Vol. 424 No. 2
9 Mr. Yates asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, he proposes to take to improve the quality of primary school buildings in the light of the recently published Irish National Teachers Organisation Report on conditions in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
12 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, he proposes to take to improve the quality of primary school buildings in the light of the recently published Irish National Teachers Organisation Report on conditions in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
21 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, he proposes to take to improve the quality of primary school buildings in the light of the recently published Irish National Teachers Organisation Report on conditions in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
22 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, he proposes to take to improve the quality of primary school buildings in the light of the recently published Irish National Teachers Organisation Report on conditions in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
42 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Education if he will make a statement on recent reports of serious deficiencies in school buildings; and the number of schools which have had new buildings and substantial repairs undertaken in each of the last three years.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 12, 21, 22 and 42 together.
I am aware of the need for continuing investment in the stock of national school premises. There has been a considerable investment in recent years in providing additional classrooms needed for the growing number of pupils and in the enhancement of existing accommodation. However much more needs to be done.
In the period 1987-91 a total of 216 major projects involving the provision of new schools or the extension-renovation of existing schools were completed. In the current year 52 projects are under construction and a further 147 are at various stages of planning. In addition, a very large number of improvement schemes have been completed, e.g. the provision of new toilets, heating and lighting, hard play areas and improvements to roofs, doors and windows. The total capital outlay in the last four years amounts to £95.5 million.
Would the Minister agree with the recent statement by the secretary of the INTO that primary education is disintegrating because of the quality of school buildings? Is he concerned that one out of every ten schools is over 100 years old? Will he also agree that the recent tendency is to provide schools which do not have a GP room? Will he agree that this will have an adverse effect on the quality of education in our primary system?
The Deputy asked whether I agreed with statements made by the secretary of the INTO; some days I do and on others I do not. I recognise that one school in ten is over 100 years old. However, it means that 90 per cent are not that old. In regard to a GP room, our priority is to provide classrooms and I am particularly concerned and interested in trying to rid the system of prefabricated buildings. A very high percentage of schools throughout the country are still prefabricated buildings which are ten, 15 or 20 years old — I think the average is about 15 years old. I visited a large number and my priority in building terms is to try to remove on a phased basis the older prefabricated buildings and to get on with it as quickly as I can because it is an urgent matter.
Will the Minister accept there is a serious problem in regard to the standard of many school buildings? Will he indicate to the House if he uses any standard to determine whether a building is regarded as substandard? Is there a programme within his Department for the elimination of substandard primary school buildings?
Yes, we are working on a programme on which we spent £95.5 million in four years. The standards are professionally assessed and they give priority to safety and sanitary facilities — what would be regarded by any sensible person as the basic requirements in a primary school — before I spend money on what might be regarded as enhancements or additional non-basic facilities. The programme will continue urgently.
What the Minister is saying is of cold comfort to many parents whose children are attending substandard schools. Many primary schools, for example, Killawalla, on which there was a report on television on Monday evening; Kinvara, which featured very prominently in the INTO report; and Kenagh, near Crossmolina, are so ramshackle and substandard that they would be condemned by the Department of Agriculture and Food for housing animals. They would not pass EC regulations for grant purposes as farm buildings. They contravene practically every regulation in terms of the levels expected for human habitation. A special submission will have to be made (a) to the Cabinet and (b) to Brussels for additional ESF money so that there can be a massive campaign to replace substandard buildings immediately.
As the Deputy knows, the European Community does not grant-aid first level education. It is a matter for the Irish taxpayer and I have already explained that there has been a 28 per cent increase in funding in four years. I have instructed my Department to prepare a strong, detailed priority listing to tackle buildings in order of priority. The odd hard case pops up now and then and receives substantial attention, but there is an ongoing programme and hundreds of schools all over the country are attended to every year. Every effort is being made to meet the legitimate demands of schools which, I accept, need urgent attention.
The Minister's answer was very vague, because he did not mention a timeframe or target. Do the Department have a target date for the elimination of all substandard school accommodation in the primary sector?
A sum of £95 million is not vague. The trouble is that we must have a rolling programme, because by the time some schools have been completed others are in a dilapidated condition. It is a continuous programme of improving the primary school year in, year out. It is an uphill battle because, as I pointed out already, there are one million people in the education system and we are spending the equivalent amount of half of all taxpayers' income tax on the system. I accept the legitimate demands for more spending and we will have to do the best we can.
A final and brief question from Deputy Gilmore.
It might be more accurate to describe the programme as floating rather than rolling, because in this weather some prefabricated buildings are likely to float away, given their condition. Leaving the rolling dimension out of it, will the Minister state how long it will take his Department to refurbish or renew the schools which have been currently identified as substandard?
If the Deputy wants detailed information on the building programme I will respond if he tables another parliamentary question.
How many years?
A substantial number of schools need attention and it will take a long time.
We know that. How long will it take?
These kind of arguments should not take place across the floor of the House.
If he tables a separate question, I will be glad to give the Deputy information and argue with him in relation to taxpayers' money.
In regard to setting priorities, will the Minister, at least within two years, provide indoor toilets in the one in ten schools which do not have them at present? Will he also ensure that the one in four schools which do not have a drinkable water supply will have one?
Yes, they are priorities and I hope to make a major impact in that regard in the next 12 months.
