Adjournment Debate.

Early Retirement and Installation Aid Schemes.

Deputy Michael Creed

I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for the opportunity to raise this important issue and I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Tony Killeen, to the House to reply to the debate.

I do not intend to dwell too much on the merits of the installation aid scheme for the purposes of this debate, as they are already well documented. However, I would like to put on the record the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food's constant refrain in respect of the decision to suspend the schemes on budget day. He said he regretted that and that when financial circumstances would permit, he hoped to be in a position to reintroduce the schemes.

I wish tonight to draw attention to the installation aid scheme in particular, because there is some confusion in that regard. This confusion arises in particular from an article in the Irish Examiner of 6 December by my good colleague, that eminent agricultural correspondent Ray Ryan, the headline of which reads, “Independent TD secures commitments on installation aid”. The article goes on to state that Deputy Michael Lowry secured some agreement regarding applications for the installation aid scheme which had been substantially progressed, but which had not been lodged within the Department by 14 October, budget day. I would like clarification on the agreement made with Deputy Lowry.

I raised the same matter on 3 December as a priority question on Question Time, three days before the said article appeared in the Irish Examiner. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food said to me in reply:

I have no plans at present to reopen the young farmers' installation aid scheme and the early retirement scheme to new applications, but the limiting of the suspension of the scheme will be considered at the earliest opportunity, having regard to the budgetary situation.

In response to further questions, the Minister went on to say:

I have stated repeatedly in the House and in response to councillors, representatives of various farming organisations and in the media that it is my intention to revisit my decision to suspend entry to the schemes as soon as circumstances permit.

He went on to state:

I understand that at times the delay in lodging applications may have been outside an applicant's power. I am conscious of that but I do not want to mislead anybody. I am not in a position at this time to say when we will be able to progress those particular applicants who had set out on the road to complete an application. I assure Deputy Creed that those applicants will be the first to have their applications processed when it is possible to re-open the schemes.

He concluded by stating: "The scheme was suspended due to budgetary constraints and that remains the position".

Unless the Government has won the national lottery since the Minister went on the record, I have not seen a change in budgetary circumstances that would enable the Minister to live up to the commitments he made to reopen the scheme as soon as budgetary circumstances permitted. Is there some kind of nod and wink politics going on between the Department and the Independent Deputies who prop up the Government, Deputy Lowry in Tipperary North and Deputy Healy-Rae in Kerry South? Has a sweetheart deal been arranged for would-be applicants for installation aid in those areas who have made substantial progress but who have not submitted the application form? Are they being treated differently in north Tipperary than in the rest of the country? Either Mr. Lowry or the Minister is telling porkies. They cannot both be right.

Will the Minister of State put on the record tonight whether the installation aid scheme is back up and running? The IFA has sent the Department a list of approximately 500 applicants who are in these circumstances, but those applicants are in areas from Malin Head to Mizen Head, some in my constituency. Will the Government treat them differently because they do not live in north Tipperary? I want and hope the Minister of State will clearly state the scheme is back up and running and open for business.

The scheme has a value significantly in excess of the €15,000 installation aid grant because it sends a signal to an industry crying out for new blood that encourages new thinking and highly trained qualified farmers at this critical time in the agricultural industry. Is the Minister holding his ground or has he yielded? If he has yielded, he cannot yield exclusively to north Tipperary. It must be a concession that is available to every would-be applicant.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Tony Killeen)

I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter and welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate.

Ireland is currently experiencing a period of economic turbulence, stemming from both international and domestic factors, and the context for this year's budget differed considerably from the majority of those of the past 15 years. The priority in preparing the 2009 Estimates for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food was to focus available resources on the measures that allow us to maintain and grow the productive capacity of the agri-food sector. The 2009 Estimates provide over €1.8 billion for the Department. This, when combined with EU funding of €1.4 billion, means that total expenditure in 2009 will amount to over €3.2 billion. Even with a provision on that scale, however, difficult choices had to be made between competing demands. It was in these circumstances that it was necessary to suspend the young farmers' installation aid scheme and the early retirement from farming scheme for new applicants.

