Vol. 678 No. 3
36 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the estimated cost of the rental of temporary accommodation in 2009; the number of units and their location in which in excess of €50,000 has been spent in rental costs to date by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12287/09]
39 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science if he proposes to recommend to the boards of management of primary schools, who have contracts with prefab building suppliers, the rent of which is paid by his Department, that they seek to have the terms of the contract reviewed in order to reduce the rental cost to his Department and so release resources for other sectors of his estimate or alternatively, to secure savings that do not damage the delivery of educational services, as was discussed recently at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Education and Science with officials from his Department on 12 March 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12336/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 36 and 39 together.
The estimated rental cost for temporary accommodation for primary and post-primary schools in 2009 will be approximately €48 million. The rental of accommodation relates not only to prefabricated accommodation, but also to a number of permanent buildings which are used as schools.
I have asked my Department to compile a list as requested by the Deputy of all schools where the cumulative cost of renting prefabricated accommodation exceeds €50,000. I will forward this information to the Deputy shortly.
Demand for additional accommodation in schools has risen significantly over the past number of years with the appointment of 6,000 extra teachers in the primary sector alone since 2002. The overall policy goal is to ensure the highest standard of permanent accommodation for all schools. However, in the context of a rapidly increasing school population, the necessity to put additional accommodation in place in a short timeframe and competing pressure on the capital budget, it will continue to be necessary to use temporary accommodation to meet the needs of schools in some circumstances. This is because competing priorities mean that it will not always be possible to have a permanent accommodation solution in place in a short timeframe.
The Department will continue to provide funding for such prefabricated accommodation and the decision on whether to rent or purchase will depend on the likely length of time it will be required. In all cases, the approach will be to ensure best value for money. Following an analysis of costs by my Department, it is now the policy to purchase rather than rent temporary accommodation where the need is likely to last for more than three years. This will reduce the incidence of long-term rental of prefabricated classrooms.
Separately, as indicated by my officials at a recent meeting of the Joint Committee on Education and Science, my Department has already commenced a review of this area and has engaged a firm of chartered quantity surveyors to develop new procedures and systems for the provision of temporary accommodation with a view to achieving best value for money. This firm of specialists has already commenced and will work in close co-operation with the planning and building unit of the Department.
The review will involve new contractual terms to incorporate buy-out and relocation options to cater for individual local circumstances. It will also involve an assessment of all existing rental contracts between schools and suppliers with a view to identifying action to reduce overall rental costs for the Department. The Deputies will appreciate that there is a substantial amount of work involved in this approach. However, I have asked my Department to give this work priority and it is envisaged that it will be completed before the end of this year.
In the meantime, where the Department has given approval to a school to rent temporary accommodation, the school authorities must seek competitive quotes from suppliers. This will allow schools to take advantage of the best value available in the current market.
I am disappointed that the Minister could not inform me of the total number of prefabs in the country on which his Department has spent over €50,000. The fact that he cannot even give an estimate of that speaks volumes for the sense of chaos that exists within the Department.
At a time when commercial and residential rents are falling through the floor, he is effectively proposing to spend the same amount of money this year as last on renting prefab buildings. Never mind the consultants' report and what they produce at the end of this year. Would he not now consider a rent control policy under which he would immediately inform the 26 suppliers up and down the country that he wants to renegotiate directly with them on behalf of the schools in question and in terms of the amount of money, €50 million this year, the State is giving to them, given the extraordinary crisis facing the country and the challenges for his Department's budget in using resources for front line services?
I was not long in this office before Deputy Quinn first brought this matter to my attention and I was concerned at the level of funding being allocated to that particular area. I was of the view that it needed to be restructured and reviewed. I am doing precisely what Deputy Hayes is asking me to do. This group of experts is in contact with the 26 suppliers and looking at the length of time prefabs have been rented and the amount of money being paid with a view to carrying out a review of long-term rentals and deciding how much more appropriate levels may be achieved, as well as facilitating the Department in taking some of this accommodation into direct ownership.
