatic drop in the birth rate and we must concentrate our efforts on using our primary schools in the most effective way possible and avoid building too many of them which will become redundant by the mid-nineties. We must see how we can cope as effectively as possible with the huge bulge in our young population who are seen in significant numbers to be going into second level and on into third level. When the very high cost of second level and the even more tremendous cost of third level are considered, that is a huge challenge. Not alone must we cope with the ordinary day-to-day building programme, curricula and staffing. Of course, certain compensatory factors must be built in. Deputy O'Rourke spoke eloquently about them this morning on behalf of the disadvantaged, as did also Deputy Dowling and Deputy Faulkner with regard particularly to the handicapped and travelling people's children who are handicapped from the point of view of social factors.

We take advantage of this debate on the Estimate to reiterate the huge need for and the compensatory results that come from guidance counsellors. We must ensure that cutbacks do not occur in this area and that the resources we have are used to increase the number of guidance counsellors. They carry out an incredibly important task in defining for young people at a stage when things are pretty confused for them the career patterns and subjects they should choose in order to give them the widest options and choices of career before it is too late and they are excluded from this wide choice. That can mean make or break for the students concerned. Guidance counsellors also help pupils and students through an extraordinarly difficult time of emotional conflict and the tremendous pressure that examinations put on them. Therefore, the importance of guidance counsellors in every second level school cannot be over emphasised and all necessary resources must be put into that area. Deputy Dowling and others who have teaching experience and, therefore, speak from personal experience, emphasised the need for in-service training. All the reforms we are talking about have been brought about through the programmes and policies of action of the Minister and through reports such as that produced by the Joint Committee on Women's Rights. These reforms have been welcomed by the teaching unions, but many of the reforms and the skills required to bring about such reforms, particularly in the area of psychology dealing with such matters as sex education, relationships, civics and politics, need in-service training through refresher courses that will give teachers extra skills that will allow them to provide the broader education for students that those teachers were not trained to impart when first they entered their profession.

The tapering mechanism that the Minister spoke of and has introduced with regard to what was previously a very arbitrary cut off eligibility for third level grants and scholarships must be welcomed. Parents who found that their income level was only slightly above the level qualifying for grants realised that their children for that reason had not the opportunity to go forward for third level education. I hope that as much fluidity and flexibility will be introduced in that area and maintained.

In recent years an awareness has developed that education does not stop at 17 or 18 years of age when we leave school, or even for those who go into third level education. In these challenging, changing days education has to be an absolute continuum. Education must not be relegated or exclusive to our younger years. A number of categories need the opportunity for adult education. The first group who come immediately to mind are those who dropped out for whatever reason at an early age, regretted that and got a chance to go back into the curriculum. It is a great pleasure to many of us and we on the Joint Committee on Women's Rights became aware of this in our research, that a great number of women who dropped early out of school and reared families, when their children were growing up formed themselves into groups for the purpose of going back into education, to sit for the intermediate and leaving certificates and even go into third level education. I welcome the fact that the Minister has taken into consideration that the £30 fee with regard to mature students was and could be seen as an obstacle, not encouragement. I welcome the fee reduction in that area, and I ask that every opportunity and encouragement be given to students who missed out in their first round of education, that they be allowed to continue and have the pleasure of getting back into the educational system.

That is the first group which comes to mind. There is a second group who may have been made redundant or have taken early retirement. They have time on their hands and they need extra training and education to enable them to take up another position. Our whole education system has to be shifted around to cater for that problem. I welcome the Minister's emphasis on the link between education and employment. That will become more and more relevant as traditional jobs cease. Technology will have an extraordinary effect on us. It is extremely costly. We will have to have computers and visual display units in schools and impart new skills to our young people before they leave school. Futurologists and sociologists tell us that people will be unskilled if they do not know how to operate these machines. This is a huge challenge in the whole area of education.

School transport has been a matter of tremendous controversy. The Minister had a rough ride in her efforts to rationalise it. The cost is incredibly high and continues to go up as most things do these days. Perhaps the communities or the local authority areas could manage their own transport systems. With local knowledge they might be able to provide it more efficiently and more effectively. The cost is so high and the need is so great that something along those lines should be encouraged.

The Minister has started programmes in areas of great interest. Something which must please her and continue to give her energy is the fact that there has been a great response to the reforms she has introduced from parents, students and teaching unions, and also from the public at large who saw for some years that we needed some reforms and that the education system must keep in touch with the changes which are coming. Action certainly is the word in the programme for action. It was not just a discussion document. It was a planned programme of action which is being implemented.

The document Ages for Learning is very challenging. It has extended boundaries which needed to be extended. It introduces something very exciting in the area of equity. It is giving a six year cycle to each second level school. There was a certain amount of inequity in that some schools had the privilege of a six year cycle and others did not. I welcome the thinking of the Minister and the group who introduced that cycle. It allows children to develop without the kind of pressures of which we are all aware.

