Brian Hayes
Question:44 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will make a statement on the school drop-out rate for primary and post-primary education. [28561/07]
Priority Questions.
Early School Leavers.
The emphasis placed by Government on tackling educational disadvantage in recent years is unprecedented. Since 2003, we have increased investment in educational inclusion measures at all levels by no less than 60%, spending €730 million in 2007.
We are determined to ensure that young people from disadvantaged areas get the support they need to encourage them to finish school. To this end, we have provided additional investment in a wide range of areas, including extra teachers, grants for books, homework clubs, school meals and summer camps. We have also expanded access to important services such as the home school community liaison scheme and the school completion programme, which work with students at risk of early school leaving and their families.
There are now approximately 620 staff working in services such as these, including more than 130 extra posts allocated under the DEIS action plan over the past two years. In addition, the National Educational Welfare Board now has more than 100 staff and is specifically tasked with tackling attendance problems that if left unchecked can culminate in young people dropping out of school.
There is an emphasis under DEIS on helping children to make a smooth transition to second level. Initiatives such as familiarisation days and week-long transfer programmes have been shown to have been very successful in that regard. Schools participating in the school support programme under DEIS are being encouraged to prioritise the development of effective transfer programmes for pupils making the transition to post-primary education.
In terms of achievement at post-primary level, it is important to examine the issue in terms of attainment of second level education or equivalent rather than just school completion. Focusing just on school devalues the hard work of students who continued their education in Youthreach centres, went on to train for apprenticeships through FÁS or acquired qualifications through other equally valuable routes.
The Government is encouraged by data that shows that the attainment levels of our young people have improved significantly in recent years. By 2006, 85.4% of Irish people aged 20 to 24 years old had obtained upper second level education or equivalent — up from 82.6% in 2000 and significantly ahead of the EU average of 77.8%.
The improvement in the proportion aged 20 to 24 years old with at least second level education or equivalent in recent years is testament to the success of the dual strategy of both improving school completion levels and increasing access to second chance and further education.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Further improvements in the availability of second chance education are a priority for us. As the Deputy may be aware, funding has been provided for 400 extra Youthreach places this year. Six hundred more places are due to be provided by 2009 under the Towards 2016 social partnership agreement.
We are also conscious that the content and perceived relevance of the school curricula have an important effect on students' motivation and desire to finish school. Under the DEIS plan, more students in disadvantaged areas will have access to the junior certificate schools programme and the leaving certificate applied programme.
There is evidence that the Government's focus on improving school completion rates and attainment levels in recent years is making a difference. I assure the Deputy that further improvements in this area will continue to be a priority for us in the years ahead.
Social inclusion measures across other Departments have also been prioritised under the Towards 2016 agreement, the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion and the national development plan.
The Minister did not answer the question. My question related to the school drop-out rate. Is she aware that in the census report of 1996, approximately 3% of students had dropped out of post-primary education by the age of 15 years? The latest data from the 2006 census shows that the figure is 6.6%. Last year, 3,700 students had left post-primary education by the age of 15 years. That is a doubling of the school drop-out rate over the past ten years. Will the Minister accept that her Government and her administration over the past ten years have failed miserably to tackle this problem?
The Deputy is referring to the census figures but these figures do not agree with the Department's estimate of participation rates for 15 year olds.
Surprise, surprise.
It is widely accepted that the participation rate of 15 year old students is within 0.5% of the total numbers. Clarification on this question was sought from the Central Statistics Office and the Taoiseach answered a question on it last week when he stated: "It should be borne in mind that the figures for persons aged 15 years may be affected by the fact that this age was used in a filter question on the census questionnaire, resulting in a possible over-statement of the number of 15 year olds who have ceased education". The CSO provided this information to the Taoiseach stating it was not a straightforward question to 15 year old people about their standard of education and whether they were still in school. The question was to the effect that if they were under age 15 they should skip to number 34 on the next page, and the CSO has said that a higher number than expected skipped the entire question on education. It is widely accepted that we could not depend on that figure because of the nature of the way in which that question was put. It was a filtering question rather than a direct question put to 15 year old people. All of the evidence the Department has, and on international surveys, shows that our participation rates and school completion rates for 15 year old students are much higher than most of the European average, as I have already identified.