I want to stress, however, that, given what has happened over the past number of years, we can never reach a point where temporary accommodation will not be needed. That is a fact of life. If one looks at the developing areas around this city, one finds there will be a demand. There was a presentation this morning showing how such demand may be anticipated and met. The Deputy will be aware, for example, that temporary recognition for a school may be forthcoming if there are 17 pupils on the roll and full recognition may be granted after three years if there are 54 pupils. However, in the interim period, temporary accommodation must be provided.
The Deputy will also be aware that I have put a system in place which gives schools that have received approval for a prefab the option of putting a permanent structure in place. As a matter of interest, some 52 projects have been completed in small schools in this area and 172 projects are under construction at present. It is, therefore, a system that is actually taking off.
This has been the subject of extensive discussion at our committee and I will not repeat what was said. In the real marketplace that is modern Ireland today, in every shopping mall and office block, tenants are demanding that landlords renegotiate their contracts or they will leave. That type of initiative should not be excluded from the public sphere either. The boards of management are the contractors with the suppliers, not the Minister, although he pays the bill. If he was to incentivise boards of management by getting them to negotiate a 15% reduction, it would amount to a saving of approximately €7.2 million. He could allow them to keep 40% while the Department took the balance of approximately €5.9 million over time. It is very much a buyers' market, but the boards of management have to be incentivised. If there is nothing in it for them and the Minister is paying the Bill, they will sit on their hands.
There are two issues here. The cost of temporary accommodation has actually come down. It is now less than €100,000, when four or five months ago it was over €120,000.
Is that for new contracts?
That is for new accommodation, and it is falling further. I agree with the Deputy and I am looking for better value for money.
Regarding the expert group, I want to get full control of this so that I can have a total assessment of what exactly we can do. The consultants are experts in the field and will be looking for the precise value for money the Deputy is seeking. I want to let them get on with their work. My officials met them again recently to emphasise the urgency involved. If we are renting particular accommodation for ten years, for example, there is no reason that we should be paying any more for that. These are questions we will be taking up with the suppliers and we will be seeking to ensure that we get that value for money.
With the greatest degree of respect to the Minister, the questions relate to now and the scarcity of resources in all Departments, as he well knows. Why do we have to wait until later this year for a bunch of consultants to tell us something we already know?
Exactly.
We know these contracts should be renegotiated now. Would the Minister consider, while in discussion with his officials, effectively setting his own maximum rent control on prefabricated units? I understand he has the power to do this. There are 26 suppliers and the Minister ultimately has to pay the bill. I believe efficiencies can be achieved here; money can be saved and used for more useful purposes within the Department.
Will the Minister inform the House to whom the consultancy contract was given and how much it will cost the Department this year? Is it not the case that this work could have been done within the Department or alternatively between the Department and the OPW, which has particular knowledge and expertise in this area?
I do not know this, and I would prefer to give the Deputy accurate information on the name of the company as well as the costs involved. The Deputy asked me about the purchase and getting a proper pricing structure. I am already doing that. There has been a significant reduction in the price. We are now forcing every——
On the rent.
In the purchase. We will purchase anything we have for over three years rather than rent. That is a complete reversal of the policy we had.
What about the rent?
We are getting value for money and are negotiating the prices downwards. The figure has gone from €120 million to under €100 million and I hope it will continue to fall.
I accept the criticism made. Something happened in the past and a series of rentals developed. It is important for me to get an aggregate and an appropriate response to see the extent of the rental and the cost and how I can do deals with these suppliers and say we have more than paid for these prefabricated buildings. The indications I am getting back from the negotiations going on are that we will be very successful in achieving what the Deputy and Deputy Quinn are trying to achieve.
Time is tight and we can pursue this later but I get the impression there are two players now. The formal client is the board of management which signs the contract and with whom the relationship with the supplier exists. I suggest the Minister should forget about the consultants. Can we have no more government by consultancy? Can we simply have political decisions saying to boards of management that they are empowered to renegotiate the rental circumstances, because they will vary around the country, and that if they do so, they will get to keep 40% of the saving they negotiate? Incidentally, it is a wonderful capitalist idea which makes sense in these straitened times, otherwise boards of management will not act. In broad figures, the Minister will save 60% of that 15% reduction which could possibly be negotiated. If the Department of Education and Science does it, the Minister will not see a single reduction this year.