It is also to be welcomed that there is to be a three year cycle for the intermediate certificate. The Minister suggested that the extra year might be used as a transition year to broaden the education and development of a person. I was part of a three year cycle for the intermediate certificate. We did the examination after two years of study and in the third year we crammed two years study into one year. It was more a memory test. We did another Shakespeare play, 24 different poems and six different essays. Looking back at it, it would have been far more beneficial if we had been allowed to use that year in a broader sense.

We all look forward to the findings of the Curriculum and Examinations Board. This area was crying out for new thinking. I am sure the Minister and her competent board are aware that there is a very fine balance here. We are trying to get rid of an examination system that judges people and decides what type of future career they will have based on one examination or a series of examinations. The person might not be in full health, or might have a nervous disposition and blank out on the day. We have all had experience of that. Five or six years of study should not be judged on one experience. That is quite ridiculous when we consider it in the sense of what we are trying to achieve through education. I welcome the assessment system. Everything should not depend on one examination.

The Minister is committed to equality of opportunity for girls in education. Research has shown that, even in today's classrooms in co-educational schools, because of our conditioning, male and female teachers are inclined to give precedence and more serious consideration to male students than to female students. There is an in-built prejudice among certain adults in leading professional positions that women are not as seriously career minded as men and should not be given the same opportunities. Interview boards should be aware that that type of prejudice can exist.

A woman carried out research into this and said that last year the number of medical students who qualified showed an excess of women over men. The question she asked was: would as many women medical students have achieved entry to the profession if there had been a system in operation other than the points system — for example, an interview board where people might have inbuilt prejudices? I ask the Minister and the board to be aware of this in drawing up the rules for entry. It is an attitude which must be overcome.

We have spoken about the mentally handicapped and the children of travellers but some of the most handicapped who are ashamed and embarrassed to admit it, are those who leave school illiterate or semi-illiterate. Once we have the privilege of reading and writing we are inclined to forget the kind of dark world in which they operate. The Minister paid tribute to the voluntary groups this morning and I welcome the fact that she has provided money for the schemes this year. I remember hearing of a woman who had a household budget. She could not read. She tried to shop for the best value but because she could not read she did not know what products were cheapest or represented good value. She was so ashamed that she could not read that instead of asking people she identified the products she wanted by their colour. I wanted to weep when I heard that. We do not realise the total disadvantage people who are trapped in that world are at. We cannot even begin to realise the stigma that is attached to having to admit that one cannot read or write.

Deputy Faulkner asked for consideration with regard to the children of travellers and we must give the same kind of consideration to people like those I have mentioned. I heard of the case of a skilled craftsman who had to consistently refuse offers by his employer to become a supervisor to the foreman, the reason being that he would have to read instructions and plans and pass them on to workers. For years promotion was denied to him not because of his work but simply because he could not read. He did an adult literacy course and admitted that he could not read. He went from strength to strength. Like the Minister, I pay tribute to all the groups who for years have been working in this area with tremendous commitment.

The curriculum for special schools has been broadened. The old curriculum has been scrapped and young people have been allowed a certain amount of flexibility. I welcome the plans announced by the Minister regarding the area of construction. I know that the new engineering building in UCD will be welcomed. Engineering students had to go from one building to another in order to attend lectures. It gives one an idea of the cost of third level education when one realises that this building and the major extensions to the colleges at Bolton Street and Kevin Street are estimated to cost over £34 million. We need our own young people in the area of engineering and research and development. I was delighted to hear that the RTC in Dún Laoghaire will have 1,000 places at a cost of £10 million. As the Minister pointed out, RTCs are planned for and will be built in areas of fast expanding population. Resources must now be put into the third level area so as to build it up to meet the needs of those who are now going to second level.

I could not allow this Estimate debate to pass by without paying tribute to the Minister and joining with her in her efforts to bring about this great revolution with regard to equality of opportunity for women and girls. It is good to read: "The following action has been taken". Sexism has been removed from school text books. As regards examinations, the sex of a candidate will not be identified. Research shows that there were inbuilt prejudices and discrimination in some places where people were able to define male and female candidates.

I should like the Minister to pay special attention to the area of teacher training programmes. In the Joint Committee on Women's Rights we found that everyone who was committed to this area had the right ideas and knew exactly what was wanted. The teacher unions welcomed our report on education but pointed out that there was a huge gap to narrow. Teachers who are trained admit to not having the type of awareness that is needed with regard to the area of equality. I pay tribute to the Minister and the Department for organising a series of seminars where teachers come together in workshops and discuss the problem of awareness.

The Minister stated that it was noted during the seminars that single sex boys' schools were not adequately represented. In fact only one single sex boys' school was represented. She said the situation had improved a little but that the representation was still far behind that of girls' schools. I appeal to the management and teachers of single sex boys' schools to try to take part in and take advantage of the general developments which are occurring in this area.

Sex education is an area of learning and development in adult relationships — boys and girls, young men and young women relating to each other on an honest level and recognising their own sexuality. There are sex education programmes in co-educational schools and single sex girls' schools but unhappily in some boys' schools, leading ones at that, there has been no improvement in this area. Young boys are deprived of this programme of learning. What worries me is that many pupils from these schools will be the leaders of tomorrow in the business and political world. If these pupils are to be the future leaders and they are deprived of learning about changing concepts in regard to equality, the same kind of traditional discriminations will prevail. That bodes ill for society and in particular for women.