The young farmers' installation aid scheme was introduced in June 2007 under the aegis of the rural development programme for 2007-13. It provided a higher grant level of €15,000, an increase of 58%, to farmers between the ages of 18 and 35 years who set up in farming for the first time on or after 1 January 2007. The principal requirements of the scheme were that applicants must generate a minimum of five production units from farming at the time of first setting up or within 12 months of that date; fulfil, within two years of first setting up on the farm the educational requirements of the scheme; submit and complete a business plan; obtain title or leasehold title to at least 15 hectares of eligible lands in less-favoured areas or 20 hectares in other areas; and have not more than €50,000 in non-farm income in a designated tax year.

Since the launch of the young farmers' installation scheme in June 2007, some 941 applications have been received under the scheme and 357 payments made totalling €5.355 million. The Minister has confirmed on a number of previous occasions that all commitments entered into under the scheme, up to and including 14 October 2008, will be honoured by the Department.

Deputy Denis Naughten

Is that even if they have passed the age of 35?

Deputy Tony Killeen

As the Minister has confirmed in the House previously, he is prepared to look at the possibility of reopening the scheme as soon as the general budgetary situation permits. Young farmers whose applications were significantly progressed at the time the scheme was suspended are a priority. In particular, eligible farmers who have continued their training will not be excluded from the benefits of the scheme when it reopens.

As for the scheme of early retirement from farming, the Minister has also confirmed that whenever it becomes possible to reopen it to new applications, priority will be given to those who were making preparations to apply at the time it was suspended. An allocation of €56.7 million has been made in the Department's Estimate for 2009 to meet current commitments under the two schemes.

A number of farm tax measures were renewed in budget 2009. These are part of a number of schemes and reliefs that have been put in place in recent years to bring about improvements in land mobility that will, in turn, improve productivity and efficiency, particularly for young farmers. These reliefs include the renewal of stamp duty relief for four years until 31 December 2012, worth an estimated €53 million in a full year; the renewal of stamp duty relief for farm consolidation for two years from 1 July 2009 to 31 June 2011; the renewal of both the general and the young trained farmers rates of stock relief for a further two years, at an estimated cost to the Exchequer of €2 million in a full year; and the extension of the accelerated capital allowance for necessary farm pollution control facilities from 31 December 2008 to the 31 December 2010, worth an estimated €10 million in a full year.

When combined, these farm tax measures are estimated to be worth over €65 million in a full year. In addition, the top rate of stamp duty on agricultural land transactions was reduced, with effect from 15 October last. This should reduce the cost of agricultural land to purchasers and encourage a higher number of transactions. All these measures should help young farmers to improve land mobility, increase land swaps and attain higher environmental standards.

Deputy Michael Creed

Does the scheme remain suspended?

Youth Services.

Deputy Brian Hayes

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to address the House on this very important matter.

In the discussion on education that followed the budget, one area was not addressed when cutbacks were announced, namely, the youth affairs budget. There is a broad consensus across this House that the work in youth services done by the many voluntary organisations throughout this country is money well spent. Every year a very small sum of money in the budget is directed towards these organisations yet they still provide extraordinary opportunities for young people to participate in society. This is particularly the case for young people who fall out of the education system, those who do not complete their leaving certificate. Many of these projects are an essential means of their remaining within the informal education sector, as the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, is well aware. There is cross-party consensus about the need to build capacity within this informal education sector which has been built up over recent years.

With a great sense of alarm and concern, I must inform the House of the very savage cutbacks that have taken root in the Department of Education and Science. The budget Estimate of €43.7 million for the youth affairs area is proposed to be cut back to €39.4 million in 2009. What we see as a result of the cutbacks in the Department is, effectively, a cut in the order of 10%. This will cause havoc and will make an already difficult situation much worse. These cutbacks will affect very many organisations throughout the country.

A complication is that the youth affairs section of the Department appears to have been shunted from Marlborough Street across to the Minister of State for Children and Youth Affairs. As a result of this shunting operation, the budget has fallen between two stools. A budget that was ring-fenced within the Department of Education and Science now falls between two Departments and is effectively lost. Nobody is standing up for this sector. The Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, will be aware of this more than anybody else because he knows from his own constituency, as I do from mine, the importance of many of these projects. I refer to the 180 special projects for youth affairs around the country. These 180 organisations help directly the most vulnerable children in our communities and they will suffer a 10% cut in their main line budget next year.