I take issue with that because we are seeing significant reductions already.
In new contracts.
The Deputy must understand boards of management are there on a voluntary basis. This practice of rented accommodation has built up over the years. Boards of management did not say to companies they had been paying rent for a certain number of years and that they should be in full ownership now.
Empower them now.
Once and for all, I am putting a structure in place so that, into the future, those we rent for a significant amount of time will come into our ownership, that we cease paying rent and that we get much better value for money. By the end of the year, I will have a comprehensive programme in place which will save the type of significant funds about which the Deputy spoke.
37 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will offer first refusal to the further education sector, including the vocational education committees and the institutes of technology, to provide the 51,000 training places for the unemployed announced recently by the Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12335/09]
There are no plans to alter the present arrangements in regard to the provision of education and training courses for recently unemployed workers.
FÁS, in addition to its own delivery of courses, already contracts with other education and training providers for the provision of relevant courses. It should be noted that the additional places referred to by the Deputy are being provided by FÁS from within existing resources.
It is open to vocational education committees and the institutes of technology to bid for the provision of appropriate courses. At present, VECs already provide courses on behalf of FÁS under the one step up initiative. Examples include the skills for work programme delivered under the workplace basic education fund which provides education and training in basic skills at FETAC level 3. VECs also provide courses for participants in FÁS-run community education schemes under the return to education programme. In addition, VECs provide courses under the learning at work and competency development programmes.
In particular, the Department of Education and Science participates in the upskilling co-ordination group chaired by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and comprising representatives of key training providers including FÁS, Skillnets, Engineers Ireland, the county enterprise boards, the VECs, the institutes of technology and the Higher Education Authority. The purpose of the group is to discuss any issues concerning the provision of training that arise among the State's key training providers. It aims to improve interagency co-operation, facilitate the exchange of information on operational and policy aspects and the avoidance of duplication. It also aims to ensure that the impact realised from the State's investment in education and training is maximised.
In the broader context, the Department of Education and Science liaises with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment with a view to improving the co-ordination of our efforts and facilitating better co-operation and collaboration at local and regional level among the relevant education and training providers. All of these organisations are working together at both national and local level to ensure that both the education and training sectors respond in an optimal way to the difficult situation we currently face.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply but remind him that since the last general election, 200,000 extra people have gone on the live register, some for the first time. What he describes is business as usual when we, in effect, had full employment. If FÁS has the capacity for an extra 51,000, then there is something seriously wrong with the organisation. We know from the quality of some of the back to work courses it offered in the past that they are substandard to meet the needs of the type of people who have been high flyers with SR Technics or elsewhere and who want to go to an institute of technology to get computer skills or otherwise.
The 51,000 places will, I estimate, cost of the order of an extra €70 million. If the figure is of that magnitude, will the Minister of State make a clear commitment to this House that he will not assign it to FÁS to subcontract out to somebody else, including many private contractors whose quality is dubious, but to the institutes of technology and other bodies under his remit in education to provide new types of courses for recently unemployed people who do not want to do the traditional back to work courses which will not meet their needs?
I accept what the Deputy said about the challenges we face at this time because of the rise in unemployment. Further and higher education have a role to play as do FÁS and the training agencies generally.
The 51,000 places announced by FÁS are part of the overall provision of 79,000 places provided by FÁS training services. This has come about in the main due to a change in the model of training provision internally in FÁS which has resulted in maximising existing resources and methodologies to deliver an increased volume of service to the number of people announced.
These challenges in the provision of further education and training and higher education generally are recognised by the Department of Education and Science. As I said, it is open to vocational education committees and the institutes of technology to bid for the provision of appropriate courses. There is a tendering process in place. At the end of the day, a tendering process gets value for money, of which we must be conscious.