We are now in the unusual situation where the Minister is attempting to rubbish the independent impartial figures that have been produced by the CSO. That is astonishing because her Department has used the CSO figures for the past ten years to back up its case. Will the Minister respond to the recent comments by the chief executive officer of the National Education Welfare Board? He stated:
We are available in the most disadvantaged areas but outside that we are just working with crisis cases. We would prefer to be doing a lot more preventative work and early intervention work.
My understanding is that the National Educational Welfare Board has sought 50 additional officers to help children falling through the education system and that the Department is prepared to give 15 of the 50 requirements. Is this not a case where the Minister sets up a body, refuses to fund the body and then blames the body and everyone else for her own failures in this area?
The information I gave in respect of the census was that given by the Taoiseach in reply to the same question last week on the 15 year olds and it is a valid answer. The National Educational Welfare Board is one part of the picture. It has 109 people employed currently doing very valuable work throughout the country.
It has 85 officers in the field.
No. There are 109 people employed in the National Educational Welfare Board.
There are 85 officers in the field.
The Minister, without interruption.
Misinformation.
There are 620 people working directly with young people at risk of dropping out of school and the work they do is just as valuable. They are the home school community liaison people who are a link between the parents and the schools to ensure the children stay on in school. They are the school completion fund programme co-ordinators who organise activities such as transition into primary and secondary schools, summer camps, study camps and the DEIS programme, which is targeting——
Is Mr. Ward wrong?
The changes in curriculum have also ensured that young people stay on in school.
Mr. Ward is wrong, is he?
The Minister, without interruption.
It is a much broader report. The National Educational Welfare Board is the stick element of it. The rest of them are the carrot element, and both are necessary.
School Accommodation.
Ruairí Quinn
Question:45 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science, further to her reply to Parliamentary Question No. 158 of 1 November 2007, the reason her Department has sanctioned money to primary schools to rent prefabs as temporary accommodation for a period of three years or less but has no details of the terms of the contract and the rental cost between the school authority and the rental company as she has already indicated the sum involved is €24.5 million; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28490/07]
Increased enrolments and the appointment of nearly 5,000 extra primary teachers since 2002 alone have created a considerable demand for extra school accommodation in recent years. This is being met by unprecedented investment in the school building programme, with more than €540 million being spent this year.
My Department has sought to provide schools with permanent solutions to their accommodation needs where possible. Construction in 2007 alone will deliver more than 700 classrooms to provide permanent accommodation for more than 17,500 pupils, mainly in developing areas.
One of the methods that has helped us to keep expenditure on prefabs at a minimum has been the introduction of the permanent accommodation scheme. Since 2003, schools have been offered capital funding to build extra classrooms rather than taking prefabs. Between 2003 and 2006, 200 schools were approved under this scheme, at a total cost of €54.1 million, but last year, €27.5 million was provided for this scheme. We have dramatically increased the allocation in 2007 to €47.4 million to allow more than 305 classrooms and 182 resource rooms to be sanctioned this year alone.
This and other initiatives have enabled us to keep expenditure on the rental of temporary accommodation low. The Deputy's question refers to the fact that €24.5 million was spent on rental last year. I should also point out that while much of this rented accommodation is in prefabricated units it can also include the rental of buildings. It is important to put this figure in context. In fact, it amounts to less than 5% of the almost €525 million invested in school buildings last year.
Where accommodation is needed at very short notice, however, temporary accommodation can be the only option. Such accommodation may also be used where the need is short-term, such as when a school requires a temporary building or is awaiting the completion of construction of permanent facilities.
With a view to shortening construction times and achieving better value for money, my Department has developed standard designs for primary schools, known as generic repeat designs. Using such a design, the construction of Griffeen Valley Educate Together school took only five months.
We are also moving towards greater use of system build accommodation, whereby a significant amount of the construction work for school buildings can be completed off-site while planning permission is awaited. Using this type of approach, my Department was able to provide a new 16 classroom school in Laytown this year.