Deputy Denis Naughten

Shame.

Deputy Brian Hayes

I put it to the Minister of State that this 10% cutback across the board may see many of these 180 special projects going to the wall. That cannot be allowed to happen under any circumstances but this budget, allegedly, was supposed to safeguard the front line and the most vulnerable children. Will the Minister of State agree to meet urgently with the National Youth Council of Ireland? The NYCI is the umbrella organisation for all the other good organisations throughout the country. The Minister of State might explain to the NYCI how, exactly, the budget for 2009 is to be constructed and, more important, how it will affect the 180 different organisations.

There may well be an argument that some national bodies can provide some of the required savings. The Minister of State, more than anybody, would be prepared to dialogue with those national organisations. I ask him to sit down over the course of the next few weeks with the NYCI in order to see if an agreement can be found to safeguard these 180 organisations that help the most vulnerable children of all in our constituencies.

There is also a need to ensure that the organisations that run these services can know their budget for 2009 as expeditiously as possible. Last year many of them were not given a budget until well into the summer months when half of their service had already been provided. That was a scandal and is no way to treat the youth service. In good times or bad, there is cross-party consensus that these organisations must be supported. Unfortunately, this budget falls between two stools because neither the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, nor the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs, Deputy Andrews, takes responsibility for the youth service budget.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Seán Haughey)

I take this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs, Deputy Barry Andrews. I make it quite clear that, since the formation of this Government, I do not have responsibility for youth affairs.

Deputy Brian Hayes

That is the problem.

Deputy Seán Haughey

One of the areas of responsibility within the Department of Education and Science is the support and development of the youth work sector in Ireland. Responsibility for the youth work sector is now being transferred to the Office of the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs. The overall purpose of the youth work service is to assist young people to realise their full potential and to become active participants in a democratic society.

I am very conscious of the great benefits that can accrue to our young people from involvement in youth work and of the benefits for society as a whole. I am also aware that this recognition requires appropriate support. Through the youth affairs section of the Department, work has been ongoing with the National Youth Council of Ireland, the National Youth Work Advisory Committee, which includes representatives of other Departments, the vocational education committees and other interested parties to support youth work activities. This support is provided by way of financial and other assistance.

Youth work programmes and services are provided primarily by voluntary youth work organisations. In this regard, a range of financial supports for the sector includes support for projects for disadvantaged young people under the special projects for youth scheme, to national youth organisations under the youth service grant scheme, to a network of youth information centres and to local clubs and groups throughout the country.

Over 50 voluntary youth organisations operate in Ireland, with a stated membership of 450,000. More than 40,000 voluntary youth leaders are the main educators, with support from approximately 1,000 full-time staff. These organisations and their young members are represented and supported in their work by the National Youth Council of Ireland. The council is pivotal to the provision and development of youth work in Ireland and the dedication and commitment of its staff to member and affiliate organisations is widely recognised.

The programmes operated by the voluntary youth work organisations vary widely and include outdoor pursuits, arts, recreation, project work and international exchanges. Qualities and skills such as leadership, co-operation, decision making, motivation and self responsibility are acquired by young people through this non-formal learning process.

The youth work sector has received unprecedented financial support over the past number of years. Youth services funding by the Department of Education and Science expanded from €35.5 million in 2004 to €56.6 million in 2008. Although this funding has allowed for some expansion in the sector, there has been a growing emphasis on consolidation of services.

The 2009 budget allocation for youth services from the Department of Education and Science is €48.2 million, a decrease of 8% on the 2008 figure. Funding is also provided for youth services from a number of other Departments and agencies. The reduced allocation in the youth budget from the Department of Education and Science will require much tighter budget management and prioritisation which may impact on pay and administration costs.

Deputy Brian Hayes

The Minister of State can sing that.

Deputy Seán Haughey

Department officials have met with representatives of the youth sector, including the National Youth Council of Ireland, to ascertain the sector's views on how best to minimise the impact of budgetary constraints next year with a view to consolidating, in so far as is practicable, the progress made in recent years. The Department has also written to the national youth organisations and vocational education committees advising them to revisit their level of expenditure to determine where cost savings can be achieved, bearing in mind the budgetary constraints in 2009.

