Brian Hayes
Question:1 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of uncertified sick days taken by teachers in 2007-08. [44581/08]
Priority Questions.
School Staffing.
The information requested by the Deputy is normally provided on a school year basis.
The average level of uncertified sick leave combined for the total cohort of primary teachers was 1.98 days and 2.81 days for teachers in secondary and community-comprehensive schools.
The average level of uncertified sick leave, for which substitution cover was claimed, combined for the total cohort of primary teachers was 1.31 days and 1.6 days for teachers in secondary and community-comprehensive schools.
The number of days uncertified sick leave taken by primary teachers in the 2007-08 school year was 60,128. Teachers in secondary, community and comprehensive schools took 48,136 days.
In the 2007-08 school year my Department paid for substitute cover in respect of 39,921 days uncertified sick leave taken by primary teachers, and 27,730 days taken by teachers in secondary and community and comprehensive schools.
Teachers employed by vocational education committees are paid by the 33 individual committees. The payroll costs incurred by the committees, including the cost of substitution, are claimed on a monthly basis from the Department and the Department does not have a breakdown of the specific data for VECs. Therefore, data provided on the VECs is estimated on the basis that the cost, days claimed and the level of absences are 56% of the total of the secondary and community-comprehensive schools. The 56% figure is based on relative teacher numbers in the different second level sectors. On that basis, the estimated number of days uncertified sick leave taken by teachers employed by vocational education committees was approximately 27,000 and the estimated number of days paid for by vocational education committees was approximately 15,500.
In trying to make sense of all that, can I conclude that a teacher in this country misses on average one or two days a year due to uncertified sick leave?
That is correct.
Is that the reality? The Minister has been putting about for the past month or so that there is a major problem of teachers taking "sickies" left, right and centre——
Hear, hear.
——but the information Deputy Batt O'Keeffe has given this House is that somewhere between one and two days on average is lost every year. Is he aware that in his Department last year close to nine days on average were lost per official?
I want the Minister to apologise to teachers for the outrageous slur he and his Department have put about the place for the past month or so as a means of attacking teachers and their representatives. Will he apologise now? The information the Minister has given this House completely demolishes the outrageous spin that he has been putting out in the past month.
Can I make two points? I do not write editorial headlines. Any information put out was on the basis of the facts.
The facts are that I have a serious difficulty with the cost of substitution days, whether for uncertified sick leave, sick leave or other substitution. The costs have grown enormously. I do not have the funds to meet those costs. It is my job to point out exactly the number of days that are lost.
It is one day a year.
It is not one day per year.
Near enough.
It is over two days.
This is a priority question.
It is 1.9 days.
It is 2.81 days in the second level and 2 days in the primary, and they teach 163 days of the year.
I am glad to hear Deputy Finian McGrath has found his voice.
I will give the facts as they are. The facts are there has been a substantial growth in the cost of substitution, sick days and uncertified sick leave, and we do not have the funding to meet those costs. That is the point that has been made.
Would the Minister agree there is not a problem of absenteeism among the primary and secondary school teachers of this country?
Of course, on the average of the Civil Service, by and large there is no difference across the board.
I thank the Minister.
The Minister stated he deals with facts that are put out by himself or his Department. I refer him to the following comment he made on 20 November last to the Joint Committee on Education and Science, that "on Mondays throughout 2008 there were in excess of 12,500 teachers absent on uncertified sick leave and that there was a similar number absent on Fridays". Does he now withdraw that comment, which deliberately misled the members of that committee?
Added to the slur is the dirty little war that the Minister has fought over the past month with Irish teachers who are doing their best and who have one of the lowest rates of absenteeism of any workforce in the country. Will the Minister withdraw that comment and, in doing so, will he be man enough to apologise for the outrageous slur he put on the record of a committee of this House?
Before the Minister responds, I remind the Deputy of the clear precedent that he may not accuse a Member of the House of being deliberately misleading.
We will hear the reply.
I have pointed out in every statement I have made that I am astounded by the quality of the teachers in this country and the throughput of education.
Were you wrong?
