Vol. 492 No. 7
16 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education and Science the estimates within his Department of the day to day running costs of primary schools expressed as an amount per year per pupil; and the evidence, if any, available to his Department on the extent to which the capitation grant meets this cost. [14976/98]
My Department commissioned a unit cost survey of first and second level schools in 1990. The survey was based on data related to the 1988-89 school year. The study was completed in 1992 and the report was published in 1994. This is the most recent study conducted on behalf of my Department and it indicates that the cost per primary school pupil at that time was £56.95 per year. At that stage the standard rate of capitation grant to schools was £26.50 per pupil, which was supplemented by a local contribution requirement of 25 per cent or £6.62 per pupil.
My Department has been advised by the Central Statistics Office that the cost per pupil of £56.95 in 1989 would, taking the consumer price index into account, result in a present day cost per pupil of £70.89. In addition, if the capitation grant to schools had only been increased in line with inflation it would currently stand at £32.99. However, as the Deputy is aware, the current standard rate of capitation is £50 per pupil. This may be increased by as much as £30 per pupil in the case of schools with 195 pupils or more for provision of caretaking and secretarial supports, giving a total of £80 per pupil. In addition, a local contribution of £10 per pupil in the case of mainstream primary schools and £9.50 per pupil in the case of schools designated as disadvantaged is required.
I am aware that certain schools may experience difficulties from time to time in meeting their financial requirements. In order to assist schools which may face particular hardship, my Department provides an additional supplementary capitation grant of £30 per pupil to schools designated as disadvantaged. An additional grant of £20 per pupil is paid in respect of pupils attending Gaelscoileanna.
The Deputy will be aware that, having been frozen last year, I secured an 11 per cent increase on the capitation payment this year. I will continue to seek further improvements in the rate of capitation grants to primary schools in line with the commitment in the programme for Government to give primary education a clear priority in the allocation of resources.
Will the Minister comment on the clear conflict between the CSO's view of what it costs to run a school and that of the national primary parents' council which estimates the capitation grant is currently meeting only 50 per cent of the cost, implying a cost level of £100 per pupil? What is his view on the recent proposal that parents may be levied with the deficit between the capitation grant of the Department and the cost of running the school, an idea circulated by the primary school managers association?
I find the proposal unacceptable. We must approach the issue in a spirit of partnership which imposes obligations on all sides. The CSO was merely updating data contained in the unit cost survey I referred to which was conducted in 1990 by consultants John Sheehan and Joseph Durkan of the economics department of UCD. The survey was subsequently published. The figure produced by it was updated to £70.89 to take account of current day costs. There can be varying arguments as to whether the figure produced by the study was accurate in terms of meeting the essential day to day costs of schools.
There are 724 schools with over 195 pupils which are receiving £80 per pupil. There are 318 disadvantaged schools serving 75,000 pupils which get an additional capitation grant of £30. Gaelscoileanna receive an additional £20 per pupil. The situation, therefore, is not as black and white as one may wish to portray.
We need to do some current work on the issue of capitation which I realise is not adequate. Last year there was, for some reason, no increase by the previous Government. I have increased it this year by £5 but acknowledge that more needs to be done.
As the Minister agrees it is not acceptable to levy parents and as he accepts the shortfall could be as much as 50 per cent——
I do not accept that.
——is the logical implication of his position that the State must pick up the balance, given the constitutional obligation on it to provide free primary education?
The Deputy never advanced that argument when he was in Government 12 months ago. The partners in education have different rights and responsibilities; the whole issue of local contributions is related not just to capitation issues but also to issues of school ownership and so on.
Is the Minister modifying his constitutional obligation in this regard?
I am not. The State provides a capitation grant which meets basic requirements although I would like to enhance and increase that. Abolishing local contributions would not create additional funds for primary education. Funds already being provided by sources other than the State would merely be replaced. The immediate priority is for primary schools to have increased access to resources and funding and that will not be achieved by simply abolishing local contributions overnight. I am open to entering into discussions with partners on the development of a programme.
The time limit for this question has expired.
