Vol. 603 No. 6
54 Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Education and Science the current position regarding discussions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Revenue Commissioners regarding the introduction of a new higher education grants scheme; the steps being taken to bring these discussions to a conclusion; when she expects the new system will be in place; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19677/05]
As I indicated in my reply of 26 April 2005 to Parliamentary Question No. 70, the administration of student support schemes is complex and resource intensive involving the processing and assessment of applications and resulting in the payment of grants to more than 56,000 students annually. Expenditure in 2004 was almost €203 million.
Student support is provided through three means-tested maintenance grant schemes for third-level students. The higher education grants scheme operates on a statutory basis, while the vocational education committees' scholarship scheme and the third-level maintenance grants scheme for trainees operate on an administrative basis. The statutory framework for maintenance grants under the higher education grants scheme is set out in the Local Authorities (Higher Education Grants) Acts 1968 to 1992.
In accordance with the commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government it is planned to have a single unified scheme of maintenance grants for students in higher education in place for the academic year, 2006-07. This will provide for a more coherent administration system that will facilitate consistency of application and improved client accessibility. This is necessary if we are to ensure public confidence in the awards system and the timely delivery of grants to those who need them most.
As the Deputy is aware, my Department has been engaged in ongoing consultations with the key stakeholders such as the Irish Vocational Education Association, the County and City Managers' Association, various social partners and other relevant Departments to map the most logical and effective arrangements for the future structure and administration of the student support schemes. Discussions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Revenue Commissioners have related to their possible contribution to the future shape and administration of the student support schemes.
These discussions have substantially clarified the positions of the stakeholders in the future administration possibilities for the schemes and their possible role therein. I expect to be in a position before the autumn to determine the best strategy to give effect to the programme for Government commitment to the payment of the maintenance grants through a unified and flexible payment scheme.
Whatever new arrangements are eventually decided upon will be provided for in new statutory arrangements through a new student support Bill. This Bill, that will provide statutory underpinning for the schemes, will have as a key objective the promotion of equality of access. I also envisage that the Bill will provide for an independent appeals system. The timescale for publication of the Bill is contingent on the range of issues, the subject of the consultations already referred to.
I welcome the fact that there is a Bill on the proposed legislative programme and that the Minister hopes to have some proposals in place by the autumn. I say this in the context of a press statement, dated 10 September 1997, when the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, said he hoped to have a system in place from late 1998 to early 1999. This has obviously been going on for a long time. Undoubtedly, it throws up inequalities.
Has the Minister any timescale in mind from September onwards when she expects to be able to implement the proposals? I sought information through parliamentary questions, as did my colleague, Deputy Burton, on the socio-economic breakdown of grant recipients and the latest data we have is from 2002, which is relatively old. Is there any attempt within the Department to collate that information on a more up to date basis?
I do not have a more recent socio-economic breakdown. It would be much easier to get that type of information if one body was responsible for collating it. However, that there are so many different groups with so many different schemes and grants makes it very difficult to collate such information. That is why I am determined to move ahead with this. We have already discussed in the House the whole capital allocation basis. If I am to wait for that to be sorted out, we will never get the unified scheme, which I believe is more important. Given the discussions we have had with the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social and Family Affairs, we are now in a position whereby they will be able to help us as regards verification and anti-fraud considerations, data protection etc. As the Deputy says, the talks have been going on for some time. However, in terms of IT systems, some bodies seem to be more capable of dealing efficiently with such matters than others. We have to ensure there is improved compliance and that people have confidence in the system. I am reasonably satisfied we have made sufficient progress to be able to make proposals. I hope to have a unified scheme in place for the 2006-07 academic year.
I know the legislation has not yet been published, but does the Minister expect to retain control of this system within the Department of Education and Science or is it proposed to move it to the Department of Social and Family Affairs?
Our discussions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs would indicate that it will not end up there. It is important, anyway, that it should be closely linked to the Department of Education and Science. At this stage, I do not envisage the Department taking responsibility for it. Other groups such as the IVEA and the local authorities, are currently responsible for some of the schemes. However, the input of the Department of Social and Family Affairs will be crucial.
Has the Minister proposals in hand to increase the age limits for those who may apply under the vocational scheme? The current age is 23 and there are strong rumours to the effect that this will be increased to 25. Even with the age 23 limit, both parents' incomes must be taken into account. Some of those with whom I have spoken are mothers of two or three children who left their family homes a long time ago, yet they must track down their parents or get them to fill in a form as part of their applications. Is the Minister examining this issue in terms of the accessibility of the scheme? While the age threshold may have been sensible eight years ago, it appears antiquated given new types of family formation and so forth. We should encourage, rather than discourage, this group of people to enter education.
The legislation will provide for the unification of the scheme. Obviously, it would not be appropriate to be too prescriptive in legislation as it would need to be amended each time one wanted to change limits, ages and so forth. It is not envisaged, therefore, that such issues will be part of the legislation. We are conscious, however, that times are changing and different needs must be addressed. The Higher Education Authority and National Office of Equity of Access to Higher Education are also examining this issue.
