Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection debate -
Wednesday, 3 Jul 2013

Issues Facing Small Primary Schools: Discussion

Chairman

From the board of education of the General Synod of the Church of Ireland I welcome the Right Rev. Dr. Paul Colton, Bishop of Cork, Cloyne and Ross; Dr. Ken Fennelly, secretary to the board; and Ms Eimear Ryan, assistant secretary. From the Catholic Primary School Management Association, CPSMA, I welcome Ms Eileen Flynn, general secretary; and Ms Margaret Gorman. From the Department of Education and Skills I welcome Mr. Hubert Loftus, principal officer, schools division; Ms Josephine O'Connor, assistant principal officer, schools division; and Mr. Martin Lally, assistant chief inspector.

Before commencing proceedings and inviting Dr. Fennelly to speak, I will read out the note on privilege. I draw the witnesses' attention to the fact that, by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in respect of a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also wish to advise them that their opening statements will be put on the committee's website this afternoon. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice of privilege.

I ask members and witnesses to turn off their mobile telephones, which I am doing now. People should take this opportunity to do it. I invite Dr. Fennelly to make a presentation on behalf of the board of education of the General Synod of the Church of Ireland.

Dr. Ken Fennelly

I thank the committee for inviting us to this meeting and for the opportunity to make this presentation. I am attending on behalf of Church of Ireland and Protestant primary schools. I am joined by Dr. Paul Colton, Bishop of Cork, Cloyne and Ross.

The last time I appeared before the committee in October, I outlined in some detail the costs involved in running a primary school. I have also noted the committee's recent report on these costs. Instead of running through the figures again, I would like to focus on some key issues of concern for the Protestant religious minority on this matter.

Our focus is the provision of suitable primary education for the children of parents of minority Christian religious traditions. In that regard, we view our schools as part of the existing provision for pluralism and diversity in the Irish education system, a network that is embedded in towns and villages across the country. Undoubtedly, every committee member will be aware of the value that local Church of Ireland communities in their constituencies place on having their own primary schools.

We are fully aware that there is a cost involved for us as taxpayers to provide primary level education for all of our children. The officials from the Department of Education and Skills will undoubtedly have exact figures on those costs. However, there is also an obligation on all of us to ensure that the best possible education is available to every child in the State. The impressive range of planned school buildings listed in the Department's five-year plan, with a budget of €1.5 billion, is a display of the necessity of continuing to provide such a quality level of educational infrastructure.

We are also conscious that, as we meet here today, a value for money, VFM, review of small schools is nearing publication. The terms of reference of that VFM states that 50 pupils or fewer is taken as the benchmark for a small primary school. The last such review was conducted as recently as 2006 and continued a policy of supporting schools where numbers were small. Obviously, this policy has now been reversed and small schools are struggling to cope with the shock of having their minor works grants ceased and their capitation core funding reduced, along with the thresholds for the allocation of teachers being significantly increased and the VFM's sword of Damocles hanging over their heads.

To retain a school's second teacher in September 2014, it will need 20 pupils, an increase of eight pupils or a 66.6% increase on 2011's figures. A 14% increase is needed to retain a third teacher and a 7% increase is needed to retain a fourth teacher. This clearly points to a policy of targeting the level of provision to smaller schools. The Minister has stated that no one could support a pupil-teacher ratio of 12:1 and that, at 19:1, one-teacher schools would be better off in their allocations than schools with two or more teachers. He has argued that the current 28:1 ratio is better than the levels that pertained in the 1990s.

As any school principal in a one or two-teacher school will agree, the reality of life in that school is that the whole school - junior infants to sixth class - is in one or two classes. One and two-teacher classrooms are multi-age, multi-grade and multi-ability with mainstreamed special needs students. Modern curricular demands and the Minister's strategies on literacy and numeracy, along with the increased amount of administrative work, all add up to creating a very different school to that which existed 20 ago. This is an extremely busy educational space and needs more resources, not less.

In terms of Church of Ireland schools, we are of the view that any policy that seeks to close or wind down a school of fewer than 56 pupils or two teachers will have a disproportionate effect on the Protestant minority. Based on the returns of 2011-12, 97 of our schools have fewer than 56 pupils. This accounts for nearly 50% of all Protestant primary schools. A policy of closing schools of fewer than 56 pupils will close half the Protestant primary schools in Ireland. This is what we are facing and is the reason that our community is anxious.