In terms of what I said, on Mondays throughout the school year, there were over 12,500 days——
You said on one Monday. It was throughout 2008.
That was for 2007.
The Minister let his Department spin the issue subsequently.
Allow the Minister to conclude.
In fact, I did the reverse. I asked my Department to contact all the education correspondents to rectify the mistake once I realised that it had been made. If the Deputy was to ask any of these correspondents, he would find that they were contacted to correct any misunderstandings that might have arisen.
Will the Minister apologise to teachers for the remarks he made?
I call Question No. 2 in the name of Deputy Quinn.
I will not allow Deputy Brian Hayes or anybody else to impugn me or imply that I made aspersions against teachers.
The Minister will obey the Chair in the same way as every other Deputy.
I did not make these remarks. They were made by the Minister.
The Deputy made the remarks today. He implied that I am taking issue with teachers.
I ask the Minister to reply to Question No. 2.
Why not correct the record?
Will you withdraw it now?
No, I never said that.
The Minister, no less than anybody else, will obey the Chair.
I would stop digging if I were the Minister.
I have always attested to the quality of our teachers.
Pupil-Teacher Ratio.
Ruairí Quinn
Question:2 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will confirm that the overall average primary school class size of 24.1 which obtained in 2005-06 and 2006-07 according to a previous parliamentary question will remain the same in the 2009-10 school year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44589/08]
Class size data for primary schools is compiled by my Department on an annual basis. The source of this data is the annual census of primary schools. Data for each school year is made available when returns for all schools in respect of the year in question have been processed. Schools will not be making returns in respect of the 2009-10 school year until after 30 September 2009 and, allowing for obtaining returns from all schools and the normal checking and processing of this data, the position will be known in summer 2010.
However, since the changes to the staffing schedule for primary schools announced on budget day restore the basis of allocation of teachers to schools to the position that applied in the 2006-07 school year, it is a reasonable working assumption that average class size in 2009-10 should be quite similar. Schools have flexibility in the way in which they assign pupils and teachers to classes and the Department does not allocate teachers to specific classes or age groups. That is why precise information to enable compilation of the national average position is not available until the position in individual schools is captured through the census.
In any discussion of class size and classes where the number of pupils exceed the average it is important to understand how the main staffing schedule sets out to treat schools in like circumstances in a fair and consistent manner. The current allocation is based on an average of 27 pupils per teacher and the fact that schools make individual choices in assigning teachers to class groups. With over 20,000 individual classes spread across all schools throughout the country there will always be differences in individual class sizes.
I have no difficulty in setting out for this House or for the public generally what the final impact will be on the overall changes in aggregate teacher numbers in schools for the 2009-10 school year and this applies to final average class size as well. I reiterate that prudent management of Government finances is vital at this time of global economic uncertainty when tax revenue has fallen so significantly. Even with the budget measures in place there will still be a significantly increased borrowing requirement in 2009.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
When the country was able to afford it we reduced the basis on which primary teachers are allocated to schools from being based on an average number of pupils per teacher from 35 pupils down to the current level of 27 pupils. The change to a new average of 28 pupils per teacher has to be viewed in that context. It means primary schools will be staffed exactly as they were during the 2006-07 school year during which they operated well.
I thank the Minister for his reply but I should out of courtesy tell him that it was not the priority question that I originally put down. That question, which was ruled out of order for reasons that I understand, noted that the Department has consistently refused to answer questions from the time I became Labour Party spokesperson on education. Out of courtesy to the Minister, I advise him that the matter is coming before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
We must deal with the question before us.
Perhaps when we have dealt with that, we might receive the answers a journalist can get by putting down a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Out of courtesy to the Minister, I advise him that I have raised with the Committee on Education and Science the manner in which his Department deals with replies. I did not expect him to write the answers but he should have someone read them because they are quite offensive.