I have been told of students queuing in colleges to collect grants for long periods only to find their grant is not available. Will the Minister consider the possibility of providing for money to be transferred directly from local authorities or vocational education committees into students' bank accounts?
There is no doubt that some councils and VECs are much better than others in this regard. Students have been left waiting even beyond Christmas for the initial grant. When I told one student president that I was aware of a student who, in years gone by, survived in Letterkenny on porridge from October to Christmas, he told me students are surviving on pasta which one can now buy for €5 for five kilos.
The current position is outrageous because some counties are slow to transfer grants. A unified scheme will mean a specific body will have responsibility which can then be overseen in the proper manner. I am anxious in the interests of students to have an accountable and fair system, particularly given the number of students — 56,000 — affected. It is important, therefore, that the €203 million spent on grants each year is properly spent and students receive them when they need them.
55 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science the main points of third level funding proposals announced on 25 April 2005 under which third level colleges will be required to compete for additional funding; the persons who will decide the way in which the money is to be allocated; the measures which will be put in place to protect independent thought and research; the assurances she will provide that disciplines important to society as well as those important to the economy will be funded; the weighting which will be given to those who promote wider access for lower socio-economic groups; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19650/05]
As I announced in April, the Government has approved the establishment of a strategic innovation fund which aims to encourage reform and capacity building in the higher education sector in accordance with the recent recommendations of the OECD review of higher education. The fund will promote inter-institutional collaboration to achieve a system-wide approach to supporting wider national goals; incentivise and reward internal restructuring and rationalisation efforts; provide for improved performance management systems; meet staff training and support requirements associated with the reform of structures and the implementation of new processes; implement improved management information systems; introduce teaching and learning reforms, including enhanced teaching methods, programme restructuring, modularisation and e-learning; support quality improvement initiatives aimed at excellence; and promote access, transfer and progression and incentivise stronger inter-institutional collaboration in the development and delivery of programmes.
It is intended that the fund will be competitively awarded on the basis of an independent external evaluation of the quality of proposals, with a requirement for excellence. This draws on the successful principles established for the awarding of funding under the programme for research in third level institutions. Where the PRTLI supports the development of an infrastructure for excellence in research, this fund will support enhanced capacity in the core teaching and learning function in all areas of the remit of the higher education institutions. The fund will only be allocated to institutions to the extent that the proposals received meet the standard required and achieve the outcomes committed to.
The fund will be created on a multi-annual basis. I have asked the Higher Education Authority to proceed immediately with developing detailed criteria and launching a competitive process for the approval of funding awards with a view to the drawdown of awards commencing in 2006.
The fund will be structured to ensure current national objectives are adequately reflected. I have previously identified these objectives as including the need to safeguard and reinforce the many roles of higher education and the full diversity of disciplines within it in driving economic development, providing independent intellectual insights and contributing to our broader social and cultural understanding.
The Deputy is aware that access and social inclusion in all areas of education are priorities for the Government. I have stated my belief that the economy and society cannot prosper to their full potential at the expense of any of our citizens. We need as full a participation as we can achieve in third level education. The National Office of Equity of Access to Higher Education has a specific remit to contribute to the formulation of policy in this regard and it is important that the necessary structures within the institutions are in place to facilitate the process of widening access to third level education to all.
I thank the Minister for her answer. While I do not doubt her dedication to equality of access or her concern with regard to the inclusion of the many different disciplines, many in the third level sector fear certain disciplines, namely, those more attuned to the economy than society, could benefit more from the fund. Who will make funding decisions? What type of background will they have? Will the decision-making process factor in institutions which have good equality of access programmes and ensure opportunities to participate in programmes are available to people from less well-off backgrounds?
The Higher Education Authority has established the process of attracting and seeking submissions. It will be for the authority, bearing in mind Government priorities and the priorities I have set out, to allocate the funding. I am satisfied that different faculties were included in the distribution of funding for the PRTLI and that there was no question of any social element being excluded. This approach will carry through in the distribution of the new fund.
56 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Education and Science the system of evaluation, which is operational to ascertain the roadworthiness of the school transport fleet, both public and private; and if she has satisfied herself that all buses being used are roadworthy and safe. [19243/05]
All vehicles operating under the school transport scheme are required to meet the statutory regulations as laid down by the Department of Transport. Where vehicles have more than eight adult seats and are more than one year old, they are required to pass the Department of Transport's annual roadworthiness test. In addition, Bus Éireann vehicles are subject to a programme of scheduled servicing under specified maintenance procedures to ensure the highest safety standards are achieved.
Contractors employed by Bus Éireann are contractually obliged to keep their nominated vehicle in a safe and roadworthy condition at all times. I am satisfied from information available to me from Bus Éireann which administers the scheme that these regulations are being adhered to and that, in consequence, the school bus fleet is roadworthy and safe.