We submit that the aim of the Minister and his Department must be to support a diversity of patronage types through the maintaining of current provision, where reasonable. The fact remains that primary schools exist to serve small children who cannot be expected to travel on buses or across large amounts of countryside in the depths of winter. Such a policy would not value and respect children.

However, we also recognise that there are situations where it is reasonable and sensible to close or amalgamate schools, especially where those schools are in close proximity and there is available capital to provide the same, or better, quality accommodation than the school to be closed. In this regard, we wish to highlight to the committee that the Protestant minority has been down this road before. Since the 1960s, we have closed or amalgamated nearly 200 primary schools and reduced our number of secondary schools from 46 to 27. A further two schools were closed in recent years. It cannot be claimed that the Protestant communities are not being realistic in this regard.

The geographical spacing of our current network of primary schools did not happen by accident, but was part of a planning process in dioceses around the country from the late 1960s onwards. Our difficulty is that, where a Protestant school closes, it is unlikely ever to be reopened. We must be mindful of the next generation of members of our church and their right to be educated in a school of their own faith. It is part of our duty of stewardship and is part of our cultural tradition.

I will conclude by thanking members for the opportunity to highlight these issues this afternoon. I hope that I have conveyed some sense of the level of anxiety that exists among the Protestant community towards the VFM review of small primary schools, which has been in gestation since 2011. I suggest that these issues, which we will discuss today, go to the heart of questions such as who we are as a society, what do we value and how do we support that which is culturally distinctive.

In recent days, the Bishop of Cork, Cloyne and Ross has further consulted with his schools on the issue of the cost of running smaller primary schools. The committee may be interested in learning this information from him as a primary school patron at first hand.

Chairman

We can probably deal with that matter when we begin asking questions. I call Ms Flynn to make a presentation on behalf of the Catholic Primary School Management Association, CPSMA.

Ms Eileen Flynn

On behalf of the CPSMA, I thank the committee for the opportunity to present on some of the issues. The CPSMA represents almost 2,900 Catholic primary schools in the State. We do not represent the voice of patrons, although they are critically interested in this issue. We represent the approximately 18,000 voluntary members of boards of management around the country who offer management of their schools for free to the State. At the minimum wage and for the minimum number of meetings possible, the saving is probably €1 million per year. This is good value for money at a time when we are all called to do more with less and for less.

I will put this issue in context. We accept that Ireland is in an economic crisis. This was not caused by any of the 472,000 children served by our schools, nor by their boards of management or staff. Ireland is a rural community; most people live in population centres of 5,000 or less. Schools are largely founded on the parish basis.

Every child has a constitutional right to primary education but many questions arise regarding how it is provided and, in particular, how it is funded. I do not propose to address this matter now, as it was included in the submission that we sent to the committee.

The Heckman equation is of importance. Members will be aware of the Nobel prize winner, who has stated that the earlier the intervention in the life of a child, the greater the outcome for the child, society and the economy. This is what the Americans call a "no-brainer". The learning outcomes for pupils in so-called smaller schools are just as good as those for pupils in larger schools.

What has been the effect of the pupil-teacher ratio, which Dr. Fennelly has outlined and I do not propose to repeat, on the schools in question? The CPSMA surveyed 1,080 of its schools in May to determine what its members thought of the increase. Some 47% responded, indicating a level of interest in the topic. Some 9% of the schools in question each lost a mainstream teacher last year, a further 7% will each lose a mainstream teacher this year and a further 9% will each lose a mainstream teacher next year.

The loss of the mainstream teacher has knock-on effects for other supports in the school. The most significant effect commented on by the principals in the survey related to their concern about the effects on pupils with special educational needs. I will explain it briefly but it is more clearly outlined at point 6.2 of the submission. The allocation of resources to address the needs of pupils with general learning difficulties used to be based on pupil needs, however around 2012 the method changed, with additional supports in terms of teachers based on the number of mainstream teachers in the school. Let me give an example, a school of five mainstream teachers would gain an additional teacher to support children with learning difficulties. One can see immediately the correlation between the loss of a mainstream teacher and the consequential effects on the loss of learning support teachers for those schools. In addition, those pupils requiring support with English as an additional language must receive support from that same additional resource teacher. That diminishes what one is getting for pupils with special educational needs. One further change prevented the resource hours that were allocated to the school for children with very severe learning difficulties being combined with the learning support hours to create a post. This has resulted in some teachers travelling between schools to make up the post, reducing the time on task for teaching and learning. Principals commented on this loss of teaching time in their response to the recent survey.

