Vol. 427 No. 8
9 Mr. S. Barrett asked the Minister for Education the number of primary schools which will be replaced and/or refurbished in the context of the £1.9 million increase in the 1993 estimate for school buildings; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
38 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Education the number of primary schools which will be replaced and/or refurbished in the context of the £1.9 million increase in the 1993 estimate for school buildings; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
48 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Education the number of primary schools which will be replaced and/or refurbished in the context of the £1.9 million increase in the 1993 estimate for school buildings; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
60 Mr. Yates asked the Minister for Education the number of primary schools which will be replaced and/or refurbished in the context of the £1.9 million increase in the 1993 estimate for school buildings; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 38, 48 and 60 together.
On the basis of the £18.7 million allocated this year for the national schools capital programme I have scheduled 43 major projects to proceed to construction during 1993. This is in addition to the 38 major projects already under construction at the beginning of the year. Upwards of a 1,000 minor capital projects will be undertaken also at national schools during 1993 and, on past trends, 50 or so schools will require to be provided with prefabricated accommodation.
Teachers and pupils need to be provided with a reasonable working and learning environment in good quality accommodation, taking account of issues such as the demands of a modern curriculum, the changing nature of teaching and learning resources and the need to adapt styles of pupil learning. Despite much investment over the years, much of which was needed to cater for increasing numbers, the condition of a great many schools leaves much to be desired. In recognition of this, the Programme for a Partnership Government states:
We will allocate an increased amount in each of the next five years to implement a planned programme of replacing or refurbishing sub-standard school buildings.
As evidence of this commitment, the 1993 capital allocation for primary and post primary schools represents an increase of £6.9 million or 19 per cent over the 1992 expenditure.
Experience since taking office has convinced me of the need for a more orderly approach to the process by which major building projects are selected for release to construction each year. It is my intention to have future decisions on the progress of major projects, through the architectural planning process up to the signing of a contract, based on objective criteria related to relevant educational, building and financial factors. I also consider it desirable that school authorities be made aware, in an open and transparent manner, of the position of their particular building projects at the various stages. As a first step, I have, in a separate written reply to Question No. 164 of yesterday's date, provided details of the major projects which will commence in 1993 under the primary and post primary building programmes. My intention is to build on this by disclosing the criteria on which projects are selected and prioritised and advanced through the planning process and then indicate on a regular basis where individual projects stand in relation to these criteria.
I am amazed at the Minister's reference to prefabricated buildings. I had thought that the era of that blight was over, as prefabricated accommodation is not suitable for education. I wish to again draw the Minister's attention to the very clear commitment given in the Programme for a Partnership Government:
We will allocate an increased amount in each of the next five years to implement a planned programme of replacing or refurbishing sub-standard school buildings.
The increase this year was a mere £1.9 million, an amount barely sufficient to complete one school for 500 students. Does the Minister not realise that the INTO has already determined that approximately 680 schools have no indoor toilet; others are tumble-down, insanitary and rat-infested and others still are battered prefabricated buildings that are a public health hazard? Does she recognise that based on her current projections it would be 20 to 25 years before any dent could be made in the problem? What will the Minister do about it?
I assure the Deputy that at least the Government has begun to meet the commitment given in the Programme for a Partnership Government. There has been an increase of 19 per cent on 1992 expendiutre.
An increase of £1.9 million.
I am aware of the survey carried out by the INTO. We all share a concern for children who are being taught in environments that are not conducive to good health or wellbeing. It is, therefore, extremely important that I be allowed to put in place a priority list that would be transparent, particularly to those who believe that the prevailing conditions are much worse than those in other counties, conditions of which they may not have intimate knowledge. I have quite a lot of detail on this issue but I shall spare Deputies that. Perhaps Deputy Higgins would like to request in writing details of how the process begins and the stages it goes through. Under criteria that I am setting down with the building unit in my Department I will be able to draw up lists so that when schools are in need of a new building they will have information on the process involved. I hope to be able to advise such schools of their place on the priority list. It is my belief — and this issue has been brought to my attention every time I have been in the Chamber — that there is a lack of confidence in the impartiality of the process associated with the school building programme. I want people to regain faith in that process. It is my intention to prioritise and select projects and to take them through the various stages. I want school authorities and local Deputies — who work very hard on behalf of their communities — to be made aware in an open and transparent manner of the position of particular building projects at all times. All statements made regarding building projects must have credibility. The possibility of establishing a formal appeals mechanism is being examined in my Department at present.