Consideration is being given to how best to apply the budgetary constraints to the bodies and activities currently being supported. Consideration will be given to all the programmes and initiatives supported in determining the levels of provision deemed appropriate in the context of the 2009 budget allocation. I assure the Deputy that ongoing contact with the youth sector organisations, including the National Youth Council of Ireland, will continue and that we will endeavour to work constructively and co-operatively with the sector in meeting the challenges that lie ahead.

School Transport.

Deputy Denis Naughten

I acknowledge the presence of the Minister of State with responsibility in this area. I am raising this issue on behalf of 11 children attending Cloverhill national school. I first raised this issue with the Minister of State last August and highlighted that these children could not attend primary school in the town of Roscommon as there was physically no space for them. The schools in the town have stated to some of the parents that there is up to a three-year waiting list.

As a result, the parents of the 11 children residing in the town of Roscommon enrolled them in Cloverhill national school. The Minister of State responded to my representations in regard to each case stating that the child is "not basically eligible for transport under the terms of the scheme as the child is not attending their nearest school". However, the children cannot attend the nearest school because there is no capacity and, as a result, they have been refused admission. It is due to this fact that the parents are seeking the provision of school transport to Cloverhill national school.

The Minister has reiterated the response that the pupils are not eligible as they reside less than 3.2 km from the nearest school and he would argue that the school transport system was basically designed to cater for children in rural areas who, if living a long distance from school, might have difficulty in attending regularly. However, if children in urban areas require transport and the school they attend is the nearest school available to them and happens to be in a rural community, why cannot the system provide a service in the opposite direction, particularly if the primary purpose and objective is to facilitate regular attendance in school?

The Minister has stated that while it is the prerogative of parents to send their children to a school of their choice, it is not the objective of the school transport scheme to facilitate this choice. In this case, the parents have no choice because the nearest school is unavailable to them and the second-nearest school is also unavailable. The nearest available school is the one they are now attending. However, they cannot enrol in that school, so the decision of the Minister has been pointless to date.

While the Department claims there is no provision under the terms of the school transport scheme to provide transport in these circumstances, at present under the school transport rules the 3.2 km distance to the nearest school does not apply to a child who wishes to be taught through the medium of Irish, once the child is 3.2 km from a Gaelscoil. It is also the case that this rule does not apply to a child with a physical disability where the school cannot physically cater for the pupil. For example, if there are stairs in the school and no lifts, and the child is in a wheelchair, then the school is not determined as the nearest school for school transport purposes.

This is also the case with these 11 children. The nearest school cannot physically cater for the pupils. They urgently require daily transport to and from Cloverhill national school. Some of the pupils have already missed up to ten days attendance at the school because their parents do not have transport or are working away from home and, as a result, are unable to transport the pupils up to 7 km to school.

These children need to attend school and they have the right to do so. Eight of the families are already marginalised and disadvantaged at many levels — culturally, linguistically and economically. By not providing school transport, we are to deprive them further despite the examples I have given regarding the flexibility of the school transport service and the fact the nearest school cannot physically cater for them. The families have received written refusals from the principals of the local schools. The parents have no other choice but to bring them up to 7 km to the next nearest school, Cloverhill national school, which provides an excellent service with which the parents are very satisfied. However, children are losing out on attendance because they physically cannot get to school on occasion. It is not an acceptable situation.

As the Minister of State is aware, the vast majority of these pupils are migrants. They already have significant challenges to integrate within our community and additional barriers should not be put in front of them. I urge the Government to reconsider this matter.

Deputy Seán Haughey

I welcome this opportunity to outline to the House my Department's position regarding school transport to Cloverhill national school, County Roscommon. By way of general comment, I should explain that one of the main objectives of the school transport scheme is to provide a basic level of service for pupils who live long distances from school and who might otherwise experience difficulty in attending regularly. In order to be eligible for transport under the terms of the primary school transport scheme, pupils must reside 3.2 km or more from, and be attending, their nearest national school, as determined by the Department. While it is the prerogative of parents to send their children to the school of their choice, it is not the objective of the school transport scheme to facilitate that choice.

