Vol. 682 No. 4
6 Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Education and Science when his Department will allow the Grangegorman development, bringing together the Dublin Institute of Technology onto one campus, to proceed in order that a planning application under the SDZ procedure can be advanced by the relevant authority. [19304/09]
On a point of order, is this question being taken with Question No. 23?
Strangely, it is not. It is a separate entity so the Deputy is on his own.
We could play the advantage rule, namely, I go first.
The Grangegorman Development Agency was established in May 2006. Since its establishment the agency has worked on the preparation of a strategic plan and budget for the proposed development of the Grangegorman site. The strategic plan is required in order to inform the Government of the options and the associated costs of moving the Dublin Institute of Technology campus to the Grangegorman site as well as making recommendations on site provision for the relevant health facilities.
The agency completed the drafting of the strategic plan and budget in October 2008 and forwarded it to my Department for approval as provided in section 12(h) of the Act. Copies of the plan and budget were also forwarded to the Minister for Health and Children for her consideration. The Grangegorman Development Agency has provided my Department with a clear indication of the overall costs for the development of the Grangegorman site. This has allowed my Department the opportunity to consider fully the costs involved in utilising the majority of the Grangegorman campus to provide for the needs of DIT.
Following receipt of the strategic plan, my officials, in consultation with the Higher Education Authority, commenced an assessment of the proposals. My Department also sought the advice of the National Development Finance Agency on the funding portion of the draft cost-benefit analysis from the Dublin Institute of Technology and the draft strategic plan. In March 2009 the agency submitted a revised master plan and budget. The revised plan takes account of the reduced prices that have materialised in the construction sector by updating construction prices to January 2009 values. The agency also reduced enabling infrastructure costs and revised the estimated value of DIT property portfolio to reflect current market trends. The revised plan proposes to deliver the complete project in phases.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House:
There are issues relating to the proposals that my Department is discussing with the various interested parties and when these have been fully explored, I intend bringing proposals to Government for consideration as soon as possible.
While the master plan and budget is being considered by my Department, work on the preparation of the strategic development zone planning scheme has been progressed by the agency. The benefits of the Grangegorman Development Agency using the SDZ process are that it provides a degree of certainty in any future planning process. If overall permission is granted under the SDZ, further planning applications which are in compliance with the SDZ would be permitted. This would simplify the preparation of incremental planning applications at a future date and would allow for an orderly scheduling of development and disposal of DIT properties as appropriate. Planning confidence also facilitates the use of public private partnership as a procurement tool.
The Minister gave an undertaking at committee last week that it was his intention to visit the site. He might confirm that this is still his intention.
Yes, I will do that in the coming days.
He could combine it with the by-election. Senator Ivana Bacik will give him a tour of the site.
It is a very worthwhile project, for many reasons. The Minister is already committed to spending money in the DIT area for maintenance, repair and upkeep, and to all intents and purposes that is wasted, dead money because the buildings are in many cases old and not appropriate.
That is correct.
This cannot be compared with a new project that would go on a greenfield site, which is additionality; this is a logical rationalisation. I urge the Minister to find a way in which this could be done. I believe the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, would be very happy to see a major educational institution established on the north side of Dublin city.
Obviously, the rationalisation of the various entities of DIT is desirable. The Deputy might be interested to know that the most recent proposal outlines the overall cost to deliver all of the elements of DIT and HSE services on the Grangegorman site at €1.4 billion, so it is a sizeable bill.
That is over an extended period. If one considers the rent they are paying, their maintenance and all the other existing costs, it is nearly a win-win situation.
The first tranche is to cost €610 million, which will be part funded from the sale of the DIT properties and from the HSE capital budget. A total of €195 million is being sought from the Department in capital funding. The second tranche is to be provided if and when required and the total cost of that second tranche is estimated at €848 million, the majority of which is to be self-funded. All costs quoted are as of January 2009, VAT inclusive.
What is the timescale?
We got the revised plan and estimates in March 2009 and they are with the Department at present. As the Deputy knows, a report will be made to Government arising from that. The Taoiseach will also visit the site. We want to be fully informed so the Cabinet can make an appropriate decision.
If the Minister gives the go-ahead in principle, with whatever caveats he wants in regard to public moneys, there are items that could be done through the private sector, for example, student accommodation and many other developments on the site. It will unlock other sources of revenue but it depends critically on the Minister bringing a positive recommendation to Cabinet.
It is fair to say we are considering all sources of funding. If the new infrastructural fund comes into being, we would look at that as being an area which could be used appropriately in regard to funding developments such as this.
It all comes down to the Minister.
I will certainly visit the site to see the overall strategic plan and to be as informed as I can be in order to ensure whatever recommendations I make to Cabinet are based on full background information.
