Vol. 544 No. 2
5 Mr. U. Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will make a decision regarding the provision of a school bus service to Seamount Convent secondary school, Kinvara, County Galway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28102/01]
I have again had the request for the provision of a school transport service for girls from the Gort catchment area to Seamount secondary school, Kinvara, examined in my Department. Having considered the points put forward by the deputation I met during the summer, the circumstances of the case and, in particular, the catchment boundary system, I have decided that the current arrangements should continue for now. If the management authorities of both schools are agreeable, I would introduce a shared catchment area. This would overcome the current transport dilemma. The management of Seamount secondary school is now prepared to participate in a shared catchment area, but the management of Gort community school is opposed to any change.
In 1998 a small number of girls from the Kinvara catchment area, who would not ordinarily qualify for transport to another catchment area, were allowed to board the bus at the same point as their brothers who had a full transport entitlement to the Gort school provided no extra State cost was involved. This was done in the unusual circumstances where members of the same household were appropriate to separate catchment areas on the basis of their gender.
A similar situation did not exist in respect of girls from the Gort area who wished to travel to the Kinvara school. In their case, there was no question of members of the same household being appropriate to different catchment areas. In addition, there was no existing service to accommodate such pupils. It would also have been a clear infringement of the catchment boundary system which would have required the agreement of both schools to a single catchment area.
In the circumstances, the most that could be offered to these pupils was catchment boundary facilities from the nearest pick-up point in the Kinvara area, provided there was spare accommodation on the bus. If agreement can be reached between the management authorities of both schools on a shared catchment area, I will provide transport to both schools under the normal conditions of the scheme.
Once again, the Minister has laid the blame at the door of school management boards.
The Deputy should put a question to the Minister.
Will the Minister confirm he met deputations representing the parents and board of management of Kinvara school on 21 June 2000 and indicated to them that he hoped this issue would be resolved? Will he also confirm that one of his Ministers of State violated the Department's rules by making a special arrangement for temporary tickets for children travelling from the Kinvara catchment area to Gort? It is ridiculous to state that such transport can only be provided where space is available on buses. The Minister should not allow one board of management to veto another on the issue of school transport. Neither should his Department discriminate against girls who wish to attend Seamount convent while allowing pupils from Kinvara to travel to the school in Gort. The Minister of State's action concealed this discrimination through the provision of temporary tickets in 1998 which, through human error, are still in operation. The situation is untenable and there is an obligation on the Minister to make a decision. He had the report for three months and still did not make a decision which would provide the students who wish to attend school in Kinvara with their due entitlement.
This is undoubtedly a difficult situation. The Deputy is aware that catchment areas apply throughout the country.
The Minister of State did not observe them.
In an attempt to be helpful and resolve this dispute, the Minister of State introduced revised terms which meant that in the unusual circumstances where members of the same household are appropriate to separate catchment areas on the basis of their gender, pupils who would not ordinarily qualify for transport to another catchment area may be allowed to board the bus at the same point as those with a full transport entitlement provided no extra State cost is involved. Where girls from the same household as boys travelling to the community school from within the Kinvara catchment area had to go to the boundary of the catchment area to be picked up, they were allowed to board at the same place as their brothers. That was a humanitarian arrangement. This matter could be resolved if the two schools would agree to one catchment area. The area in question is a large one and the two schools – an all-girls school and a community school – are quite far apart. It would not seem overly difficult to combine the catchment area. Originally, neither school was prepared to share a catchment area, but the Kinvara school has subsequently agreed to this. I could ask the management of the Gort school to consider the matter further.
We have exceeded the six minutes allocated to this question and must move on to Question No. 6.
Will the Minister make further inquiries on this matter and put it on a solid footing to ensure one board of management does not have a veto over the other?
Very briefly, Minister.
I will make a further request of the school management.
We move on to Question No. 6.
On a point of order, I draw the attention of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle to the fact that four minutes of priority time remain and he has cut Deputies off on each of the five priority questions. He should check his clock.
Six minutes are allocated per question. Two questions were taken together.
We do not lose time because questions are taken together.
One of the questions was disposed of in less than six minutes. We saved time on the Minister's replies to two questions which only took half a minute.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle cut off Opposition spokespersons.
I did not cut them off within six minutes.
Deputies were deprived of four minutes' priority time.
That is incorrect.
Two of my replies were very short.
Six minutes are allocated to each question. The first two questions which were taken together received 12 minutes. If Members do not use the six minutes, that is not the fault of the Chair. Question No. 3 took only four minutes and all questions were answered. Nobody was cut off within six minutes.
It does not add up.