As part of the strategy for the provision of school places for 2008 and onwards, my Department has initiated a tender process for a drawdown contract facility that will be used to provide additional school places in the rapidly developing areas. This is aimed at providing school accommodation in very short timescales using modern methodologies such as off-site construction. We are using a range of methods, therefore, to limit the need for temporary accommodation.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Regarding the information on individual rental agreements sought by the Deputy, the situation is that in general, the board of management of a school is responsible for acquiring temporary accommodation, including the procurement of prefabs. In practice, a rental contract is between a school's board of management and a supplying contractor.
It is important to emphasise that the Department examines all applications for additional accommodation on an individual basis to determine if the need exists in the first instance. My officials also decide if the level of funding being sought by a school for prefab rental is acceptable. My Department is satisfied that adequate financial management measures are in place and that comprehensive information is available on individual records held on individual school files. However, my Department does not have details of all of these contractual arrangements entered into by schools available in a format that provides readily accessible cumulative information on the overall position. It is intended to address this issue as part of a general review of rental policy currently being undertaken by my Department.
I thank the Minister for her reply, but had I replied similarly to a question she set for me in one of the classes she occupied expertly in Sion Hill, I would have failed. She did not answer a question I asked clearly. She gave the House a wonderful story about construction and all sorts of other things, but it did not address the question. Nor did she answer Deputy Brian Hayes's question. My question related to the Minister's previous misleading reply which read:
To ask the Minister for Education and Science further to her reply to Parliamentary Question No. 158 of 1 November 2007, the reason her Department has sanctioned money to primary schools to rent prefabs as temporary accommodation for a period of three years or less but has no details of the terms of the contract and the rental cost between the school authority and the rental company as she has already indicated the sum involved is €24.5 million; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
That is what I wanted to find out. The rest of the information, for which I thank the Minister, was wonderful but irrelevant to my question. She is deliberately evading parliamentary questions a second time by answering every question that was not asked and refusing to answer the questions asked.
We are discussing Allspace Limited prefabs, which have a guaranteed life expectancy of 30 years and a possible expectancy of up to 50 years. My question asked whether the Minister examines the terms of the contracts, it did not relate to the other wonderful, irrelevant information. I was happy to receive them, but they were not the answer.
A Minister cannot be criticised for putting on the record what is occurring in respect of a substantial building programme. My reply, which has been circulated to the Deputy, stated——
On a point of order, the House has a function to hold the Minister to account, not to be an applause machine for public relations exercises.
That is not a point of order.
I ran out of time before I reached page four of my reply, but it will be circulated to the Deputy.
Deputies do not even have page one.
It stated:
The board of management of a school is responsible for acquiring temporary accommodation, including the procurement of prefabs. In practice, a rental contract is between the school's board of management and the supplying contractor.
The Department examines all applications for additional accommodation to determine whether it is necessary and we determine the level of funding sought by a school for a prefab. If satisfied that all adequate financial measures are in place, the information is placed on the schools' files, but we do not have the details of the individual contractual arrangements entered into by schools in a way that is readily accessible without going through each school's files. Due to the amount being spent on the capital programme and temporary accommodation, we are considering this matter.
Deputy Quinn can ask a brief, final supplementary question.
I asked a specific question about details the Department has, but the Minister refuses to give them to me. She could have given me a sample of ten. We are trying to consider value for money.
Some €24.5 million is probably not of particular consequence to the Government, but it is an enormous amount to all the schools that the Minister recently told not to proceed with setting out to tender. Whoever is writing the Minister's replies——
The Deputy should ask a question.
——is not letting her answer with information she has.
Some €24.5 million is a substantial amount, but it is small in the context of the €540 million being spent on the capital programme. The Deputy asked what details the Department has regarding the terms of the contract and the rental cost. As I made clear, that information is kept by the individual schools and we do not have it, for example, on a computer database that would make it readily available.
Why not? How does the Department know it is getting value for money?
We check the cost of each case.
The Minister should ignore the heckling.