I put down this question through my colleague Deputy Breen because I wanted to establish that there is cross-party support for this infrastructural project. It is good for the community, the DIT and business links, and is the kind of project we need right now to help the economy get out of the hole it is in. My understanding is that before the strategic development zone application is made to Dublin City Council, it requires the Minister's Department to give the green light in principle to the proposal.
When does the Minister think the Department, following Cabinet discussion, will be in a position to allow the proposal go to Dublin City Council? Otherwise, the project will not get off first base.
I do not want to be tied to a time limit. I will visit the site within the next couple of weeks and will then discuss the strategic plan with my officials and the costs involved. It is a good time to be involved in construction and it is the desire of Government to put strategic projects in place so that we can sustain and increase construction jobs. We will examine the feasibility of the plan to see how it can be achieved and consider what form of funding would be appropriate for it.
7 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will publish the findings of his report on third level funding in order to allow for an informed debate on the issue of third level fees. [19219/09]
14 Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Education and Science if he proposes to introduce third level fees or to increase the registration and other charges for those attending third level. [19128/09]
19 Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science the status of the proposed reintroduction of third level fees. [19220/09]
28 Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science if the proposed third level fees will affect those students who are due to start their third level education in September 2009. [19221/09]
32 Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason for the delay in announcing his plans for the reintroduction of third level fees. [19222/09]
34 Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science when he will make an announcement on the reintroduction of third level fees; his favoured view on same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19248/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 14, 19, 28, 32 and 34 together.
As the Deputies will be aware, I am currently finalising a review of policy options relating to the introduction of a form of student contribution. There are many complex and competing considerations involved. These include considerations relating to institutional funding, family affordability, equity, participation and value for money for the taxpayer. However, it is an issue that merits consideration at this important juncture in the development of higher education and also given the current economic circumstances.
My officials are finalising a technical report on the various options available. This will look at available models, drawing on the experience of those that have operated internationally. It will assess the potential policy and cost and revenue impacts of various available approaches in an Irish context. I will be providing the completed technical report to my Cabinet colleagues for consideration in the near future. As the Deputies will appreciate, I do not wish to pre-empt any decisions of Government on these matters.
In the event that it is decided to introduce a form of student contribution, it is my intention to recommend to Government that any new arrangements will apply to students entering higher education from 2010. Such arrangements would also apply, in 2010, to those students who would have entered higher education this year, 2009.
On the issue of the student services charge, the Government has already announced that it is willing to accept increases of up to €1,500 — from €900 — for the 2009-10 academic year in individual higher education institutions. This increase of up to €600 is agreed on the understanding that the revenue generated by the level of increase to be adopted by each institution is required to defray the cost of items that fall to be funded by the student services charge.
All students who are eligible for means tested student support have the student charge paid on their behalf by the local authorities or the vocational education committees, in addition to any maintenance grant and tuition fee grant to which they are entitled.
Am I to take it from the Minister's response that we must wait until the Minister's officials have finished with the report before we see the findings of the commissioned report? Is the Minister aware that Ireland has consistently underspent in terms of third level education? The OECD puts us well below the average investment in students. Does the Minister understand that the abolition of fees had a hugely beneficial impact in terms of working class families who, otherwise, would not have benefited from the grant system in the past?
I will take the supplementary questions together so the Minister gets a chance to reply to them.
We had a debate on this issue at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Education and Science last week. Will the Minister clarify for me whether he is telling us that those who entered the higher education system this year, 2009, will not be subjected to any new funding arrangement the Government may decide on at some stage after their entry to college?
I presume that after the by-election disaster for Fianna Fáil, the Minister will be immune from any effect of publishing the report on fees because it will not be able to make his position any worse. Therefore, will he please get on with it and publish the report?
On the matter of delaying the publication of the report until after the local elections, I have indicated clearly that it would be more appropriate and political for me to make the announcement beforehand, because that would allay all of the fears of those on middle incomes and let them know this would not affect them in any way.
Reverse psychology.
It is to the advantage of the Opposition that I am not making the report available.
With regard to Deputy Ó Snodaigh's question on bringing the report to the House, I have been charged by the Cabinet to make a report to it. My first report, therefore, will be to the Cabinet. It will then be a matter for Cabinet to adopt the proposals or otherwise. I will make the report available to the Cabinet, seek its comments and observations and then make a recommendation to Government. I will do that on the basis there are four former Ministers for Education and Science in Cabinet and obviously they would like to make their observations. I will take that into account.
They are equally divided on the issue.
On the question of those who enter third level in 2009, I said the opposite. I said there would be no change for anybody going into third level in 2009. The reason for that was they had applied to the CAO, understood exactly what they had to pay and what their commitments would be. However, I clearly indicated that if the Government takes a decision to introduce either loans or fees for the 2010 school year, that those in the second year of university could be liable to such charges.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