I understand the point that the Deputy is making and respect his opinion. I hope, however, he can appreciate that we have a difficulty in this regard. The Department has received 4,300 written and oral questions, which is 13% of the total number of parliamentary questions. The amount of man hours required to answer them is substantial. I am the first to admit that we have to make improvements. We want to develop a more effective procedure and we are working on our information technology systems to increase our efficiency. If the Deputy wishes to raise certain issues, I am willing to arrange for him to meet officials of my Department so that we can rectify whatever difficulties may have arisen.
Before I call Deputy Quinn, I remind him that his original question was not in order. The matter will be considered next week by the long-standing and prestigious committee of this House, the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. We should not debate the matter in advance of that committee's deliberations.
I appreciate that. I will make two observations to the Minister. When the beef tribunal was in full flight, its chairperson stated that if Ministers had answered questions honestly, openly and accurately in the Dáil, the tribunal would never have been necessary. When the Departments of Post and Telegraphs and Social Welfare experienced telephone chaos, the numbers of questions put down by frustrated Deputies exploded because their constituents could not get a straight reply from the Departments in question. The Department of Education and Science will continue to attract 13% of parliamentary questions if it does not answer them properly.
I am aware of the number of questions that are tabled. They reflect a drawback in our system. Since I have taken on this position, I have assigned a dedicated line for Deputies to contact an official in the Department when they have particular issues they want to have investigated. That official is assigned to facilitate Members of this House. I hope we can thereby dramatically reduce the number of questions submitted to my Department.
Higher Education Strategy.
Brian Hayes
Question:3 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the person who will chair the forthcoming national strategy on higher education; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44582/08]
I intend to bring proposals to Government shortly in regard to the process of developing a new national strategy for higher education. It is envisaged the process will be led by a high level steering group which will provide business, student, wider community and international perspectives. Senior officials from key Departments will also participate.
The development of a national strategy provides an important opportunity to bring together in a coherent manner our stated ambitions for the sector and to set out the systems which we will use to achieve these ambitions. Furthermore, by its very nature, the process of developing a national strategy provides an opportunity to engage in consultations with those who have an interest in the sector, enhance the quality of the analysis and recommendations and generate a shared understanding of the needs and challenges of the sector, together with a commitment to the change that will be needed to underpin implementation.
The strategy will provide for a survey of the operational environment for higher education and research, an analysis of the demands likely to be placed on the system and a review of capacity to meet those demands. A review will be conducted of the effectiveness of current use of resources with a view to identifying potential for rationalisation or change to maximise the use of those resources and how additional resource requirements to support the achievement of stated objectives can be met over the medium term. Clear strategic guidance will be provided for the development of the sector and of individual institutions and types of institutions within it. Structures will be developed to oversee the planning and development of the system, as well as ensuring quality and accountability. Membership of the steering group is currently under consideration and I do not propose to speculate or comment on any particular names until all are agreed.
Is it not the case that the Minister's predecessor outlined her support for such a strategy when she was in office? It has taken us a very long time to get to the stage of announcing this strategy. Does the Minister agree that whoever chairs this strategic way forward for higher education in this country must be internationally and domestically eminent in industry and the connections between industry and education?
Will the Minister put on the record of the House the suggestion that was mooted some time ago that former EU Commissioner Peter Sutherland had been considered for the chair of this august body, and while the Minister had been "open-minded" to the suggestion, others in Government felt he was the wrong political colour and consequently would not be considered for the chair?
He was a Taliban faction.
He was somehow outside the core. Will the Minister give his views on this issue as it is important that the person chairing this body can hold his or her weight locally and nationally?
There has been no mention of any person to chair this committee. I have never discussed the chairmanship of this committee with anybody and I was never privy to any information that a particular person was being proposed for it. It was news to me when I read the newspaper article that a particular person was mentioned.
With regard to the chairmanship, I agree we need somebody of outstanding ability and achievement. He or she should have a very good knowledge of the third level sector and be able to direct and guide this process for the next 20 years. From my perspective and that of the Government, finding the best person to chair this body will be paramount. Politics will not come into play in what I see as being one of the most strategic roles to be played for the next 20 years in terms of developing an educational strategy.