I should like to think we could cut down on the area of equality in in-service training, if as part of the training of teachers we had a module dealing with the whole area of equal opportunity and ridding ourselves of sexist attitudes. This is happening in Thomond College at present. What worries those who are involved in this area is that teachers who get third level degrees which enable them to teach in second level have no such module. There is no centre for women's studies in any of our universities although I hope there will be in one university soon. Until we have that there will continue to be a huge imbalance between the number of men and women at management level in education. Yet that is the level at which policies are made.

If young people see that everyone at the top is male they will think women are not fit for management positions. In our committee report we stated that the predominance of women teachers in all areas of education except lectureships in university is not reflected in the figures for posts of responsibility. For instance 53 per cent of principalships were held by men and 47 per cent by women. A system in which 25 per cent of the workforce holds more than half the principalships illustrates the extent to which inequality between the sexes is entrenched in the teaching profession. The other area is more subtle but may be more influential, that is the practice in primary schools of always having women teachers teach junior classes no matter what age they are or how much experience they have. The men no matter how young they are are left to teach senior classes, the implication being that is is an extension of the mother image in the home plus taking away her professionalism as a teacher and the implication for men being that they are not fit for or interested in teaching very young children. It could be an incredibly rewarding experience for male teachers to deal with young children. What that leads to is that children from their earliest years when their ideas are being formed constantly see men in the power positions and in authority, with women in the lower roles. Unless we actively break that up, we will perpetuate what all of us, especially the Minister, are trying to remove.

I should like to compliment the Minister not alone for making equality of opportunity in schools a priority when she was on the Council of Ministers during our Presidency but for ensuring that through her drive and enthusiasm it was carried forward to the next Presidency. The Minister has just returned from a European meeting and a code of practice will be drawn up and a commitment made to continue this at European level.

We invest an incredible amount of money in school buildings. However, they are not used much after school hours. Would it be possible to make the classrooms available for other pursuits after school hours? In Italy, young children who wish to do so may stay on in school after the normal hours. A different staff is involved in supervising young people who would otherwise be at home alone or who may wish to study under a supervisor. That seems to be a practical and useful suggestion, especially in areas where we do not have adequate child care facilities. I know that there are problems in regard to insurance but perhaps the Minister could explore this area.

I know that civics and politics are dear to the Minister's heart and I wonder if any progress has been made in teaching these subjects. Young people have a right to know how democracy and PR work. They should also be taught how to secure a loan, their rights as consumers, how to get a mortage and areas of family law reform. That knowledge and information would be of much more use to many students than some of the more esoteric subjects which they are now studying. Is there any way in which civics could be a mandatory subject? I welcome the reforms and progress made by the Minister and I hope that she will continue to allocate resources to the areas of greatest need. School should be pleasant, stimulating and challenging. Learning should equip young people for not just a narrow career but also for living in the real sense and a preparation for the world ahead of them in the nineties and the next century which will place great emphasis on leisure. That is the challenge which the Minister faces at present. She has risen admirably to it and I wish her luck in a most difficult Ministry. We are all experts in education and we all have our expectations, but I compliment her on the progress she has made already.

Mr. L. Fitzgerald

Before I speak on the Estimate, I should like to comment briefly on some of the points mentioned earlier. I was more disappointed than taken aback by the Minister presuming to take anyone to task who identifies urgent and pressing needs in the field of education without providing costings or clearly identifying sources of funding. I have spoken in a number of debates here and I have identified urgent and important needs in many areas. However, I have never seen fit to outline clear, defined costings or where the funds should come from — that is the function of the Government. It is the function of the Opposition to identify in general terms where funding should be made and, as far as possible, where resources can be transferred from, provided that the Member is in possession of adequate information in relation to the whole area of funding. It would be a terrible negation of democracy to suggest that a Member should not analyse and clearly identify pressing and urgent needs in any area of Government activity.

Our view and approach to education is an integral part of our philosophy in regard to the well-being of society as a whole. It is imperative for Members to ensure that they bring whatever evidence they have to bear into this House and identify very clearly the most urgent needs. While I commend long term plans as logical, reasonable, wise and consistent, they cannot be put forward to the complete dispensation of short term pressing needs.

In the course of her speech the Minister referred to third level grants. She told the House that the Government were committed to providing third level education to as many people as possible and that student grants were being increased from September by 10 per cent in real terms. If one takes account of the spread of four or five years when there was no increase in that grant scheme the Minister should have increased the level of the grants by much more. The quantity involved does not seem to take account of the level of difficulty abroad in this area because, whether we are referring to students who are rurally or urban based, there is considerable difficulty involved. There is also difficulty in relation to the funding of the administration of third level education. I accept that the increase matches inflation this year, and perhaps a little more, but, in terms of the four year period which the Minister is trying to make up, it is in the overall very disappointing.