The schools to which the Deputy referred, the prefab accommodations of which are being put on hold, have been given the go-ahead subject to the tendering process not running out of control.
Site Acquisitions.
Brian Hayes
Question:46 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the sites which have been acquired or designated for new schools under the Fingal school model agreement announced in September 2007. [28562/07]
Land has been acquired as a result of my Department and Fingal County Council working in partnership over the past number of years. The focus is on finalising arrangements for sites needed for the next school year.
The innovations in the design and delivery of school buildings put in place in recent years mean that once the land has been acquired, we can provide school accommodation quickly. While Fingal County Council is working on the acquisition of sites, my Department has tendered for a contractor capable of delivering new schools within an on-site construction time of four months. My Department has been in regular contact with local authority staff regarding the status of the sites we have asked them to acquire.
Last September, I met the council manager and others to discuss progress. While the meeting gave rise to considerable media attention, it was not the start of the co-operation between the Department and the council, which has been ongoing for some time. Two years ago, the Department and the council agreed to develop a new model of partnership for providing school and community facilities. Under the terms of the Fingal school agreement, the local authority has undertaken to identify and acquire appropriate sites for schools as recommended by the Department. The design of the schools will be varied to meet community needs, including enhanced facilities, etc.
As site acquisitions can be commercially sensitive, my Department does not generally provide specific details in advance of contracts being signed. Once the contracts have been signed, the information can be released in the normal way.
While the scale of the work under way in Fingal is extensive because of rapid population growth in that area, my Department has developed much closer working relations generally with local authorities in recent years, particularly in rapidly developing areas. In addition to meeting the Fingal County Council manager, I met the county managers of Meath and Kildare and am arranging to meet the managers of South Dublin County Council and Westmeath County Council to follow up on what is required in terms of planning. I met the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to discuss how the programme for Government commitments in respect of school planning and land acquisition can be progressed.
This is curious. I asked the Minister to tell the House which 13 sites the Department or the council has acquired for the purpose of the Fingal agreement. Splashed all over the national media in September was a firm commitment that 13 schools would be built and up and running by 1 September 2008. Does the Minister stand by this commitment? If so, why can she not inform Dáil Éireann of the specific sites or their general locations?
The timeframe is ambitious. If the Minister was serious when she told the House that individual planning applications in respect of the 13 schools, which will be built off-site, would take at least three months, will the sites be ready for Fingal's children by 1 September 2008?
I did not hold or arrange a press briefing. Fingal County Council organised it.
Is the council leading us astray?
For the past couple of years, we have been working closely with the council regarding these sites. Site acquisitions are commercially sensitive and the amount of available land in many developed areas is limited. I cannot give specific details as to which sites are in play.
What about locations such as Blanchardstown and Castleknock?
The general areas under consideration include Balbriggan, Skerries, Donabate, Lusk, Swords and the Dublin 15 area. Fingal County Council is working on the Department's behalf to acquire sites. We are further along in some cases than in others, but there is good co-operation. For commercial reasons, I am not in a position to give the details of individual sites.
How many of the 13 schools referred to in the Fingal model agreement have reached the planning application stage? Will the Minister give a definitive answer as to whether she is giving a commitment to the Dáil that the 13 schools in the agreement between the Department and the council, irrespective of last September's press conference, will be built and up and running by 1 September 2008? It is a straightforward question. I am not interested in the Gettysburg address.
All schools that must be built are subject to site acquisitions, planning permission and construction. We are working actively in all three respects.
What about the 13 schools?
They were announced by Fingal County Council, not by me.
Another pipe dream.
School Accommodation.