Will the Minister indicate when he is likely to propose to Government the strategic group and the chairperson of this important body? Will the Minister further outline his strategy in terms of the establishment of this higher level group? As I understand it, he has asked as one of the first functions to bring forward a report on the potential funding arrangement for third level and higher education in this country.
Does the Minister agree that it would be much more sensible to have the vision and the issue of funding dealt with at the same time? If the Minister is proposing to consider funding first, without looking at the broader remit of vision for higher education — which I referred to two weeks ago in a speech at my own party conference — it will effectively put the cart before the horse. We need both issues to be addressed at the same time rather than rushing in to a funding solution — or not as the case may be — without looking at the wider issues of quality, participation and where exactly we want higher education to be in 20 years.
Having committed to the strategy, I thought it appropriate in the first place that I have a look at the budgetary parameters and the financial framework. I also wanted to have an opportunity for in-depth discussions with various people relating to the higher education strategy. I will not be looking at one in isolation of the other; both issues will be considered in tandem.
I see in-depth knowledge of future student commitment as being separate from the overall strategy. The issues will impinge on each other but will coincide in terms of any discussions taking place.
Obesity Levels.
John O'Mahony
Question:4 Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of the recommendations of the 2005 task force on obesity which have been implemented to date in primary and post-primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44583/08]
The subjects social, personal and health education, physical education and home economics at second level cover, among elements of the syllabus, the areas of healthy eating and the food pyramid, healthy lifestyle, physical health, body care, exercise, relaxation and diet. They are evaluated in schools by the inspectorate using indicators specific to primary and to second level schools as appropriate.
Schools in Ireland have a strong and proud tradition of developing sport outside of the school timetable. Sports organisations such as the Gaelic Athletic Association, Basketball Ireland and the Football Association of Ireland provide extensive opportunities for schools to participate in sport. Schools have worked on devising healthy lunches policies as part of social, personal and health education, SPHE, and physical education, PE.
The curriculum support services at primary and post-primary level have a number of activities in place to promote healthy living in schools and healthy eating policies. Planning templates to assist in school planning for the implementation of the PE curriculum and the wider aspects of physical activity and school sport are also available. In addition, extensive opportunities for professional development for teachers are provided in this area, including in SPHE, PE and home economics. The majority of schools currently participating in the school completion programme operate breakfast clubs or other meal provisions, in accordance with the nutritional guidelines issued by the Department of Social and Family Affairs.
A special PE funding package of €6.5 million issued in 2006 to primary schools, and in 2007 a similar package of €3 million issued to post-primary schools. The Food Dudes programme is being rolled out on a national basis to all primary schools over a five-year period and my Department also promotes Sport for All Day, the Active School Awards and National Healthy Eating Week.
The task force recommended that all schools should provide for 30 minutes of physical exercise each day, restructuring the school day if necessary. While schools can encourage pupils to take physical exercise during breaks, the extension of the time available in the curriculum for PE is not feasible in terms of the range of curricular options which must be facilitated and the industrial relations and cost implications.
Schools are playing their part in the battle to tackle childhood obesity. However, it should be remembered that children only spend 20% of their time at school and that a healthy home environment is vital to ensuring they do not suffer from obesity. The State of the Nation's Children report launched in 2007 shows that children in Ireland are doing well on physical activity, ranking second across the 32 WHO countries surveyed in being physically active for at least four hours per week.
The Minister mentioned facts a few moments ago in a reply to Deputy Hayes on another question. There were 22 recommendations from the task force and I hoped the Minister would tell me how many were implemented with regard to primary and secondary schools.
The Minister mentioned home economics as a vehicle for providing healthy lifestyle and eating. Does the Minister agree that the recent withdrawal of the home economics grant through the budget cutbacks is a setback to the implementation of obesity policy in second level schools? The Minister mentioned the great work done by the various sporting organisations so does the Minister agree that the recent cutbacks in substitution — the figure of €13 million was mentioned — will have a devastating effect on the implementation of obesity policy in our schools? The Minister stated that Ireland is faring well but my figures indicate there were over 300,000 obese children in our schools, and this was growing by over 10,000 each year.