Deputy Barnes spoke about the concept of equality of educational opportunity. While I appreciate her deep concern for the elimination of any form of discrimination in the area of sexism — that concern is shared by all people on this side of the House — it is an area that needs to be dealt with more effectively than at present, with all due respect to measures, sentiments or proposals in the pipeline. I am aware that a number of nettles need to be grasped in regard to that area but I suggest that the concept is far wider than just sexism. Sadly, many other elements that would go to making up the rounded concept of equality of educational opportunity are not being addressed in most cases.

I note the Minister's announcement that the capitation grant was being increased by £1. That does not take account of the enormous difficulties that exist in that area. I am sure the Minister is aware that, while the system on the basis of a capitation grant does not show up anomalies as it transfers itself right across the primary education spectrum, there are enormous anomalies as between different communities. Some communities have enormous potential for fund raising on a voluntary basis but others do not have any despite tremendous efforts by local groups such as parents' associations. I suggest that in the current year the Minister should look at this area. I commend communities who have so impressively supplemented school funding through local voluntary effort but special extra attention should be given to areas where as a result of deprivation more than anything else it is not possible to match the potential or realisation of other areas.

The Minister said she would be very sympathetic towards staffing needs in disadvantaged areas. I hope she takes account of a number of schools that have extreme social and educational disadvantages and where staff members have already been told that they are on the panel. The Minister should have a re-think on this. If that re-think is to take place it should not be left to August when school administration for the coming year is complete. It should be done before the end of June, before the principal and staff go on holidays and management boards wind up for the year. It is important that in disadvantaged areas extra staffing considerations be granted well in advance of the summer holidays. I am aware of many cases where decisions are taken in the Department at a late stage causing enormous problems for school administration and staff allocations to different classes.

This debate marks another sad landmark in the past two and a half years' history of educational services in Ireland. On 23 and 24 April last we on this side of the House put down a Private Members' motion outlining our fears and concerns on the very serious cutbacks in education and the disastrous effects they were having both on the well-being of our pupils and society as a whole. We wanted to outline the importance and significance of education to the progress both socially and economically of our population and to appeal to the Minister at the time to take full cognisance of what we were saying. We wanted her to take due regard of the fact that the public at large were extremely alarmed and parents were very concerned and that the practitioners involved in the educational services were very disillusioned and frustrated at their inability to give adequate and caring service to the children under their care.

It is clearly obvious that our appeals and pronouncements of the facts as we presented them have fallen on deaf ears and the Minister has chosen to disregard real educational needs and to continue to resort to what I would describe as public posturings, which, as I said previously, do absolutely nothing for the advancement of the educational services. They merely promote cynicism, disregard and alienation among our young people who see the hollowness of it pretty quickly. To lose sight of the importance of education, and investment in education, to the overall development of the country is extremely retrograde.

Successive Fianna Fáil Governments through their policies, provisions and decisions have demonstrated the importance of investment in education for expansion in the future. It is always an integral part of our Governments' programmes as we always recognised and still recognise, that education and investment in education play a vital role in the development of technology, the creation of social harmony and in economic expansion generally. Those countries who have recognised, and continue to recognise that fact, and have planned their programmes accordingly, enjoy the most successful and buoyant economies and are among the countries with more satisfactory social harmony.

The Estimate for Education in 1985 to which we refer today shows a mere 2 per cent to 3 per cent increase in nominal terms over 1984 and when we take these increases in real terms they represent at least a 5 per cent cutback on last year. This operates right across the board to primary, post-primary and higher education allocations. It is very obviously a mathematical decision with no due regard given to the cares, needs and shortcomings within the educational sector. It is indiscriminate, unfair, shortsighted and will have very serious consequences for the future.

A look at the 1982 figures provided for by Fianna Fáil show that this year's allocations across the board are between 12 and 13 per cent less in real terms. Indeed, the case made recently in the NESC report referred to by Deputy O'Rourke illustrates the serious concern at the very worrying pattern in the Government's approach to education. Allocations to education as a percentage of GNP are always the real barometer by which Governments are judged regarding their priority to educational provisions and any of the statistics, no matter how we jumble them about, do not reflect the true picture. Consequently, the Minister, when challenged in this House on a number of occasions by a number of speakers during the debate on 23 and 24 April last on the NESC report, chose conveniently to sidestep it and produced a proliferation of figures, statistics and percentages to illustrate that the Government were attempting to increase allocations to education when the opposite was true. There is clearly very little priority being given to education by the Government. As well as having very serious educational consequences for the standards of literacy, numeracy and basic know-how in future years, the implications, as I have had occasion and necessity to refer to in earlier debates, will also have serious social consequences if present decisions are not reversed.

Over the past two and a half years we have had a proliferation of statements emanating from the Minister's office in relation to future educational provisions concerning plans, programmes and policies which, of course, we on this side of the House in many instances had occasion to commend as being very sensible, for-ward-looking and a very obvious and logical development of the 1980 White Paper on Educational Development. We at no time attempted to diminish the importance of such programmes and plans. We offered our support and co-operation in the implementation of these plans and encouraged their speedy implementation. However the insistent churning out of statement, restatement and restatement in relation to each of these pronouncements and decisions has given rise to a rather hollow ring as to the intention, commitment or determination of the present Government to implement these plans.