The principals also mentioned the adverse effects of the current situation on all of the pupils currently in the schools. These include loss of support and larger class size with an increasing number of pupils in classrooms that can barely accommodate the larger classes. They also commented on their workloads, exacerbated by the additional stress placed on them in trying to maintain pupil numbers to save their schools. They mentioned the friction caused in localities between schools competing for pupils for enrolment. Many noted what we christened the double jeopardy effect. This is where parents, fearing that their child will not be able to spend eight years in the same school, decide to go elsewhere. The underlining feature of many comments from principals highlight far-reaching effects for the increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, far in excess of the economic considerations. With the demise of the school, very often the last focal point of the community has gone. As one principal put it, we have the combined effect of unemployment, emigration and rural decay. Is that the future we want for Ireland?

The loss of the school has a demoralising and a multiplier effect. Many of the respondents mentioned unemployment. Some 70% of schools employ special needs assistants, 84% employ secretaries and 72% employ caretakers. With closures, jobs will be unavoidably lost. Others noted the cost of transporting young children to get them to the alternative schools. Interestingly, the survey revealed that the smallest schools had the predominant numbers of the youngest children.

Some 214 schools reported that they had spent almost €44 million on building works in the past five year, of which €37 million came from Oireachtas funds with the balance from local fund-raising. This is indicative of a number of important points. The first is that local communities value their school. Many have incurred ongoing debt with the irony that they will be left with the debt and a school that is closed, albeit with excellent facilities that are white elephants. Capitation grants generally have been reduced and while no small school receives a grant for fewer than 60 pupils, with further anticipated cuts, it would mean a 16% drop overall from €200 to €168. The minor works grant has been abolished as my colleague Dr. Ken Fennelly mentioned. A survey of all of our schools in November 2012 showed that almost half of them were in deficit at that time and a further 22% were just about breaking even. The situation has not improved since last November.

Schools are treated as businesses in regard to charges for water, standing charges and VAT, and without the possibility of reclaiming anything. An Post charges schools for holding on to their post during the holidays. The Catholic Primary School Management Association, CPSMA has engaged with the procurement service as the way forward but that must be supported by the Department and local suppliers cannot be put out of business. The impact of the real value for money comes back into the frame. Amalgamation can be explored where feasible and CPSMA has prepared a discussion document to help with that process.

Is money the only value we now consider? Do we only value that which we can measure in monetary terms? What contributions do schools make to society and to their locality beyond the economic dividend? Should each school not be considered in its own context, with location and circumstances being weighted? What about future proofing, as very often what we have shut down will be required for another purpose tomorrow? The railways, the waterways and the tram routes are nearly gone but are now operating as cycle routes around the country. Is that what we want for the schools as well? Is strategic thinking not wanted at a time of crisis more than at any other time? I will not refer to the recent situation to reveal how necessary it would have been.

Primary schools are at crisis point and can take no more cuts in either finance or staffing. The ultimate question is what do we value. I suggest more research needs to be done or yet again we will have the luxury of making another decision in haste only to repent at leisure and at what cost.

Chairman

I now invite Mr. Hubert Loftus to make his presentation on behalf of the Department.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I thank the Chairman and members for the opportunity to address the committee. Today we are discussing the impact of the increase in pupil-teacher ratios on small primary schools, as well as issues relating to the costs and funding in such schools.

At the outset it is important to note the Department of Education and Skills, similar to all other Departments, is operating in the context of a budgetary programme that is designed to put the public finances on a sustainable footing. It is particularly challenging to achieve savings in the education sector given the ongoing and significant increases in demographic trends across all levels. For example, at primary level pupil numbers have increased by more than 27,000 in the past four years and further significant increases are projected over the coming years into the medium term.