In August 2008, the Deputy informed my Department that a particular constituent was seeking the provision of school transport for her son to Cloverhill national school due to the lack of capacity in the local schools. The Department referred the case to Bus Éireann, which operates the school transport scheme, to establish whether the pupil met the criteria for eligibility on distance grounds. According to Bus Éireann, the child resides 1.4 km from the nearest school and 7.1 km from Cloverhill national school. The child is, therefore, not eligible for transport. Bus Éireann further advised that there is no service to either school from the area. The Department has already informed the Deputy that there is no provision in the school transport scheme to provide transport in the circumstances outlined by him.

While it is understood from the Deputy that school transport is required to Cloverhill national school due to capacity issues in the school nearest to the child's place of residence, the question of enrolment in individual schools is the responsibility of the managerial authority of those schools. My Department's main responsibility is to ensure that schools in an area can, between them, cater for all pupils seeking places. This may result, however, in some pupils not obtaining a place in the school of their first choice.

It is the responsibility of the managerial authorities of schools to implement an enrolment policy in accordance with the Education Act. In this regard, a board of management may find it necessary to restrict enrolment to children from a particular area or a particular age group, or occasionally on the basis of some other criterion. This selection process and the enrolment policy on which it is based must be non-discriminatory and must be applied fairly in respect of all applicants.

Under section 15(2)(d) of the Education Act 1998, each school is legally obliged to disclose its enrolment policy and to ensure, as regards that policy, that principles of equality and the right of parents to send their children to a school of the parents’ choice are respected. Section 29 of that Act provides parents with an appeal process where a board of management of a school or a person acting on behalf of the board refuses enrolment to a student. Where a school refuses to enrol a pupil, the school is obliged to inform parents of their right under section 29 of the Act to appeal that decision to the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Science. Following the determination of any such appeal, and in the event of the child being unable to secure an enrolment at the local school, the Department may review the procedures regarding the provision of school transport.

I thank the Deputy again for giving me this opportunity to explain the position to the House.

Deputy Denis Naughten

It is a crazy, bureaucratic system.

School Staffing.

Deputy Ulick Burke

Last Wednesday the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, was in the House when I raised a matter relating to Mercy College, Woodford, County Galway and the affects on that school of the cutbacks announced in the budget. Yesterday, Deputy Noel Treacy and I attended a meeting of the board of management, parent representatives and staff of the school. They outlined in detail the effects of the withdrawal of disadvantaged status. As a result of this measure, 3.81 teachers will be lost, which represents almost 25% of the total school staff quota. The withdrawal of special status together with the financial loss of nearly €10,000 will have devastating results in this small school of approximately 230 students.

The school is a small, stand-alone, co-educational school in south-east Galway in a CLÁR programme area, where 41% of the parents do not have any formal or primary school education. Only 13% of students from the school proceed to third level education. The school has taken many children with disadvantages and special needs through to junior and leaving certificate level, and some of these have continued to third level. Will the Minister for Education and Science re-examine the effects of these cutbacks on the school? I believe if the cutbacks proceed as intended, they will threaten the very existence of the school.

I draw the Minister of State's attention to a decision in 2006 to withdraw the disadvantaged status from the school. This was later reversed by the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin. The school was allowed to retain some staff, as well as the home school liaison person. It was vital that the school retained such assistance and the financial support. Will the Minister of State bring to the attention of the Minister for Education and Science the message that this school should retain its status for the lifetime of the delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, action plan, which was the intention of the reversal of the original decision in 2006?

Deputy Noel Treacy

I support my colleague, Deputy Burke, and I endorse his comments. We come from the constituency of Galway East where there are both urban and rural disadvantaged areas. The only positive aspect of an urban disadvantaged area is that the affected children have a choice of schools and some opportunity. However, in a rurally disadvantaged area there is no such choice and only one school. This is especially the case in mid and south County Galway along the Slieve Aughty mountain range and near the border with County Clare. In this area only one third of the population is employed and two thirds are unemployed. There is an outstanding school with an outstanding, positive attitude to all children. There are 30 special needs children in the school population. There is in place a whole school evaluation and performance system which also addresses the curriculum and subject choices. I appeal to the Minister for Education and Science to allow for the continuation ad infinitum of the DEIS programme, in line with the Departmental circular of May 2007.