Only yesterday evening in the Evening Herald, Thursday 6 June 1985, we again read banner headlines “£74m. Schools Bonanza Plan”. This will mean an extra 4,200 student places. Our spokesperson when contacted was very willing to commend the decision and indeed to point out the necessity for such provisions. Nobody would deny that considering a cutback of 25 per cent to higher education over the past two and a half years it was time the Government saw fit to try to offset the situation and to redress the injustices they had inflicted on that sector.

However the sad feature of it is that the announcement made is but one more example of a long litany of promises into the distant future and there is absolutely no commitment during the current year or next year to increase the capital allocation for the provision of this development despite how welcome the proposal might be.

It is possible for any Government, any Minister, or indeed any Member of this House, to promise or speculate as to what might be desirable, logical or consistently developmental in relation to education, but it is quite a different matter to have a clear, definite commitment to the allocation of financial resources to ensure the implementation of that proposal. There was a vague reference in the article to the fact that the building work would commence towards the end of next year and that regional colleges might be ready to take in students from September 1988 — although it did read 1998, which I am sure was a typographical error but might more accurately reflect the likely date of implementation should the country be unfortunate enough to endure the present Government until then. Some weeks ago banner headlines said the Minister was recruiting an extra 2,000 teachers. Although some people surprisingly fell for that pronouncement, others like ourselves on this side of the House already wise to the excellent PR at work within the present Cabinet, were not so easily fooled. Long term plans and strategies are all important and very commendable and need to be supported and encouraged, but in this case we are talking about plans which are a long way off.

I have to ask the Minister: what about all the very urgent, necessary and top priority short term plans which are not coming forward? Why is there no provision for the pupil-teacher ratios? Why is there no serious adequate or determined provision for special and remedial education? Why is there no immediate provision to offset the hardships experienced by students at third level and indeed to give assurances to the administrators of both post-primary and third level institutions that the education services will not be dismantled? That is the sentiment being expressed by those operating in the field. Their care and concern leads them to call for assurances that they can provide adequately for the students under their care. Third level institutions do not know from day to day or from week to week whether certain departments can continue to operate at the flimsy skimpy level they have continued to operate over the past year. This type of cynicism is most unacceptable in education. While all the most grandiose plans and popular pronouncements made at the most appropriate and convenient times might be all so possible from the Minister's office for the next decade, two decades or three decades' ahead, it is not so easy for the local administrators who have to plan from week to week and from year to year.

I am asking the Minister to by all means continue with her long term plans but to stop using posturings of these long term plans to demonstrate that all is well in education, that today's needs are being met, or to illustrate that educational provisions at the present time in the context of present needs are adequate, or in any way are approaching adequacy. Such an assertion would be a wild and irresponsible exaggeration. After all let us look at some of the facts of the situation that at present obtain.

As I said previously, the Minister's programme for action in education for 1984-85 addressed many of the serious problems which were previously addressed in the 1980 White Paper on Educational Development by the then Minister for Education, Deputy John Wilson. But this document contained a very fundamental flaw, its big weakness. The omission that must inevitably bring the plan into disrepute is its failure to tackle and, indeed, to understand that the most serious difficulty, the most pressing problem in educational provision at primary level, is the pupil-teacher ratio. It has effects right through all sectors subsequently and into job seeking itself.

The last time the problem was tackled was by a Fianna Fáil Government when in 1982 the appointment figure for first assistant teacher was reduced to 35 pupils and the pro rata reduction obtained down the line. I am repeating here to-day that the present Minister had done absolutely nothing to further the advancement that was made then, but chose, perhaps because of a lack of understanding of the importance and significance of this area in the educational provision, not to take up this issue. It shows disregard for all the pronouncements, all the fears, all the concerns expressed by all those practitioners in the field so anxious to adequately care for the needs of their pupils. In fact, the contrary has been the case in relation to the pupil-teacher ratio.

Because of the cut-backs, class sizes have increased and now in many instances, particularly in areas where there is serious educational disadvantage and social deprivation and where co-operation and assistance in the home are very minimal, there are ongoing problems. Principals and teachers, in an effort to cope with the increasing problems and difficulties being experienced by pupils as a result of large classes are trying various "mixums" and "gatherums" to improvise — and I stress "improvise"— in an effort to make the best possible educational environment available under the restricted conditions and grossly inadequate provisions.

In one school on the north side, an area of particular social difficulties where unemployment is at an unprecedented high level, nearly all the classes in the junior school are over 31 or 32 pupils. Over 60 of the pupils in that school of 760 to 770 pupils are deemed to have serious learning difficulties. There is only one remedial teacher, there is no special class and already in the last month or two, the school has been informed that it is losing one of its staff. These problems were brought to the attention of the Minister recently. The inability of many of the parents to give the kind of back-up support, help and encouragement needed renders the situation very serious. The statistics available in relation to this school and in relation to the enormous difficulties that obtain within this school are frightening. Similar statistics are available in relation to conditions in a number of schools in the inner city.