I thought that when the Minister of State was appointed to the two Departments that his primary responsibility would be to cement the bridge between the Departments of Education and Science and Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Part of the task at this moment of crisis is to capture as many resources as possible for the control of the education system. FÁS simply cannot do this job, and I have been there. Anybody in FÁS who is telling the Minister of State otherwise is telling the same kind of stories we got from FÁS which led to recent upheavals in that organisation.
There is under-capacity in the institutes of technology for courses which people recently unemployed want to attend. They do not want to go on a back to work course but want to upskill their IT skills in places of education like the institutes of technology. The fact the institutes of technology are free to bid means they are closed out. That is Civil Service speak for saying they did not win the contract.
The Minister of State should assign half the 51,000 places to the education sector without subcontracting and half to FÁS and let them compete with each other. Let us see what the market says and to which the unemployed people sign up. I wager that they will go to the institutes of technology long before they go to——
I am responsible for the co-ordination of programme implementation across the Departments of Education and Science and Enterprise, Trade and Employment with the aim of progressing the lifelong learning agenda. In that regard, I ensured delivery to the target groups of relevant programmes across the two Departments and their relevant agencies and offices, including FÁS. That was a mouthful. I accept my responsibilities.
The Minister of State did not write his script.
Can the Minister of State run that by us again? We missed it.
My role is to co-ordinate between the two Departments for the first time, in a very significant way, the provision of education and training. I believe we are making progress in that regard through the upskilling co-ordination group, which meets several times a year. I believe, because of the scarce resources which we are experiencing at the present time that we are, slowly but surely, getting efficiency in the delivery of education and training programmes, the elimination of duplication and so forth.
There are 200,000 extra people, some of whom have never been on the dole before.
That is recognised by the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Mary Coughlan and by myself, as a Minister of State at the Departments of Education and Enterprise, Trade and Employment with special responsibility for lifelong learning. We are constantly reviewing the situation, with a view to coming forward with new initiatives and, generally speaking, trying to get the best value for the scarce resources we have.
The Minister of State will not get it from FÁS.
38 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science if he plans to reintroduce third level fees in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12288/09]
The issue of the re-introduction of third level fees, to which the Deputy refers, should be viewed in the context of the wider funding of higher education. The Government is investing unprecedented levels of public funding in higher education. In 2008 some €2 billion was invested in our higher education sector. In contributing to the achievement of national policy goals for social and economic development, it can be anticipated that there will be continuing significant resource needs for the sector.
Ireland's higher education system currently has a relatively high dependence on the Exchequer as its principal source of revenue. It is appropriate, therefore, to raise questions around how future additional resource needs can be met and how our higher education institutions can be supported in their development ambitions through a widening of their non-Exchequer sources of income, including through a new form of student cost contribution. There are also equity grounds for arguing that those who benefit directly from higher education should be asked to contribute to the costs.
As the Deputy will be aware, I am currently finalising a review of policy options regarding the introduction of a form of student contribution. There are many complex and competing considerations, including costs, affordability and value for money for the taxpayer, which will be taken into account by the Government in considering the available options. It is my intention to bring proposals to Government in the near future regarding the available options, including the issue of implementation. As the Deputy can appreciate, I do not wish to pre-empt any decisions of Government on these matters.
Is the Minister bringing proposals to the Cabinet next Tuesday? Can he confirm to the House whether it is his belief that a new funding scheme will be in place for the autumn period of this year for new entrants to college? If a scheme is not in place, will those who will come into college next September or October as new entrants into the higher education system be part of the old funding system and not the new one? I do not want the Minister to comment on the clear, open trench warfare which currently exists between his Department and the Department of Finance. Can he put his preferred option on the record?
I have no specific date for brining the matter to Cabinet.
It will not be next Tuesday.
I will bring it very shortly. I want to finalise a number of issues regarding the finality of the report and I will put it before my Cabinet colleagues as soon as it is completed. That is the answer to the Deputy's question.
Regarding this matter, the Cabinet asked me to furnish it with a report on student commitment, which will look at fees, loans, a combination of the two, means testing and all the other issues. I will bring all of those to Cabinet so it can take an informed decision on the third level sector into the future and what the student contribution should or should not be. It is a matter Government can decide. As part of the norm, there will of course be interaction between the Department of Finance and the Department of Education and Science. To say that there is open warfare is untrue.