The criteria used to allocate teachers to primary schools are published annually on the Department's website and are commonly referred to as the staffing schedule. The staffing schedule for the 2013-14 school year has been provided in the briefing material for committee members. The staffing schedule operates on the basis of enrolment bands and does so in a clear and transparent manner. It currently operates on the basis of a general average of one classroom teacher for every 28 pupils with lower thresholds for DEIS band 1 schools.

The staffing schedule gives significant advantages to small primary schools. For example, a two-classroom teacher school with 24 pupils has an average class size of 12 pupils. In contrast, a typical ten-classroom teacher school with 272 pupils has an average class size of more than 27 pupils. One of the savings measures in budget 2012 was a phased increase in the pupil threshold for the allocation of classroom teachers in small primary schools. The impact of the budget measure means that the staffing levels in small primary schools will no longer be as favourable as they were previously but they will still be better than the staffing schedule general average of 28:1 that operates in medium to larger schools.

A new staffing appeals process for small schools was introduced as part of the budget 2012 measure. This enables small schools that are due to lose a classroom post as a result of the budget measure to retain the classroom post on the basis of then-projected enrolments. The impact of the budget measure on small schools in September 2012 was 64 posts. This figure includes the 44 schools that lost a classroom post and the 20 schools with increasing enrolments that did not gain a classroom post as a result of the increased pupil thresholds outlined in the budget measure.

In regard to costs and funding, the Department recognises the challenges faced by schools. Energy costs are a significant area of expenditure. The Department is at the forefront of design for school buildings in respect of sustainable energy efficiency. The capital investment of almost €3 billion at primary level during the past decade has transformed the standard of accommodation in primary schools throughout the country thus helping to reduce operating costs. The Department also provides guidance to schools on practices in terms of how to improve energy usage with a view to reducing school operating costs and helping the environment.

The Government has recently appointed a new chief procurement officer for the public sector and the Department is co-ordinating procurement reform across the education and training sector. In that context, the Department is consulting school management bodies on the best way to enhance procurement processes for the sector in order to achieve savings for individual schools.

The two main grants that are provided to primary schools for day-to-day running costs are known as the capitation and ancillary grants.

In 2010, these grants amounted to €355 per pupil, at an overall cost of some €193 million. The impact to date of the budget measures has reduced these grants to their current level of €323 per pupil, at an overall cost of some €187 million. Further reductions in the capitation and related grants of 1% in 2014 and 1% in 2015 are due to be implemented as part of the budget 2012 measure. As part of the supports for small primary schools, those schools with fewer than 60 pupils receive an additional amount to bring the total amount up to the same level as a 60 pupil school. Enhanced rates of capitation funding are paid to schools in respect of pupils with special educational needs who attend special schools or special classes attached to mainstream schools. The current rates range from €452 to €871 per pupil. The current enhanced rate for pupils from the Traveller community is €249 per pupil. All areas of the public service are being asked to do more with less. Our schools and the teachers who teach in them cannot be exempt from this requirement. The challenge for all schools is to ensure they utilise their allocated staffing and financial resources to best effect to maximise teaching and learning outcomes.

Chairman

I will take questions from the Fianna Fáil spokesperson, followed by the Sinn Féin spokesperson, followed by a representative of the Technical Group, if there is one, followed by a Government representative, if there is one, and followed by Deputies and Senators in the order in which they raise their hands.

Deputy Charlie McConalogue

I join the Chairman in welcoming our guest speakers to the meeting. They represent the Church of Ireland Board of Education, the Catholic Primary School Management Association and the Department of Education and Skills. I asked for this item to be placed on the committee's agenda because when I visit schools in my constituency, I get feedback from boards of management, teachers and principals about the difficulties being faced by primary and secondary schools at the moment. I am sure other members of the committee have had similar experiences.

Over recent years, the pupil-teacher ratio has been changed, capitation grants have been reduced and the minor works grant has been abolished. In the last couple of budgets, the Minister has outlined that he has sought to protect the mainstream pupil-teacher ratio. That is not the case for smaller schools with one, two, three or four teachers, however. As has been outlined, the changes that are being made each year - further changes are expected in the coming year - are having an impact on such schools.

According to the evidence that has been presented today, half of Protestant schools come in under the 56 pupil threshold. It is quite concerning that the policies pursued by the Department over recent years will have a disproportionate effect on Protestant schools and consequently diminish the ability of people to continue to receive education with a Protestant ethos in their local areas.