I find it quite extraordinary that the Government and the Minister can continue to consistently tell us about their concern for the disadvantaged and the amount of back-up assistance that is being given while we have over 58,000 of our children still in classes of over 40 pupils — 36,000 in classes of over 30 and a considerable percentage of those are in multigrade classes.

Again many are deemed, on the basis of a fairly conservative estimate, to be in classes of over 35. I want to stress this since the Minister is here today because she was not here when I last said it: anybody who presumes to tell me that a reduction in the pupil-teacher ratio in our primary schools, or indeed our post primary schools, will not make a significant advance or impact on the level and quality of educational service knows little about the enormous level of difficulties emanating from large classes.

Minister of Education (Mrs. Hussey)

I would like to thank all Deputies who contributed to this constructive and helpful debate. It could be said that this debate has brought to light some constructive suggestions and very thoughtful and concerned contributions from people who have a degree of expertise in this area. This has been a very good day for education. Many points have been brought up by both sides of the House and in the sort of time available to me it would not be possible to react in full to all of these. If Deputies' questions, queries or contributions do not appear to have been responded to on this occasion, I assure them that what I do not or cannot answer now will be followed up by me in direct discussion or contact with those Deputies.

I should like to begin with some remarks on the first contribution by the Opposition spokesperson on Education. I found Deputy O'Rourke's contribution very helpful and concerned. Obviously, we share a great many things in common in our approach to education and, in particular, to the wide range of what might be described as educational disadvantages. A point was raised by the Deputy — and in slightly different language by Deputy Fitzgerald, about the difficulty which I seem to have caused them by announcing third level projects on time and as planned for the in the Government's plan, Building on Reality. In our programme for action in education published in January 1984, we signalled the very great challenge facing this country in providing adequate education for the generation of young people who were moving rapidly into the third level age, where the participation rate is gradually increasing all the time. We signalled quite clearly that it would be a very great challenge to the people and to the Government to face up to the question of finding the capital resources to provide facilities for these young people.

I have been engaged, since I became Minister for Education, in first assessing the needs for third level building programmes with the aid of the statisticians in my Department, of the many learned reports and documents which have been brought out in recent years, of the Higher Education Authority and all the groups — statutory or otherwise — who have been making contributions in this area for many years.

My first task was to sit down with my Department and look at the size of the challenge. We referred very specially to it in the programme for action in education. The next step was to look at the many recommendations that had been made for the kind and location of facilities which would be required to meet the explosion of population. We looked at a very large range of capital requests from universities all over the country and the recommendations that have been made to us by Clancy, Benson and others, as well as the Higher Education Authority, for the provision of new RTC facilities.

We then had to make decisions approaching the national plan — the first time that any Government have ever produced their specific spending and revenue proposals for three years for the country to see — giving the actual figures for the three years and undertaking to stick by them. In the process of planning and production of Building on Reality, we prioritised — to use a horrible new word which has a certain handiness in summing up what I want to say — the areas for third level capital investment. As we identified how much that would cost, we identified the kind of money we would need if we were to start building these projects in time to meet the needs of those students when they would be looking for the places. Of course, an enormous number of those young people will be looking for places specifically in the years ahead, coming to a particularly high point in the years 1989 and 1990, when the requirements for places will be massive.

Having done that, we then in the national plan identified and provided money necessary for these building projects for each of the three years. We then published the list of the projects in the national plan and published the money required to build them. The Taoiseach, I recall, in his launching speech for that document specified the increase that the Government were providing in capital for the next three years, particularly at third level. He did so in some detail.

I am sorry if I appear to repeat myself, but so many Opposition Deputies apparently are mesmerised by planning because they are so unaccustomed to it. I must point out that each of these projects was considered not lightly but in great detail. We do not wave magic wands because we are not so irresponsible with the taxpayers' money. Each project which came on stream subsequently was examined in detail by the Government and was considered in many aspects — its location, its need, the kind of facilities it could offer and its cost. When each one of those was considered, it was then approved. As the projects were approved, I then announced them and the first that I announced following the national plan was the School of Engineering in UCD which, as Deputy Barnes pointed out, is a matter of extreme urgency for that college which finds itself very divided up between different faculties and in need of a great deal of new equipment and new buildings to enable it to keep the extremely high standard of engineering which it has achieved.

Each college was amply provided for and the capital spending for the start-up process for building and the on-going process are clearly provided for, having been identified in our national plan and in our Estimates for those three years. I certainly would not be the slightest bit interested in any announcements which were not accompanied by the precise spending figures and did not have the commitment of my colleagues in Government to the spending required.

In 1985, 1986 and 1987 there is capital expenditure at third level of £26 million, £31 million and £33 million, respectively, amounting to £90.7 million. That capital spending will be right across the board for each of these projects which will be planned and consultants appointed and sites acquired, as required for each one.

Deputy O'Rourke, I am sure, realises that I cannot give her the precise date on which the site will be acquired for any college.

Mrs. O'Rourke

How far advanced are the plans for the acquiring of the site?