Mercy College, Woodford is in a critical location. If there is to be any diminution of the services there will be a serious reduction in the numbers attending second level education, resulting in difficulties and social disadvantages. This will compound the existing situation, whereby the people are already playing against the wind and require every possible State support. These are necessary to sustain this outstanding centre of educational excellence in South Galway, an area which Deputy Burke and I are proud to represent and support.

We depend on the Minister of State and the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe. We realise the Department will treat each school on a case-by-case basis and take into account the mix of students, the disadvantages and the fact that the school population is multicultural. There were people of many nationalities living in the parish before the advent of the Celtic tiger. We appeal to the Minister of State to ensure the school receives special attention and that the provision of specialist supports continues.

Deputy Seán Haughey

I am pleased to have the opportunity to address the Deputies on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe.

Notwithstanding the increase of €302 million in the education budget for 2009, which is a real achievement in the current economic climate, several tough and difficult decisions had to be taken in framing the 2009 budget. These decisions were taken to control expenditure and to ensure sustainability in the long term. In this respect education, while protected to a much greater extent than most other areas of public expenditure, could not be entirely spared, and I acknowledge the impact of funding restrictions several areas, including at school level. However, these are the inevitable result of the current challenging economic environment and the need to manage Exchequer resources prudently.

The DEIS plan for educational inclusion provides for a standardised system for identifying levels of disadvantage and an integrated school support programme. DEIS brings together and builds upon a number of interventions in schools with concentrated levels of disadvantage. There are 876 schools in the DEIS plan. These comprise 673 primary schools and 203 second-level schools.

The process of identifying schools for participation in DEIS was managed by the Educational Research Centre on behalf of the Department of Education and Science and supported by quality assurance work co-ordinated through the Department's regional offices and the inspectorate. Some 73 post primary schools, 27 urban primary schools and 123 rural primary schools that were not identified for inclusion in DEIS retained resources, including teaching posts and financial supports, under pre-existing schemes and programmes for addressing educational disadvantage.

When DEIS was introduced, a commitment was given, as a concessionary measure to these schools, that they would retain a level of support for the duration of the current DEIS initiative which is scheduled to end in 2010. While it is appreciated that the discontinuation of these resources will impact on these schools, given the current challenging economic climate, the Department considered that it was prudent to advance the withdrawal of such supports from non-DEIS schools to the beginning of the next school year.

The main focus of social inclusion measures will be to retain resources in DEIS schools. There is a need to target resources on the schools in most need and this approach is in line with the broad thrust of the recommendations of the Comptroller and Auditor General, set out in his report on primary disadvantage of 2006, which recommended that the Department should focus its educational disadvantage measures on those schools serving the most disadvantaged communities.

Taken in combination, the impact of the staffing schedule changes, as well as the withdrawal of historic DEIS posts and language support, weighed off against increases expected in the numbers of teachers for demographics and resource teachers for special needs, will mean an overall net reduction of 200 posts at primary and post primary levels.

As the processing of the September 2008 enrolment returns for primary and post-primary schools is not yet finalised, it is not possible at this time to outline to the House the impact these changes will have on the allocation of mainstream teaching posts for the school year 2009-10. This includes Mercy College, Woodford. The Department will be advising individual schools in the normal way on staffing allocations for the school year 2009-10 and at that time, a more accurate indication of the mainstream staffing levels will be available.

The allocation processes include appellate mechanisms under which schools can appeal against the allocation due to them under the staffing schedules. This is particularly relevant at post-primary level where the appellate process especially considers any specific curricular needs of the school concerned. At primary level, the normal redeployment arrangements apply. However, at post-primary there is no effective system-wide redeployment scheme at present and this can mean that schools retain teachers, though over quota. I remind the Deputies that the ceiling of two on the number of language support teachers per school is being re-imposed, with some alleviation for the position of those schools where there is sufficient concentration of newcomer pupils as a proportion of the overall pupil enrolment.

I again thank the Deputies for providing me with the opportunity to address the House on this matter and to outline the current position here.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 16 Dec 2008