One of the recommendations is that home school community co-ordinators should incorporate healthy skills within a wider framework of home visitation. What does the Minister say to the nine or ten voluntary schools in my constituency that will lose their home school liaison officer and will not be able to implement some of the recommended provisions?
I cannot comment on individual schools. It is appropriate that I mention here that at all times I was open to having discussions with the various education partners. When they came to meet me, they indicated they may have some suggestions and I indicated to the education committee that discussions were going on in the background. I bring it to the attention of the Dáil that those discussions have continued and proposals have been made by second level management bodies. These have identified that annual savings of €16 million on substitution can be made not only in the current year but on a continuing basis.
These savings essentially involve replacing an open-ended or demand-led availability of cover for uncertified sick leave and official school business costing €21 million per annum with an allocated or budgeted scheme costing €5 million per annum. This is a constructive and positive approach and I will make €2.7 million available to secondary schools for the remainder of the school year to provide each school with a limited number of hours of substitution cover outside of the supervision and substitution scheme. During this period, I intend for there to be a full review of the substitution and supervision scheme in conjunction with school management bodies and teachers' unions with a view to taking up the additional €2.7 million expenditure. I will also be open to similar constructive suggestions from the primary school management bodies.
Will there be a change in the extra €2.6 million allocated to the substitution scheme?
No. The Deputy asked me about substitution and the difficulties in terms of sports, games and the operation of schools. We have held discussions with the Joint Managerial Body for Secondary Schools, JMB, and the second level teachers' unions are aware of the suggested agreement.
That is the post-primary level.
In light of a full review, I am prepared to invest €2.7 million in the system between January and June to complete discussions. It has been indicated to me that the schools will be able to live within these parameters.
Will the cutback be €16 million instead of €18 million?
No. The JMB and everyone involved in the constructive negotiations have indicated to me that €16 million in savings can be found in a full year. I will invest €2.7 million. We will continue our discussions during the coming school year and arrive at a satisfactory conclusion within the parameters. In terms of the constructive negotiations, having left the door open for discussion and realising that I do not want to affect schools into the new year, it would be sensible of us for the moment to take an approach that will deliver supervision and substitution within schools. In this way, I will get the majority of the savings for which I am looking.
I welcome that.
I hope that we will also welcome the answer to the next question.
School Accommodation.
Ulick Burke
Question:5 Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in view of the contents of reports from the Health and Safety Authority, the risk assessment report and the Health Service Executive report on the conditions at a school (details supplied) in County Galway, he will sanction the provision of a new school; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44585/08]
An application for capital funding towards the provision of a new school building was received in April from the school referred to by the Deputy. This was the first such application from the school. On foot of it and information supplied by the school regarding its condition, officials from the planning and building unit of my Department visited the school in June. Consequently, €26,862 was sanctioned to carry out remedial works to the school.
In November, the school invited the Health and Safety Authority, HSA, to inspect the building. The HSA inspector served an improvement notice on the board of management directing that "a new safety statement based on site-specific risk assessment must be compiled by a competent person and implemented at this place of work". It is the responsibility of individual school management authorities to have an up-to-date safety statement in place in their schools. Following receipt of the HSA report, my Department has sanctioned funding for the school to engage a qualified health and safety consultant to survey it and to assist the school authority in compiling an up-to-date safety statement.
The school principal also invited the department of public health of the HSE to inspect the school. A copy of the report of the HSE representative who visited the school was forwarded to my Department in mid-November. The report advised that one classroom should be temporarily closed due to evidence of damp penetration and fungal growth. I understand that the fungal growth has been safely removed and that the classroom is back in use.