Mrs. Hussey

They are very far advanced. Let me give the Deputy a specific answer to a specific question. One must take into account the time necessary for the planning and actual building of such enormous projects. The architectural planning has started in some cases and will start without delay in others. Our targets for the finishing of each project are as follows:

Tallaght RTC — 1,200 places — September 1989; Dún Laoghaire RTC — 1,000 places — September 1989; Blanchardstown RTC — 1,000 places — September 1989.

This is well in time to meet the projected needs of those populations in those years.

NIHE, Dublin — 1,000 places — September 1990; Thurles RTC — 800 places — September 1990; Castlebar RTC — 800 places — September 1990; The Dental Hospital and the St. James's site — October 1989.

The UCD School of Engineering already referred to will start within a few months and will be ready for September 1988.

I am specifying a very short term time scale for these projects because we intend the capital in our Estimates to be used very quickly to bring these projects on stream within the shortest possible time. I am hoping that we will achieve that time schedule for the sake of the parents and young people in all those areas who will be looking for those places at that time.

I do not think it would be really time to say that the public are growing weary of announcements in education. I think the public welcome greatly the fact that a planning process is being undertaken, and undertaken very carefully and very deliberately. Many thing are happening in this area of education. I am glad that the inertia of the late seventies and early eighties when Fianna Fáil were in Government has now been put out of our minds.

Mrs. O'Rourke

That is not true.

Mrs. Hussey

I am sorry it upsets the Opposition when plans are made that have concrete spending and revenue figures attached to them. They find it very difficult to deal with that. Perhaps it comes from lack of experience in that kind of responsible planning.

Deputy O'Rourke asked about the 2,000 new teaching jobs in the schemes announced in the document Ages for Learning. I should have thought that the document published on that day would have made the answers self-evident but, of course, there may have been other motives for asking the question. That document specified clearly that the new course would commence in September 1986 and that the third year of senior cycles would not start until 1988. As the Deputy will know from reading the document, obviously the batches of additional teachers will come on stream as the plans come into operation and as the schools plan and provide for the extra years.

I do not know why someone — I think it was Deputy O'Rourke — raised the question of charging people for senior cycle classes. I do not know why that question was raised.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I said it arose out of my own observations.

Mrs. Hussey

It must be that that idea is germinating in the minds of Fianna Fáil and Deputy O'Rourke. I hope Fianna Fáil have no such plans when they come to Government, if they ever do.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Minister should not be so naive.

Mrs. Hussey

I was surprised to find references to student grants not having been increased since 1981. Fianna Fáil were in Government for a portion of that time and in that period it appeared that money was flowing like water. However, nothing was given to students in third level when Fianna Fáil were in Government. They did nothing for the students——

Mrs. O'Rourke

Neither did the Minister.

Mrs. Hussey

It was when Deputy Boland was Minister and in my period as Minister that support for students has been considerably increased.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Three years later.

Mrs. Hussey

Fianna Fáil should remember they have a record of total inertia in that area. I am sure Deputy O'Rourke was not serious when she spoke about increasing the grants retrospectively for the past four years. This would cost untold millions of pounds and I do not think it was a serious suggestion. All of us believe it would be desirable to give millions of pounds with a stroke of the pen——

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Minister does not understand what I was talking about.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should allow the Minister to continue without interruption.

Mrs. Hussey

I am sorry if the Deputy is upset by what I am saying. I did not interrupt her and she should allow me to continue. I do not know why the Deputy is raising the question of four year olds and I do not know why she feels it necessary to make a bible out of this every time she speaks on the subject. I should have thought that the decisions of the Government, which were very clear, had settled this matter. I should like to take issue with the Deputy when she said that Fianna Fáil never wavered from the principle of the four-year entry age. She should remember the proposal of Deputy Wilson when he was Minister for Education. He proposed to permit the enrolment of pupils of four years on only two entry dates in the year, namely, 1 September and 1 January.

Mrs. O'Rourke

For four year olds.

Mrs. Hussey

Deputy Wilson had to withdraw that suggestion. Deputy O'Rourke should stop referring to some kind of sacrosanct stance of Fianna Fáil on this issue. It is really like a broken record at this stage.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Government had to adopt our clothes.

Mrs. Hussey

Deputy Faulkner's extremely thoughtful and constructive contribution demonstrated an expert and compassionate understanding for the whole question of education for the handicapped and for the children of travelling people. That concern, which I know is shared by all Members, finds an echo with me. I have noted carefully what he said on the many questions he raised in this area. I agree with him that all Governments have made great strides but I also agree that much more has to be done. I will bear in mind very carefully all the points he raised.

I am sorry if the two Deputies opposite do not like when I make any remarks in defence of the taxpayer. I asked people to remember that aspect when they propose expenditure in addition to the £1 billion we will spend in 1985 on education and the inevitable rise in cost that will happen every year as a result of demographic factors which in themselves are causing us an amount of difficulty in terms of making other improvements. Any remarks I make are not intended in any way to limit people in the suggestions they make. The contributions today have been most useful and have been expressed with great care and concern. However, it is only right that all of us should have some regard for the taxpayer when we ask for more money. That was the only caveat I entered at the beginning of my speech. It caused a great deal of offence, perhaps because Fianna Fáil are not used to worrying too much about the taxpayer.