The Minister is spinning it that way.
No, I am not. I am not spinning it at all. In fact, I have not discussed the matter with the Minister for Finance, Deputy Lenihan at all yet, in any detail, so there could not be any open warfare between the two of us. My job is to provide the report for Government and then let it take a decision on when or if any fees or a combination of loans and fees should be introduced.
I have personal views and have expressed those quite openly. I believe there should be a contribution from the students and I am delighted that Deputy Hayes' party is in agreement. I thank him for his document which is helpful in looking at the overall issue.
I will send the Minister a bill for the final product.
I am glad to see there is a divide between Deputy Hayes' party and the Labour Party.
There are various views here on this matter, it is what is called democracy. Can the Minister put the position for new entrants to the systems from this autumn on the record? What is his considered view as to whether fees will be in place for new entrants to the system?
As a means of not making a dog's dinner of this, I ask the Minister and Cabinet not to make a decision on the funding issue until such time as we get the report of higher level review group which is looking into higher level education. I speak here in a constructive manner. We cannot decouple the issues of funding and reform. Both are part of the same response we must make collectively to improve quality and standards in higher education. While it is useful to have a debate at this stage, I ask the Minister to wait to make a decision until such time as we have the reform document.
On 11 August last the Minister said he would support the initiative of a forensic audit of third level spending before making any decision on funding, in terms of the university and institutes of technology sector. Is that still his position? He also said recently that he rejected the notion that senior academics and university heads should be getting more than Secretaries General in the various Departments. Is that still his view? I understand from the HEA that it has no intention of involving itself in cutting excessive pay which may well be awarded to university heads. What is the position of Government on that issue?
I will clarify the last section of the Deputy's contribution because what he said is not what I actually said. On the "Morning Ireland" radio programme I said that certain people in universities were receiving a salary which was on a par with Secretaries General and that they should follow the example set by Secretaries General in terms of pay. That is exactly what I said. There is also a separate issue whereby payments may have been made to certain individuals within the university sector which were not appropriate. The Higher Education Authority is in consultation with those universities regarding this matter. I hope that clarifies the issue.
Deputy Hayes asked about reform in general. I can understand where he is coming from. I have asked the strategy group to look at a whole range of issues. I looked at the structure of third level institutions to see if there might be any bureaucratic factors in play and how we might have a more efficient and effective operation within the sector itself. I am also aware that a value for money audit has almost been completed by the Comptroller and Auditor General.
Is the Minister sure about that?
That is the information I received from members of the Committee of Public Accounts. As the Deputy is aware, I cannot interfere with the Comptroller and Auditor General, he is absolutely independent. However, my information is that an audit on value for money is near completion.
I appreciate what the Minister is saying. Is it his view that he could not move to make a decision on the wider issue of funding until such a time as he receives that audit?
This is where I disagree fundamentally with Deputy Hayes. The State is currently investing €2 billion in the third level sector, an increase of 33.3% over the last four years. The Exchequer is paying some €350 million by way of fees to the third level sector. This is a fundamental policy issue which will have to be decided on by the Government. It is for this reason that I have separated this issue from those being dealt with by the strategy group. The Government must ultimately give direction according to its conclusions.
Question No. 39 answered with Question No. 36.
40 Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason for the withdrawal of capitation grants for the schools service which provides school books for children with special educational needs in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12289/09]
I have consistently said that the 2009 budget required difficult choices to be made across all areas of public expenditure. These decisions were made to control public expenditure and to ensure sustainability in the long run. In this respect, education, while protected to a much greater extent than most other areas of public expenditure, could not be entirely spared. The changes made in regard to book grants were one aspect of these measures.
The Deputy refers to grants for school books for children with special needs. To clarify, there was no specific special needs aspect to the book grant paid to schools. The key change is that aid for school books is being restricted to schools that are included within the delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, scheme. By limiting the funding to schools within the DEIS scheme, savings of €7.5 million will be achieved. DEIS is the action plan for educational inclusion and focuses on addressing the educational needs of children and young people from disadvantaged communities.