I want to get feedback from all the speakers on a couple of key points, such as the impact of these changes on school finances and on the day-to-day running and operation of schools. In its presentation, the Catholic Primary School Management Association referred to research it commissioned last year and conducted by Amárach Market Research which concluded that 50% of schools were in debt and a further 21% were on the breadline. It was decided last year to remove the minor works grant, which was worth a minimum of €5,000 to every school. The grant was paid in the latter part of the year, so it would have been due to be paid in the coming months. As we head into the autumn and the funding cliff gets nearer, a real crisis will become more apparent in many of our primary schools. Last year, many schools managed to soften the impact of the loss of the grant by scrimping and scratching. I recently visited a school of 80 students that is having to raise funds from families to make up for the loss of the essential €7,000 it used to receive in minor works grant funding. In a school of 80 students, that €7,000 will have to be collected from 30 or 40 families - certainly less than 50 families. As we know, household budgets are coming under massive pressure as a result of cuts like the reduction in the back to school grant.

Chairman

I will give the Deputy a minute to wrap up.

Deputy Charlie McConalogue

I will make another couple of points. I would like some more feedback from our three sets of guests about the crucial issue of financing and funding at school level. A particular issue has arisen with regard to special needs assistants and resource teachers in recent times. I would be particularly interested to hear feedback from the General Synod of the Church of Ireland and the Catholic Primary School Management Association in this regard. What are school authorities saying about the impact these changes are having at school level? What impact are they having on resource teaching, particularly at the back end of the year when demand increases? Have students on the ground been experiencing reductions in hours as a result of the SNA cap staying the same despite an increase of 10% in demand? It was only last week, after they had closed for the summer, that schools were notified of resource teacher and SNA allocations. I understand from the feedback I have received that this created exceptional difficulties for school management.

I would like to get feedback on two other points, the first of which is the burden that VAT notification has placed on schools when administering VAT, for example, by making VAT returns. The lack of a threshold in this regard means that school managers have a responsibility to make a VAT return when it brings in a plumber to do €100 worth of work. I would also like our witnesses to comment on the issue of procurement. How do they think that is affecting schools? I know of many local businesses that in the past have been able to provide better value - or as good value, in many instances - than might be provided under the national guidelines. It is important for such flexibility to continue to be provided as long as the savings are actually being made. I ask the witnesses to comment on that.

Chairman

Deputy McConalogue has spoken for well over five minutes.

Deputy Charlie McConalogue

I will conclude by apologising in advance for the fact that I will have to leave this meeting to attend Question Time in the Dáil Chamber at 2.30 p.m.

Chairman

Okay.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

As Deputy McConalogue has said, education questions will be taking place in the Dáil in a few minutes. For that reason, Senator Ó Clochartaigh will question the delegation on behalf of Sinn Féin.

Chairman

Fair enough. I remind members to concentrate on asking questions rather than making statements.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tá fáilte roimh na toscairí ar fad. I will go straight into it. Do the witnesses agree with me that the use of the pupil-teacher ratio as the main basis for funding schools and teachers is a very blunt instrument in the context of rural areas? I note that some of the DEIS cutbacks were reversed, but they were not reversed in rural areas. Could the Department outline why the value for money audit has not been published? Will it be published soon? The Minister, Deputy Quinn, alluded last week to the possibility that the pupil-teacher ratio might have to be examined on a national basis. Is the Department undertaking such calculations at the moment on his behalf? Would any changes be imposed on schools with one, two, three or four teachers, which have already taken an increase in their pupil-teacher ratios? What do the other witnesses think about the effect such an extra whammy, so to speak, on top of the whammies, as it were, their schools have already been hit with, might have?

When the Department is calculating the number of teachers in a school, how cognisant is it of the complexity of teaching in rural schools and small faith-based schools, as outlined at today's meeting? Such schools may have multiple curricula, multiple age groups, principals who also have teaching duties, children with special needs, and English language or Irish language issues. A smaller rural school may have less capacity to raise funds because of its smaller parent base. Many rural schools are in areas that have traditionally had to confront socioeconomic difficulties.

They would have been outlined in studies by Pobal over the years, with the deprivation index it has published. Those areas have more difficulties with unemployment, with more people dependent on social welfare, etc. Are they taken into account when we look at rural schools and the staffing numbers in them?

