Vol. 411 No. 7
15 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Education if she will outline (a) the total number of fee-charging post-primary schools, by county, (b) the current enrolment of these schools, (c) the current amount of State grants paid to such schools in respect of teacher salaries and other grants and (d) the way in which public grants to such schools can be justified at post-primary but not primary level; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I refer the Deputy to the list of schools I arranged to be supplied to him. Did the Deputy get that list?
Yes.
The list relates to Deputy Gilmore's previous question on the matter, Question No. 669 of 16 October 1991. The total current enrolment of those 57 schools is about 21,000 pupils. Grants for teachers' salaries in those schools amount to about £23 million annually. The total amount paid in other grants is in the order of £2.5 million a year. The amount in question, then, is £23 million to £25 million annually. At post-primary level the schools in question are recognised secondary schools which did not opt into the scheme for free post-primary education introduced in 1967. National schools do not charge fees and those private primary schools which do charge fees are not recognised as part of the State supported system of education.
I should like to ask the Minister three brief supplementary questions. First, is she giving consideration in the context of the forthcoming Green Paper to changing the level of subsidisation to fee paying post-primary schools? Secondly, has she given any consideration to the possibility that some of those fee-paying post primary schools may now wish to opt into the free education system and is she disposed towards that? Thirdly, can the Minister offer any justification for the State continuing to pay £25 million a year as a subsidy to private education while at the same time she refuses to sanction appointment of teachers, extension to school buildings, renovation of buildings and so on for the rest of the education system due to lack of finance?
The Deputy will know that recently there has been quite a debate about the matter, a debate fuelled by radio, television and the newspapers. The debate has all been in the context of the Green Paper and it is very helpful towards the ongoing education debate. The Deputy asked whether the Green Paper would address the issue of fee-paying schools. Yes, that matter will be considered and discussed in the context of the Green Paper and that will hold for us and the various interested parties to have further discussions on the matter. I do not consider that I have been in any way backward at proclaiming that, so I make that statement quite clearly.
The Deputy asked whether I had given consideration to schools in the fee-paying system that might wish to opt into the free system. Obviously, that would arise from discussions. I stress that the Green Paper is a paper of discussion and consultation, not of diktat, so in a hypothetical case schools may well wish to opt for the free system. We would certainly consider the position if any of the schools in the fee-paying system did opt to change into the free system. We are discussing something that might occur later on, but I do wish to be as helpful as possible. The Deputy also asked for a justification of my Department continuing, in the context of scarce resources, to pay in the region of £23 million to £25 million to schools in the fee-paying system. I wish to make two points in that regard. Of course, children stand to be educated no matter which school they attend. Obviously, if schools wished to opt into the free system they would then fall into the pupil-teacher ratio arrangements of the day. That would want to be put very clearly on record. Also, it is because of the need to look at what appear to be anomalies and inequities that the matter will be addressed in a consultative fashion in the Green Paper.