Approximately €7 million was made available in 2008 to DEIS schools at primary and post-primary level for the school book grant scheme. The same level of provision has been made available for distribution to schools in the DEIS programme in 2009. The continuation of this provision is testament to the Government's determination to prioritise social inclusion and protect the most vulnerable in our society. We must focus targeted resources on the schools in most need. This is in line with the broad thrust of the recommendations of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2006 report on primary disadvantage.
My Department has encouraged schools to implement book rental schemes as a measure to minimise the cost of school books to all parents. As far back as 1993, a report commissioned by my Department dealt with the factors which contribute to the cost of school textbooks. The report included useful suggestions for schools, including a code of good practice for the successful operation of book rental schemes. Many schools have developed such rental schemes. It is open to schools to utilise general capitation funding to fund book rental schemes.
Enhanced rates of capitation funding are paid in respect of children with special educational needs. The capitation rates for these children range from €512 to €986 per pupil, an increase of 59% from the rate in 2006. I have already said that I favour a reform of the grants system to one overall funding grant that allows schools to use the funding to meet the priorities they identify. I fully acknowledge that there are pressures on school funding generally and that it is difficult for schools to cover all competing priorities. However, we are in very difficult times.
By any standards there have been significant improvements in school funding within a relatively short period and the Government is committed to increasing funding further for schools as resources permit. The current state of the public finances and the widely acknowledged need for further cuts in public expenditure simply reinforce the imperatives that underpinned the decisions taken in October.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I am concerned about how these changes will affect pupils in schools throughout the State. The Minister referred to support for DEIS schools. I have before me a list of parents and teachers of students with special needs in non-DEIS schools. Recurring themes in the months since our economic difficulties emerged are that there must be value for money and that the vulnerable must be protected. In this instance, students with special educational needs in non-DEIS schools are falling through the cracks.
In my own constituency of Mayo, a capitation grant of €65,000 was paid to the county council last year to provide a school library service. Special needs teachers were able to obtain books under this scheme for children with special needs in their schools. We are all aware of the need for reductions in public expenditure. It is only right that those parents who can afford to do so should pay for their children's school books. However, what about vulnerable children in non-DEIS schools? What has the Minister to say to those teachers whose students have been eligible for this service thus far but are now to be denied it? Has any provision been made for such students? Officials in Mayo County Council have told me that the cutbacks will affect not only children with special needs but also non-national children, or the new Irish as they are often described. Other services that may be affected include the link-up to the Health Service Executive for the provision of speech therapy services. What will the Minister say to the parents and teachers of the children from whom these services will be withdrawn in June 2009?
The Deputy has raised several issues. The Comptroller and Auditor General indicated clearly that any supports we provide should be targeted at students in disadvantaged areas. Therefore, I have ensured that funding is targeted at DEIS schools.
Deputy O'Mahony did not refer to the increase in the capitation grant this year. It is true that some grants have been withdrawn but the reality is that there has been a significant increase in capitation to the primary sector. Neither did the Deputy refer to the enhanced rates of capitation funding paid in respect of children with special educational needs who attend special schools or special classes attached to mainstream schools. The current rate ranges from €512 to €986 per pupil, an increase of 59% since 2006. My objective is to offer flexibility to schools by allowing them to decide on their own priorities for capitation funding.
The problem is that the Minister is giving with one hand and taking away with the other. The enhanced funding to which he refers was in place before these cutbacks were introduced. What is to be done for the children who continue to require the supports formerly available under this scheme? That is the question I want the Minister to answer.
The Deputy claims the enhanced provisions were in place prior to the changes announced in the October budget. That is not correct. I specifically undertook to increase the capitation grant in that budget having acknowledged that the existing grant was too low. There has been a 59% increase in the rate of capitation, which now ranges from €512 to as much as €986, to children with special educational needs who are either in mainstream classes or in special classes. The amount of the capitation depends on the individual needs of the child. That is significant in itself.
