Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 25 Mar 1993

Vol. 428 No. 3

Adjournment Debates. - Knocklyon (Dublin) New School Proposal.

It is now clear that the former Minister for Education, Deputy Séamus Brennan, committed a gross fraud on the Knocklyon community in November last. For his own electoral purposes, he circulated a letter dated 13 November 1992 stating that he had sanctioned the construction of Knocklyon Community School being "a 400 pupil school with first year intake scheduled for September 1994". The letter continued that he had instructed his Department to immediately begin the process and named consultants for the project. It stated:

An amount of £250,000 has been included in the Department of Education Estimates for 1993 to enable the project to proceed. The school is scheduled to be built in two stages and will be funded over the financial period 1993-95.

Following the circulation of this letter, I warned the local community to be cautious as at that time no Government spending Estimates had been finalised, approved or agreed for 1993 and it seemed to me that the Minister's letter was grossly misleading. Nevertheless, it was my hope that it was a prelude to the school being constructed.

Subsequently, a letter was circulated by Deputy Brennan, signed by a civil servant in the Department of Education, Mr. Noel Montayne, detailing plans for the construction of the school with a hand-written note added on by the then Minister accusing me of questioning his "integrity on the Knocklyon school project". Sadly, I was right to do so.

It is now clear that my words of caution were correctly voiced. On 11 March 1993 the Minister for Education stated that the school was not included in the 1993 capital programme and is now clear that no construction will start in 1993.

There is no indication that the construction of the school will commence in 1994.

The 11 March 1993 was the first Education Question Time after the general election. In the days preceding it, knowing that he was about to be publically caught with his trousers down, Deputy Brennan who is now a junior Minister, engaged in a face-saving correspondence with the Minister for Education, making a pretence that she had in some way reversed a final decision made by the Government last November. The media story that emerged following the Dáil Question Time was one of a row between Deputy Brennan and the present Minister for Education and was portrayed by him as a struggle between Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party with the former Minister being in some way let down by the current Minister.

The truth is, of course, different. The truth is that no final spending plans of the Department of Education for 1993 were approved by Government in either October or November 1992 and no such plans could have been approved until some days immediately prior to the budget. This was confirmed in an answer to a Dáil Question on Tuesday of this week by the current Minister for Education.

The present Minister is being blamed by Deputy Brennan, and his supporters in Knocklyon, for what has taken place. It is clear, of course, that the current Minister has no commitment to the construction of Knocklyon community school. It is also clear, however, that Deputy Brennan was simply involved last autumn in a piece of political chicanery for his own electoral advantage. His commitment to the construction of Knocklyon community school was as much of a political illusion as were the trees planted some years ago by Deputy Ray Burke on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party the day before the Dublin West by-election which were mysteriously dug up and removed when the count was complete.

Instead of engaging in a phoney interparty war with the current Minister for Education, Deputy Brennan should show some humility and come into this House and apologise to the people of Knocklyon for his conduct. He should also explain how a letter signed by an official of the Department of Education came to be written and used by him for electoral purposes, the contents of which have now been proved false. The present Minister should also explain to this House what took place and should tell the House and the people of Knocklyon whether she or Minister Brennan is telling the truth about the events of recent months. It is unfortunate that the Minister for Education is not here and that the Minister of State at the Department of Education, Deputy Aylward, has been sent in to bat this evening. No doubt, he will provide protection for Minister Brennan.

Parents in Knocklyon are entitled to know the true story and whether there is any realistic possibility of this Government constructing the community school that has been badly needed for so many years. We should know the true plans of the Government, not just for 1993 but for the rest of its term, so that parents are in a position to take the necessary decisions for the future schooling of their children. The future education of the children of Knocklyon should not be placed at risk by Government politicians who are either unwilling or incapable of telling them the true story.

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. It is unfortunate, however, that he had to resort to personal attacks on Members of the House, and I am sorry that he chose to do so. As the Deputy should be aware, the Department purchased a site of more than 11 acres in the Knocklyon area in 1982, when it was considered that the demand for post-primary places in the area would require the provision of a new post-primary school.

Throughout the eighties the question of providing a school at Knocklyon was reviewed on a regular basis. In 1984 the former Minister, Gemma Hussey, decided to defer the opening of the school until 1988. In 1988, following a further review, the former Minister, Deputy Mary O'Rourke, decided not to proceed with the proposed school for Knocklyon but to retain the site in Department ownership.

The Department has, since 1988, been regularly reviewing the needs at post-primary level, present and future, of the Knocklyon area. In 1992 the former Minister, Deputy Séamus Brennan, met a deputation representing the Knocklyon post-primary committee at which the results of a community survey carried out by the committee were given to him. Following a further meeting with the Knocklyon committee and having considered all the facts of the case, the Minister decided in November 1992 that the school for Knocklyon should be proceeded with. I emphasise that that decision stands. Accusations of fraud against Deputy Séamus Brennan, the former Minister, are scandalous and should be withdrawn.

Minister Brennan said that there was provision in the 1993 Estimates but it is not there.

I ask the Deputy to withdraw his accusation.

The word "fraud" should not be used in the House.

The letter issued by Minister Brennan was issued in good faith, and that is well known by Deputy Shatter.

It was envisaged at that stage that construction of the school building would commence in 1993. When the present Minister for Education, Deputy Bhreathnach, took office earlier this year she undertook a review of the post-primary capital programme following confirmation of the capital allocation for 1993 in the published Estimates for Public Services. Regrettably, it was not possible to include the project for Knocklyon in the 1993 programme within the allocation available and having regard to other commitments and priorities, including the needs for disadvantaged areas.

Why were people told during the general election campaign that it would be included?

However, the inclusion of the Knocklyon school project in the capital programme will be reviewed in the context of educational planning criteria and in the light of available resources and other commitments and priorities. Again I emphasise that the decision to provide a school at Knocklyon still stands.

When will it be provided?

The Minister is convinced 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 her 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. It is also desirable that the criteria on which projects are selected, prioritised and advanced through the planning process be made known to the relevant school authorities and local interest groups.

Minister Brennan was the relevant Minister.

Why did Minister Brennan tell the people that the school would be included in the programme for 1993?

The Minister's reply ends the debate.

Top
Share