With regard to Question No. 9, I should first have called Deputy Seán Barrett, who tabled the question. I apologise to the Deputy, whom I did not observe.
There is no difficulty, a Cheann Comhairle. Given the current state of many school buildings throughout the country, particularly primary school buildings, would the Minister agree that the 11 per cent increase granted this year is completely insufficient? I respectfully suggest to the Minister that to announce 43 major projects when it is known that there are 700 on the priority list is not to deal adequately with an appalling problem. In view of the Minister's new policy of openness in the prioritising of certain projects, would she consider referring this matter to the Dáil committee that will be set up in the near future to deal with education? In that way, everybody in the House could have a say in the drawing up of the new plan. We do not want to continue with a situation which depends on a Minister, or a Government Deputy, being in a constituency to ensure that somebody will get a replacement prefab or an extension to an existing primary school.
In the past five years we have spent £84 million on capital works for national schools. During the same period we have spent £107.4 million on post-primary schools and 6,800 grants were made available for post-primary schools for emergency and minor works. At post-primary level 166 major projects were completed, involving hundreds of minor projects. I am concerned about the condition of school buildings, but we are committed in a five year programme to increasing the capital made available to improve the condition of school buildings. We are living in very difficult budgetary times and an increased allocation right across the board suggests not only that we are committed to delivering on our educational promises but that we are committed, and have shown that commitment, to ensuring that children will benefit from a better educational system in an environment conducive to learning.
The Deputy referred to transparency and the building programme and said those matters should be discussed at the education committee. I will be happy to discuss these matters with Members of all parties and work out a common system for building priority projects.
That would be appreciated.
The Minister said earlier that she wanted to impart the fullest information. If she intended to do that she should have answered Question No. 84, which is linked to this question. She did not do so because she cannot answer it. Does the Minister accept that in many cases the parents have been waiting 20 years for a new school? If a fire chief visited some of the schools in my constituency — I would say the same applies nationwide — he would close many of them because they are fire hazards. There are no corridors left through which the children could get out of the classrooms. They are packed in like sardines. Surely in this day and age we are not talking about prefabricated buildings as a solution to the problem? They are outdated and are not a solution to the problem. They are also a waste of public money.
I will ensure that there is a written reply to Question No. 84. This school is one of the examples brought to my attention as being in a substandard condition. This applies throughout the country. It will benefit all schools if we succeed in drawing up criteria for measuring when the parents of this school, and others, can expect the condition of schools in which their children are taught to be improved. If the Deputy would like to communicate directly with me I will be happy to facilitate him.
I call Deputy Crawford for a final, brief question.
I welcome the Minister's openness in regard to many of these problems and I also welcome the fact that she has committed funds to schools in Ballybay and Shercock. However, because of previous promises — I am not criticising the Minister in this regard — parents will not believe any more promises until they see the work completed. I also wish to refer to a school in Glaslough, which I raised in the House on another occasion, where the children have been divided and some classes are being held in another building. This is a very urgent matter and I hope that the schools in Glaslough and Killanney will be treated as a priority. I hope that because we do not have a Minister in Cavan-Monaghan we will not be left out. I am sure the Minister will ensure fair play for all.
I welcome the Deputy's comments in regard to my openness and I hope that I will be assisted by Deputies on all sides of the House in the task which faces me.
With regard to the Deputy's local problems, I will ensure they are not forgotten and that part of the capital programme will be drawn up to include those schools. As I said earlier, the list will consist of priority areas, priority urgent and priority needy. There are many lists. I am really being asked by Members of the House to draw up a schools scheme which will satisfy all Deputies that capital resources are being made available in a fair and transparent way.
That disposes of questions for today.