Deputy Barnes made a long and thoughtful contribution and I shall deal with some of the points she raised. I share her concern for a review of the pressures caused by examinations. That is one of the fundamental reasons we are reviewing that area with the Curriculum and Examinations Board. Despite its faults the points system for entry to third level education is equally unfair to all in that there is no question of influence being brought to bear on results or of persons achieving entry to some faculty because of people they know. It is a most complex and difficult task to find an alternative system that will be seen to be manifestly fair. It must be the concern of all of us to try to have a system that will be different and that will not, as Deputy Barnes said, expect a young person on a particular day to decide his or her future life.

Undoubtedly this is a difficult area for us but it is one which causes me great concern. Obviously I do not dictate to the third level sector how they should decide in relation to admitting students to the universities. I can only consult with them and urge them. But our concern must be, more than anything else, to try to remove that all pervasive influence of third level entry requirements on the second level and even on the lower level of education. We must endeavour to ensure that our curricula and examinations procedures are tailored exactly for the protection and the development of young people in all aspects of their minds and of their potential instead of steering them soley towards third level education. Many of our young people either do not wish to embark on the higher level of education or are not suited to that further education.

Deputy Barnes spoke also about the literacy schemes and expressed concern for the underprivileged. I am glad she noted the enormous increases being granted to the various people working in the area of literacy. In a world of information technology, which is moving helter skelter on the road towards the machine age when we will use visual display units for all activities, we could easily forget a group of people who for one reason or another will be inevitably left behind in that context. I commend all those groups who have pressed so hard for an improvement in the lot of those people.

Deputy Barnes spoke, too, with her considerable expertise and understanding, on the question of equality of opportunity. She is aware of the long list of action that has been taken in this area. We will continue with that work and to think at every opportunity of new ways and schemes of engaging parents, pupils and teachers in facing the problem whereby half of the population are geared too much towards traditional areas of employment in which opportunities may no longer be available.

I turn now to some of the remarks made by Deputy Briscoe. He referred to the very difficult problems being experienced in 17 inner city schools. These problems relate to deficiencies in standards of maintenance, to the lack of remedial teachers and to debts incurred. I do not need to remind the Deputy that the primary responsibility for maintaining schools rests with the trustees. This has been the policy of successive Governments. The capitation grant system is intended to help boards of management, but it is not intended to defray the full cost of maintenance. Boards of management are expected to raise a proportion of the cost from their own resources. I recognise the special problems of inner city schools. These are in areas where unemployment is particularly serious, though that is a problem for all schools that are located in disadvantaged areas. For this reason I introduced the special disadvantaged areas fund last year. That fund is being repeated this year; and this year also, for the first time since 1979, additional remedial teachers are being provided in areas of special need. I trust this move will help towards the elimination of the problems mentioned by Deputy Briscoe. The special fund is not adequate to meet all the legitimate demands made on it but it is intended to enable special capitation grant supplements to be paid.

It is intended to enable a series of special measures to be introduced in 33 special schools in Dublin, Cork and Limerick and I hope to be in a position as Minister to continue to expand on these special initiatives in the years ahead. As I said this morning, my Department have a particularly sympathetic approach to the staff needs of schools in disadvantaged areas. It is my concern to ensure that these schools are given a level of teaching staff that is adequate to cater for their problems. I assure Deputy Briscoe that his remarks will be treated with considerable care and attention.

Undoubtedly we will be debating another Estimate for my Department when we will find that the spending on education will have increased yet again. I have one problem to refer to here before closing my remarks and it is this. When we talk about spending on education many figures seem to be tossed around in relation to the NESC reports and to the question of whether spending has increased or decreased in real terms. I have a very long answer to that point but I shall not have time to read it now. However, I assure those Deputies who expressed concern about the expenditure on education as a percentage of GNP that the NESC report to which Deputy Fitzgerald referred did not take into account various factors such as European Social Fund spending or the increase in the 24th round as applied to education and various other features also, but these are referred to in the national plan. If the Deputy is still concerned in this regard I shall send him an explanation later but I can tell him now that the non-capital spending on education as a percentage of GNP for the following years was as follows: 1978, 5.07; 1981, 5.92; 1983, 6.09; 1984, 6.20 and 1985 6.23. I should mention also the expenditure figures which these percentages reflect. They were respectively, £319.1 million, £625.7 million, £810.6 million, £896.5 million, and £969 million. I am sure the Deputy did not mean to suggest that either on this occasion or on any other the experts in my Department were not producing honest figures. There was a reference during the last debate to the integrity of the Department but I am sure Deputy Fitzgerald would not like to make any imputation concerning the integrity of my Department in the matter of the preparation of figures.

I thank those Deputies who have contributed to the debate which I have found most constructive and helpful.

Mr. Briscoe

I thank the Minister for her replies to the points I raised.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The NESC report has never been properly refuted before.

Vote put and declared carried.