What is the Department's policy on amalgamation? Many principals have said to me that what is happening is amalgamation by default and that they are being forced, in a very awkward situation, to negotiate with other principals or other schools in their areas and that they are getting no direction from the Department on it. Some of them are open to amalgamation while others are not but they appear to be left in limbo on the issue.

The changes to the pupil-teacher ratio were introduced in 2012 but there has been a huge amount of emigration from rural areas in the past couple of years. Has the impact of emigration been taken into account? Will the pupil-teacher ratio be adjusted this year to take into account that many rural areas have lost families and are finding it very difficult to keep their schools open? We hear the Government say it is hoping that the downturn will be an upturn at some stage. Would it be detrimental, now that we have a problem of emigration, to close a school when we hope those communities will be revitalised in the next couple of years when the economy turns?

A lot of money was put into extending and refurbishing schools. If there is a policy of amalgamation, most of the schools would not have enough space to amalgamate with the rural school down the road. There would have to be extensions and a building programme. Is it not going to cost us more? Has the Department done an analysis of the cost of amalgamation? Would we really be saving any money?

We had a discussion about the Gaelscoileanna situation previously. We were told there was full redeployment of teachers, so no money was saved by the increase in the public-teacher ratio in Gaelscoileanna. Gaeltacht schools have lost teachers, as have rural schools. My guess is that those teachers are being redeployed in urban areas or towns. Is there an urban bias in the policy of the Department to basically increase staffing in urban and town schools to the detriment of rural schools because it would seem there is an inherent bias in the system? We propose that a collective decision is taken by the Government to ring-fence education funding, so that these types of cuts are not brought in.

Dr. Ken Fennelly

Deputy McConalogue asked about the cost impact on schools. I might defer to the Bishop of Cork on this because he has just done a survey in recent days in schools.

Rt. Rev. Dr. Paul Colton

Knowing I was coming here today, I contacted all the schools under my patronage. I have about 24 years involvement in school management, the last 15 years as a school patron. County Cork is a pretty good example of what is happening to minority faith schools around the country. I contacted the schools there, about 70% of which replied. In short, the collective effect of the cutbacks in a number of areas is immense and it has induced despair and a lot of insecurity about the future, certainly in my type of school. That is not just in rural areas but in the small city centre schools as well.

The Deputy asked about the practical impacts. The things about which I am being told are the heating being turned off, including during the winter, parents providing personal toiletries, reduction in working materials available to children, a ban on colour photocopying, cutbacks in teacher and board of management training and reduction in the amount of cleaning in schools, all to save money. Those were the things reported to me in recent days.

The capitation to the smallest school in the diocese, by virtue of its enrolment and the demographic change, has been reduced in recent years from €43,817 to €24,000. That gives the Deputy an idea of the scale. Water costs have been added so, in general terms, the effects have been immense and, quite simply, the schools cannot operate without fund-raising or without voluntary contributions. They are saying they are under pressure to increase pressure in regard to voluntary contributions.

All of the schools have suffered reductions. At the end of the last academic year, one of my schools was operating at a deficit while at the end of this academic year, five schools are operating at a deficit. Every single one of my schools is saying that without the support of parents and without voluntary contributions, they would all be in deficit on a scale ranging from €3,000 per year to €16,000 per year. That is very significant. They all point to the cessation of the minor works grant as the single biggest issue affecting repairs, which are being done voluntarily or not at all.

It is the contention of the General Synod board of education that although this is an unintended consequence of the cuts, it is a consequence none the less and that, effectively, some of these will undermine our involvement, as a group, in education in the not too distant future. I point to the fact that traditionally in many areas, we cater for a large number of communities and a great diversity. I will conclude by pointing to the fact that one of my schools, which caters for 17 different nationalities in an enrolment of 52 pupils, has been unable to secure its English language support.

Ms Margaret Gorman

In regard to Deputy McConalogue's questions on the impact on school finances, based on our survey of November last, we estimate that at this point in time approximately 66% of schools will be in deficit.