The school, which has a current enrolment of 49 pupils, is situated in a rural area. As such, it would have been a suitable candidate for the small schools scheme, introduced by my Department in 2003. The scheme was targeted at small rural schools and provided funding for more than 730 such schools around the country. One of the key principles of the scheme was that responsibility for project management was devolved to individual school authorities for the purposes of refurbishing and-or extending existing buildings in order to address the schools' long-term accommodation needs. However, my Department has no record of having received an application under the scheme from this school.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Department records show that, in the past five years, the school received €33,917 under the grant scheme for minor works to national schools. Works that can be covered under this scheme are improvements to school buildings and grounds, the improvement or replacement of mechanical and electrical services, the purchase of standard furniture and physical education equipment, the purchase of floor covering and window blinds and the purchase of IT-related equipment. My Department has been in contact with the school regarding the use of these funds.
My Department is in ongoing contact with the school regarding its needs. The Deputy will be aware that I requested officials from my Department to visit the school. A member of the inspectorate and officials from my Department's building unit are arranging to visit the school on Thursday, 11 December. In light of the many competing demands on my Department's capital budget, it is not possible to give any commitment relating to the provision of a new building for the school at this time.
I thank the Minister for his reply. On behalf of the board of management, parents' association, staff, students and community, I wish to put two important facts on the record. The new board of management was established in November 2007 and the principal was appointed in September 2007. They cannot take responsibility for anything that occurred beforehand. The Department's request concerning moneys and grants spent is irrelevant.
The Deputy should ask a question.
All that is required is help in responding to the matters highlighted by the Minister. I will show him a picture of the classroom——
That is not in order.
——closed by the HSE and subsequently analysed with the help of NUI Maynooth. The HSA's preliminary report will be ready next Thursday.
A question, please.
I welcome this morning's decision that senior departmental officials will visit the school in the coming week but people want a replacement school because of the danger involved. The physical deterioration of the school cannot be exaggerated. None of the reports is scaremongering; they highlight the reality of what the children and staff must bear. The remedial work carried out was to stop slates from blowing off and injuring people. As well——
I will call the Deputy again.
The Deputy will understand that the letter to the school needed to be sent through the Secretary General, who is subject to the Comptroller and Auditor General. Some €33,917.44 was provided between 2003 and 2007. According to the information to hand, only €19,000 can be accounted for, leaving a potential balance of €14,610.
During the 2007-08 school year, a new security camera was purchased for €3,500. During the 2006-07 school year, €384.53 was spent on minor works. It is appropriate that my Department ask the pertinent question of the school, namely, where did the balance go and, if there is such a deficiency in the school, why was the minor works money not used to upgrade it in the appropriate manner. It would be inconsistent of us to do otherwise.
The situation begs another question. Why did the school only make an application in April 2008 for a new school to be built? Considering the area's topography, there are five small schools therein, some comprising approximately 14 pupils or fewer than 20 pupils. In these circumstances, it is appropriate for me as Minister to ask what opportunities for amalgamation of those small rural schools are available.
I want the Minister to understand the situation, namely, a new board of management and a new principal. I ask him to bear this fact in mind. They cannot take responsibility for the situation.
While expenditure on a security camera may not be seen as a priority in the Department's eyes, the school's dilapidated appearance led to a high degree of vandalism. That has since ceased. As a matter of urgency, I ask the Minister to consider an offer on the table. A new school would be built on site without any disruption and at no cost to the Department other than the cost of the lease. It could be done quickly.
The Minister mentioned he is considering a priority scheme. I hope this school will be afforded top priority within that scheme.
If five small schools are situated within two miles of each other, it is appropriate to ask whether there is a possibility that they might amalgamate. We asked the board of management of the school in question to consider the possibility of an amalgamation. It is a matter for the board of management to decide whether such an amalgamation would be appropriate.
On a point of information, is the Minister rowing back on the policy——
The Deputy should allow the Minister to complete his reply.
——to the effect that rural national schools will not be closed?
I am actually adhering to that policy. If a number of small schools are located in the same area, the first option we would consider is whether they might be amalgamated and whether improved facilities might be put in place. That is an appropriate and proper way to operate.
The application in respect of the school in question was received in April last. The board of management at the school is effectively stating that it wishes to jump the queue and have its application considered before any others. I will consider the position as it relates to the school. If the board of management indicates that it does not wish to become involved in an amalgamation, I will be obliged to examine the matter in that context and in light of all the other applications that have been received.