Vol. 427 No. 8
2 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Minister for Education if the proposed increase in the primary school capitation grant is to apply across all primary schools; or if it is to be targeted to schools in specific areas of particular disadvantage.
59 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Education the current level of capitation grant paid to primary and post-primary schools; when the level of grant was last increased; the plans, if any, she has to increase the grant; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 59 together.
The standard rate of capitation grant paid to primary schools in 1992 was £28 per pupil and £150 per pupil for secondary schools. This grant was last increased in 1990 from £26.50 to £28 per pupil at primary level and from £140 to £150 for secondary schools.
I am happy to say that I have secured an increase of £3.4 million in the 1993 provision for capitation grant for primary schools. This will enable me to increase the standard rate of grant to £33 per pupil in every national school, with pro rata increases for certain other categories of school. This will cost in the region of £2.8 million and allow me to give increases above £5 per pupil to certain disadvantaged schools.
I am aware that the primary schools have been underfunded in the matter of running costs. In the current tight budgetary situation an increase of £5 per pupil is a very positive step towards improving the position and is the single largest increase in grant for many years.
I have particular concern for the position of schools in disadvantaged areas. Currently, such schools get an extra £17 per pupil. The balance of £0.6 million from the additional £3.4 million to which I have already referred will be used to initiate further measures to assist the disadvantaged. Discussions will take place shortly with the interested parties regarding this matter. I regret that in the budgetary situation it was not possible to provide an increase in the post-primary grant this year.
Does the Minister not agree that, in view of the fact that the capitation grant has remained frozen for a considerable number of years at the inadequate level of £28, the General Secretary of the INTO was quite justified in dismissing the paltry £5 increase as playing slap-tickle politics with education? Does she not realise the tortuous pressure on low income families and schools to beg, borrow and squeal for £7,000 to £10,000 in order to keep schools open on a day to day basis?
I agree that the grant is worrying for people who have children in school at present. However, the Deputy should acknowledge the increase achieved by the Department in this year's budgetary figures. In 1986 the capitation grant was £24 per pupil, in 1990 it was increased to £28 per pupil and in 1993 it was increased to £33 per pupil. To take the example of a 100 pupil school, it will receive £3,300 for annual running costs while a school of 300 pupils will receive £9,000.
Does the Minister not accept that the present system of financing primary education has failed and a complete overhaul of the system is necessary? This reinforces inequity, consolidates poverty and maintains disadvantage in society. The system needs a radical revamp at this stage.
I cannot agree that to increase the capitation grant by £5 consolidates poverty. The increase of £5 is a very clear signal of this Government's commitment to funding at primary school level. My Department is undertaking a unit cost study at primary and post-primary levels on the costs of schools generally and in light of the result of this study I will be considering the existing rates of capitation grants to schools. The Higher grant reflects the fact that part of the secondary capitation grant goes towards the cost of teachers' salaries. I am in the process of reviewing the position and I am particularly committed to ensuring that poverty is not consolidated. There is a clink of light as we move forward to invest in the primary school system.