Given that the Minister answered three questions I did not ask when I raised this matter during Priority Questions, I will repeat my question. When will the original review end? Was it already examining the issues of seat belts and supervision on school buses? What are the timescales for the retrospective fitting of seat belts, bringing on stream the new buses which will be required and arriving at a decision on supervision?
With regard to the review to which the Deputy referred, we look forward to receiving the results of the three specific investigations taking place. No doubt any recommendations which may be made in the reports or anything we can learn from the reports will be part of the review. The review was only examining the three for two rule pertaining to seating arrangements with regard to costings because we wanted to determine the exact position in order to phase out the rule. This is the reason we were able to state that the timescale for the abolition of the rule will be within a three-year period. We hope it will be completed sooner than this and will do our utmost to move the issue along.
I have already explained the position with regard to retrofitting. Although the experts must advise us on the issue, the Department has been informed that some buses may be suitable for retrofitting. As I stated with regard to replacement or additional buses, our objective is to ensure they would be fitted with seat belts.
This issue has been discussed for years and reviews have been taking place since 1998, yet no changes have been implemented. As part of this review, which will examine the three for two rule and the use of seat belts and so forth, is consideration being given to the possibility of using brand new, specifically designed school buses? I understand Bus Éireann tested such buses in Navan long before the recent tragedy in County Meath. The buses in question are similar to those used in the United States where it is clear that the school buses are specifically designed for schoolchildren rather than being ordinary buses with a sticker on the back. Such buses give children the respect they deserve. Is the review examining the entire issue of school transport and not only seat belts? When can we expect changes? The tragedy in my home town a few weeks ago has made it urgent that we act on this. It is time to stop passing the buck, with review after review, to start doing things and make changes. What plans are there?
Unfortunately, the Deputy was not present when I answered the first and second priority questions.
The Minister of State did not mention special buses, and that is why I am asking the question.
I did, I mentioned that we are looking at three different types of buses, as I will say a second time in my reply.
The Deputy referred to reviews. The references to different reviews and reports on the issue are erroneous. The only reference I am aware of to the three for two seating policy and to seat belts was in the report of the Oireachtas committee and we are going further than the recommendations in that report. That committee referred to the three for two policy for primary schools only, but we want to abolish the three for two system for everyone. The Oireachtas committee recommended that seat belts would only be fitted to new buses but we are considering fitting seat belts to the full school bus fleet in the long term. It is our target to ensure that replacement and additional buses will be fitted with seat belts.
We have looked at three types of bus, one of which is built in Donegal, one in Turkey and one in Britain. All these are new school buses that are fitted with seat belts and we are seeking to incorporate them in the school bus fleet.
We should change all school buses to that type. There is no point fitting seat belts in the existing fleet if the Government is going to buy the buses from Donegal or Turkey, which have been very popular with drivers.
We want to ensure seat belts are provided for all the school bus fleet in the long term. We are considering retrofitting where applicable and acquiring replacement buses with seat belts and new buses to complement the specific school bus fleet.
57 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Education and Science the amount spent by her Department on the provision of prefabricated buildings at primary level for the 2004-05 academic year; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19739/05]
My Department's records are held on a calendar year basis rather than by academic year and the information which I am providing reflects that position.
Since the start of 2004, my Department has spent €9.9 million on the purchase of prefabricated buildings at primary level. This expenditure was for the supply and installation of prefabricated buildings, including associated site works and other related costs such as compliance with planning permission conditions, professional fees and connections for water, electricity and sewage. The expenditure represents 2.3% of the total expenditure on school buildings for 2004-05. The total expenditure for 2004-05 on primary school buildings is €441 million.
The demand for additional accommodation in schools has risen significantly in recent years, mainly due to the rapid expansion in teacher numbers, particularly in the area of special needs, the growth in the school-going population in rapidly developing areas and the demands to cater for diversity through the recognition of new gaelscoileanna and educate together schools.
My Department also provides for the rental of accommodation where this is appropriate, such as in the case of newly established schools with provisional recognition, while long-term enrolment viability is being established. The outturn on the relevant subhead in 2004 was €11.3 million. This expenditure is not categorised by accommodation type and I cannot therefore readily identify for the Deputy the portion of that expenditure that may relate to prefabricated buildings.
The current focus within my Department is to empower schools to resolve their accommodation needs, wherever possible, in a permanent manner rather than relying on temporary accommodation. To reduce the amount of temporary accommodation at primary level a new initiative was launched in 2003. The purpose of this initiative is to allow primary schools to undertake a permanent solution to their classroom accommodation needs and to achieve the best value for money. The feedback from the 20 schools in that pilot of the initiative was positive and the initiative was expanded to include 44 additional primary schools in 2004. Over 70 schools have been invited to participate in this initiative in 2005.
My Department has also used other innovative solutions to deliver urgently required permanent accommodation for schools in rapidly developing areas quickly rather than rely on temporary solutions. An example of this is the new 16 classroom primary school for Griffeen Valley Educate Together national school, Lucan, which was delivered through the use of a design and build contract within 13 months.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.