Going back to the Heckman equation, which is a world renowned equation, the more we put in earlier in a child's life, the greater the resource for the child and society at large but we seem to do the exact oppose. The OECD report, Education at a Glance, confirms that. We put our main resources into third level, we scale back at post-primary level and primary level seems to be the poor relation. That has always been the case. Even when the capitation grant was €200 - it will ultimately be reduced to €176 per pupil, which is an enormous reduction - we said it was insufficient to properly fund schools. We hear daily from schools in financial crisis.

As has already been said, the removal of the minor works grant has, in effect, meant that a school with 100 pupils, for example, is down approximately €10,000, which is approximately one quarter of its funding. Any organisation down one quarter of its funding with increased costs would obviously face a very difficult situation.

Deputy McConalogue also raised issues about special needs and resource teaching. We referred to it in our submission and we are very concerned that the reversal in regard to the resource teaching allocation is not used against primary schools in that they must now all suffer an increase in their pupil-teacher ratios. That would be a matter of the utmost concern. We must also remember that the resource hours for pupils with special educational needs who have the most acute difficulties and who in the most severe cases will only get an additional five hours have already been reduced by 15%. They have still lost that 15%.

We are running a summer course for principals this week and one of the things we are hearing very loudly - as well the issues of people under enormous strain - is that the notification last week was the last straw. Schools are closed so how are they supposed to contact other schools in order to put in place the provision for next year?

A question was raised in regard to VAT notification. We have made numerous representations on that issue, in particular on the obligations on schools in regard to relevant contracts tax, RCT.

We have asked that there be a minimum threshold in order that schools do not have to make returns in respect of an electrician who might install some light sockets. The returns that schools have to make can be as minimal as that.

We have also had ongoing engagement with the National Procurement Service which is about to have a change of name. Our general secretary met Mr. Paul Quinn as recently as last week. One thing we have consistently called upon from the Department for numerous months is to issue a circular to schools so that they will be aware of their procurement obligations.

A Senator asked whether PTR is a blunt instrument. We would say it is. In our submission we stated we are somewhat concerned at the notion that smaller schools do much better in terms of their PTR. That is not the case. Larger schools have administrative principals who do administration. In smaller schools there are teaching principals. Some 70% of our schools have teaching principals who also have enormous administration tasks. They are supposed to teach across, potentially, eight different classes comprising pupils aged from four to 12 years of age. They have to cover the entire curriculum and complete administrative duties. Such children are regarded as getting preferential treatment but I do not think that is the case.

There has always been what we describe as the squeezed middle, namely, those in four, five and six teacher schools. They have a greater administrative burden but no additional support. We believe that additional support should be put in place for all teaching principals throughout the country. We have to acknowledge that all principals in the country have made an enormous contribution to education in terms of what they give back. We know from the calls to the office throughout the summer that there is no such thing as principals going on summer holidays. They are lucky if they get a two week break because they work throughout the summer.

In the regard to the cognisance given in rural areas, we would agree that something needs to be put in place. To some extent the old system had some balance. Schools with lower pupil teacher ratios may have had to do administration. There was a certain degree of fairness. That has been ripped away and we have been left with an increased burden falling on more people. It is a concern we have.

In our submission we mentioned the stock of buildings throughout the country which we need to future proof. We should not get rid of that in which we have invested. There is real concern that people will return but the stock of schools will not be available. They are the main issues.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to respond to some of the questions. Small schools are those with fewer than 50 pupils. It is important to look at the context. They represent about 20% of all schools. They account for about 3.5% of all pupil enrolments and about 5.5% of all classroom teachers. Those figures help to put things in context, in terms of the number of schools, the level of enrolment and the additional classroom posts relative to other schools.

In terms of funding, the Department fully acknowledges there have been budgetary impacts. No Minister for Education and Skills likes to be in a position whereby the decisions on funding for schools or capitation budgets involve downward rather than upward adjustments. Like all other Departments, the Minister is operating within a difficult scenario. We are trying to manage within a budgetary programme which is trying to put our overall public finances on a sustainable footing. The best way to ensure the long-term sustainability of our finances is to address that issue.

The ongoing and significant increase in pupil numbers over recent years, which will continue into the future, has a particular impact. Over the past four years while we had various budget adjustments at primary level we also had 27,000 additional pupils. We had to provide the school places, teachers, capitation funding and ancillary grant funding associated with that. It is a very difficult scenario within which to operate.

