I thank you, Sir, for giving me permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I wish to share my time with Deputy Rabbitte.
Saggart (Dublin) School.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am disappointed that neither the Minister nor the Minister of State at the Department of Education are present to reply to this debate. This matter was raised in the House last Thursday by my colleague, Deputy Rabbitte, but since then the difficulties at Saggart school have escalated. Essentially, the problem revolves around the fact that on 30 September last Saggart school had 92 pupils which, apparently, qualified it for a principal and two assistant teachers but within a day of the applicable date, on 1 October, the school had 94 pupils which entitles it to a principal and three assistants. I am asking the Minister as I have done by way of parliamentary question and through contacts with her office and her officials not to allow bureaucratic nonsense to intervene, not to allow a teacher to be removed from the school and placed on the panel.
Saggart is a small village. The school has 95 pupils at present and the parents are very reasonable people. However, they are so annoyed that bureaucracy and red tape that do not make sense are depriving them of a teacher, thus reducing their school to a three teacher school, that with effect from yesterday, they have withdrawn all the pupils from the school. That is a serious matter in a small, close-knit community. Unfortunately, the Minister for Education is not present, but I would ask her to meet the parents tomorrow as a matter of urgency to discuss the position and to agree to allow the school retain its principal and three assistant teachers.
A few months ago the State spent £70,000 on refurbishing the school to maintain it as a four-classroom school. It is crazy and a waste of public money a few months later to remove one teacher and, consequently, the necessity for an additional classroom. The school will not be viable as a three teacher school. Many parents have told me that if it is reduced to a three teacher school they will send their children to a larger school because they do not believe the children would receive an appropriate standard of education in such a small school, the whole ethos of the school would change.
I ask the Minister for Education, through her colleague, Deputy Cowen, to meet the parents tomorrow and to put a stay on Mr. King, who is a popular teacher, being placed on the panel. Saggart is a small but developing area. Ballymore Homes have recently started a housing development of 600 houses there. The Minister stated last Thursday that if it were a school in a developing area, exceptions could be made. Saggart is a developing area. Those 600 houses will obviously bring a large influx of new students to the school. Therefore, I ask the Minister to retain the extra teacher and avoid the unpleasantness which will arise otherwise in the community between the school authorities and the parents.
I am grateful to Deputy Harney for allowing me to share her time. As she stated, I raised this matter last Thursday. I tried then to convey the depth of feeling among the parents in the relatively small community of Saggart in regard to this issue. The Minister deputised the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry to reply to the debate and that was acceptable. However, it is not acceptable that the Minister is not present tonight especially having regard to the unfortunate dispute that was provoked by her intransigence in this matter. She is not the type of politician who would miss a photo opportunity and there is an inviting one for her now on the picket line with the parents involved. This matter deserves the attention of the Minister personally. She is a Dublin Minister and could have come in here this evening to answer for her portfolio.
As Deputy Harney said, parents in Saggart are reasonable people. It is regrettable in the extreme that this dispute has been provoked. It is a somewhat odd dispute in its genesis in that there was more than the complement of children required for the retention of the fourth teacher. That may require some probing but, in any event, there is a compelling case for the retention of that fourth teacher. I am aware that the Minister exercised such flexibility in a school in Marlborough Street.
Saggart is a growing area with major expansion planned. Much money has been spent on the school and it is desirable that it should not be reduced to a three teacher school. I plead with the Minister to intervene because this is a case of bureaucracy gone mad. There is a compelling argument to resolve this problem without any more ado.
): I wish to apologise on behalf of the Minister who is unable to attend this Adjournment debate.
I understand that parents of pupils in St. Mary's national school, Saggart have withdrawn their children from school because the post of the fourth teacher in the school will be discontinued as from the beginning of the next school year next September.
As the Deputies will appreciate, it is possible to administer staffing arrangements for national schools in an orderly way only on the basis of rule. Any other arrangement would be unworkable in a system of over 3,000 schools. The basic features of the relevant rules are, first, that the staffing is determined by reference to the number of pupils on roll on 30 September of the preceding year. Second, there is a prescribed number of pupils required for each teaching post.
In the case of St. Mary's national school, there were 92 pupils enrolled in the school on 30 September 1992. This enrolment warrants a staff of principal plus two assistant teachers for the year 1993-94 school year. An enrolment of at least 94 pupils was required on that date in order to retain the post of third assistant. Incidentally, the enrolment in the school in the preceding year, 30 September 1991, was 105 and the year before that again 110.
I should also mention that the school has, additionally, the services of a remedial teacher on a shared basis.
The only exceptions that can be made from the general staffing arrangements are in the case of developing schools or where the Department's guidelines on maximum class sizes are being breached. The Department would be prepared to examine the school's position in September next in the context of maximum class size or developing school status. However, the information available to the Department would not indicate that either of these conditions is likely to be met.
The Minister very much much regrets that the parents have decided to picket the school and to withdraw their children from classes as from yesterday, 24 May. Such action can achieve nothing and it is their own children who will suffer most. As I have indicated, it is not possible to depart from the general arrangements in the case of individual schools. The Minister appeals to parents to lift their pickets so that their children can resume their education.
I appreciate that the loss of a teaching post is always a matter of concern to a school and to parents and the Minister is willing therefore to arrange for a senior official of her Department to meet the parents if they wish to discuss the matter further.
The Dáil adjourned at 9.05 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 26 May 1993.