Ulick Burke
Question:47 Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science if there is an ongoing review and analysis being carried out in the Kinvara catchment area, County Galway on the provision of a second level co-education school in Kinvara as a replacement for a school (details supplied); if a similar review was completed by the planning unit of her Department before the announcement of 16 May 2007 in which she stated that a new second level school would be provided in Kinvara; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28563/07]
In light of increases in population in the south Galway area and the decision of the Sisters of Mercy to close Seamount college, Kinvara, on a phased basis, I determined that a new post-primary school would be required in the south Galway area. I asked the commission on school accommodation to conduct a survey of school accommodation in the area to determine the location of the proposed post-primary school and to identify other locations where additional school places may be required over the next five to ten years. Areas included in the survey are Oranmore-Clarinbridge, Claregalway, Athenry, Gort-Ardrahan and Kinvara. The commission placed an advertisement in the local and national media on 23 April inviting interested parties to submit their views in writing to the commission by 15 May. Some 25 written submissions were received from a range of individuals and organisations such as patrons, boards of management, teachers, parent groups, local communities and the Association of Secondary Teachers, ASTI. The commission noted that such a broad response was indicative of the strong support by the community for educational provision in the area and showed that solid links have been formed between the schools and their respective local communities.
The commission, consisting of a dedicated technical group and the secretariat, undertook a public consultation process. It met representatives of the ASTI staff from Seamount college in June 2007. On 16, 17 and 18 October it met all the patrons involved, representatives of boards of management, principal teachers, staff members and representatives of the Rescue Seamount Committee and paid visits to each of the post-primary schools in the area. The commission is currently engaged in an analysis of all key issues such as baptisms, demography and population, migration, diversity, primary and post-primary enrolment trends, regional and local authority plans for industry and housing, and house building. This analysis, in conjunction with information from those consulted, will facilitate the commission in reaching its conclusions and recommendations. I expect the commission's report will be submitted to me by the end of November.
When a new school has been approved a number of procedures and processes must be undertaken and these can take some time to complete. The main stages are identification and acquisition of a suitable site, the design of the building, the application for and granting of planning permission, invitation to seek tenders and construction.
I thank the Minister for her answer. Before 16 May a full analysis of the population trends in the Kinvara catchment area and south Galway in general was completed. Based on this analysis the Minister decided to provide for, and announced, the continuation of second-level education in Kinvara. Based on what the Minister has stated we are indulging in a further examination of south Galway from Gort to Athenry, Oranmore and Kinvara.
Does the Deputy have a question?
The trustees of Seamount college gave ground by allowing for an intake last September. That was not part of the agenda when they made their announcement nearly a year ago. They have shown they are committed to allowing for the replacement of Seamount college. The Minister has made her commitment subject to the intake for five years. Why cannot the Minister give a commitment and show a positive response to their commitment, which was not available 12 months ago? Although three sites have been identified, the Department of Education and Science's planning section has made no response to examine them as an initial step. Why cannot the Minister indicate, through her actions, to the trustees and management board of Seamount college that she is prepared to provide second level education in Kinvara and cut out the delay tactics? If we can build hospitals in three years, why cannot we build a second level school for 600 pupils in Kinvara in three years?
Hear, hear.
The announcement earlier in the year was that if there was continuity of provision a school could be provided for Kinvara, if the school continued to take first year pupils for each of the next five years. I thank the Mercy Order for agreeing to take first year pupils this year, but there has been no agreement on the other years.
Cannot the Minister respond in kind?
However there has been no agreement on the other years. The original intention on 16 May was that it would be for the next five years and this would allow for a continuity of provision. Any work before the summer related only to Kinvara, although we are aware of the population increases in other areas of south Galway, particularly around areas such as Ardrahan and Athenry. That is why those areas were also examined. It was an important opportunity for the commission to examine the population and meet all the relevant bodies because any decision on a school in south Galway will impact on the existing schools, for example Oranmore and Gort. The process undertaken is extensive. I expect to have the report at the end of November and look forward to making a decision on it. The Deputy mentioned a school of 500 or 600 pupils, but I expect that any school would be at least 700 or 800. We would seek a site appropriate for that number of students and that would ensure it was the proper catchment for where the greatest population is. All these issues must be taken into account. It is not an immediate priority that must be done today or tomorrow because there is a school there, whereas some areas have no school——
The Minister said it was a priority and that she would take immediate action.
I made it clear that if the Mercy Order agreed to take first years each year for five years we would be able to allow continuity and that would give us the opportunity to have a school built by 2012. I again thank the Mercy Order for its co-operation in agreeing to take first years this year.
Can the Minister confirm for the people of south Galway, particularly in Kinvara, that she is talking about a replacement for Seamount college in Kinvara? It is important that she clarify this. The Minister knows that Gort community school is severely overcrowded. Schools in Oranmore and Athenry are also overcrowded. The population in this area is, uniquely, increasing by 8% per annum. All the numbers in the schools have already been identified and the Minister has them.
The Deputy is correct that the population has grown substantially in those areas. That is why we have done the study and will determine the correct location for it.
Did the Minister make the decision on 6 April, before the general election, on false information?
No, the decision stands. There will be a new post-primary school in the south Galway area.
Will it be in Kinvara?
School Transport.
Frank Feighan
Question:48 Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Education and Science if she is satisfied that the fleet for transporting school children is up to standard mechanically with seat belts fitted and that pick up and set down locations for students are in accordance with best safety standards; the checks carried out to ensure that they are in place; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28564/07]
The safety of children travelling on the school transport service is of paramount importance to my Department and to Bus Éireann, which operates the school transport scheme. To this end, Bus Éireann has a wide range of checking procedures in place, in addition to statutory vehicle examinations, to ensure, as far as reasonably possible, that a safe and reliable service is delivered. These procedures are reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure that appropriate standards are maintained and improved upon, where possible. In recent years, a range of measures to enhance safety and to improve the quality of the school transport service has been put in place, both in the vicinity of and on board school buses. These measures include the phasing out of the three-for-two seating arrangement on primary and post-primary services and providing all children with an individual seat equipped with a seat belt.
The planning of school bus routes, which includes designating pick-up and set-down points, is an operational matter for Bus Éireann. However, my Department and Bus Éireann are conscious of the fact that, in spite of the highest safety standards being applied, children are more at risk of being injured in the vicinity of a bus than travelling on the bus itself. A warning flashing light pilot scheme on school buses was launched in Ennis, County Clare in 2005 and a further phase of the pilot scheme will commence in the coming weeks in a number of other designated areas.
All vehicles operating under the school transport scheme are required to meet the statutory regulations as laid down by the Department of Transport. Vehicles with more than eight adult seats and which are more than one year old, are required to pass the Department of Transport's annual roadworthiness test. Private operators employed by Bus Éireann under the school transport scheme are contractually obliged to keep their nominated vehicles in a safe and roadworthy condition at all times. These contractors are required to meet an extensive range of regulations and standards as set out by the Department of Transport for use of buses in a public place.
Bus Éireann conducts on-the-road service checks using 40 mobile school bus inspectors, who board the buses in the course of their checks to ensure the vehicle and driver are as nominated, and to check that other safety requirements are being observed. Follow-up action is taken by the local Bus Éireann office, which can include termination of contract if deficiencies are detected. A leading international independent agency has been engaged by Bus Éireann to carry out mechanically-based checks on a random basis on both Bus Éireann and privately-owned contractors' vehicles operating under the scheme throughout the country. In conjunction with this exercise, the same agency is carrying out audits of maintenance procedures in use by school bus contractors to make sure they meet best industry standards.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. We were very concerned that the importance of safety on school buses might not be paramount in the Department so I appreciate that. The Minister of State highlighted that he is phasing out three for two seat belts, but he has been phasing it out for a long time. Is it in the process of being phased out or has the process been completed? Has every student got an individual seat belt and is the rule being enforced?
The phasing out process was completed in December 2006. As part of the school bus transport scheme, every student now has a seat belt and retrospective fitting of seat belts occurred in many cases.
The Minister also rightly highlighted the fact that many accidents occur at school bus stops. If the pilot scheme introduced in County Clare was successful, more should be done to introduce more schemes. This happened in early 2005, yet nearly three years later no other scheme has been introduced. We want to see results and safety for every bus stop in the country, especially when we are talking about school transport.
There is a danger in having children in the vicinity of the school bus, which was identified by my Department and by Bus Éireann. The pilot scheme worked well and a number of areas are under consideration for an extension of the scheme. We have identified places and we hope to extend the scheme to them in the coming weeks.