Reference was made to the minor works grant. It was last paid to the school system at the end of 2011. The current grant costs a total of €28 million which the Minister does not have and was unable to pay. He has committed to paying us as soon as he has the money.

There is a cap of 10,575 on the number of SNAs. The level of allocation has been below that over the past number of years. There has been no policy change in terms of the methodology for the allocation of SNAs. On resource teachers, last week the Minister announced resource teaching support will remain at this year's level. There will be a consequential budgetary impact from that. There has been speculation in the media on the impact that might have on the PTR at primary level. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on such speculation in advance of budget 2014. The overall position is that a decision will be made by the Government on how it will achieve the necessary savings to manage its budget.

Reference was made as to whether the PTR is a very blunt instrument. The same could be said of the points system at third level. The other side of the coin is that it is a very fair instrument and is open and transparent. A school comprising 40 or 50 pupils, whether it is in Cork, Kerry, Galway or Roscommon, gets the same number of teachers from the Department irrespective of where it is located. It is a very fair and objective way to allocate staff resources. If the methodology is changed it would have an impact on allocations.

Mr. Lally and I were both part of the team which prepared the small schools value for money report. It is very comprehensive and examines many of the issues mentioned today, such as ethos, the stock of schools and how many schools are located within a short distance from each other. It also examines issues such as amalgamation. The report has been completed and has been with the Minister for the past three weeks.

Given that it is a comprehensive report, it will take time for the Minister to consider it and he will want to consult his Government colleagues. He is fully committed to publishing the report. All such reports are published in a standard manner. It is something I have no doubt the committee will devote some time to in the future when it is published and will have a full and comprehensive debate. A lot of detailed analysis is set out in it.

In terms of issues like immigration and the impact on PTR, the staffing schedule for the 2013-14 school year has been published. The phased increases have been set out and there will be no change. The staffing appeals process introduced last year enables schools which are due to lose a classroom post to be able to retain it if their projected enrolments for September 2013 achieve the required level.

There was mention of 100% redeployment and the urban bias that might ensue. I reject that assertion. The redeployment arrangements operate within 45 km so if a teacher is moving from one school to another, it is within a 45 km radius. There is no scenario where a surplus teacher in Galway moves to fill a vacancy in a rapidly developing area around Meath or Kildare etc. That teacher would typically move to another school in Galway with a vacancy.

Chairman

If there are outstanding issues we can come back to them. Do Deputies or Senators have any other questions?

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I will ask a question in a moment.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Unfortunately, I must leave to attend another committee meeting. I have no option but to do so as it is a select committee. I will throw a few grenades and run, if that is okay. I thank the delegation for the presentations and I am interested in some of the comments made that half the Protestant primary schools in the country could be closed. There was also a question of values and a suggestion that Ireland is a rural country, as well as the issue of competition between schools and the percentage of schools in deficit.

I am coming to this partly as a politician but also as somebody who used to be principal of a small school, although it was not in rural Ireland. There are different perspectives in this regard, including the perspective and individual ethos of the small school and what is being achieved for the children under care. One can consider the pressures we see in this committee, with people from the likes of the fee-paying sector coming here asking for more resources or trying to state their case in that regard. Teachers are also keen to maintain pay and pensions, which is their right, and the issue of class sizes is also a common theme across the education sector at primary, secondary and third level. Most recently we had the issue of special needs etc., so there is much pressure on the education system.

When I was made principal of a school, the best bit of advice I got was to dig deep into every decision and ensure it is rooted in what is best for the child. If a decision must be made that is sometimes unpopular or unpalatable, if teachers or parents do not like it or if the board of management needs convincing, one will always win out or have a better chance of winning if the decision is good for the child. We have already heard accusations of anti-rural agendas or that this report has an impact on one faith over another. Fundamentally, across the political sphere we are trying to provide an education system at primary and second level that benefits children most.

The committee visited Finland recently, which was fascinating as every child goes to a school in a particular district. We met with a conservative member of Parliament who is the chair of the education committee there and she gave us a friendly lecture about the importance of equality in the education system. The conservative Members of Parliament in Finland are far to the left of anything we have here in Ireland, as we noted when she spoke of the importance of equality.

What is the value system here? It is of choice, with a matrix of 3,500 primary schools around the country, all of which must be maintained, built and restructured by the Department of Education and Skills. They must be staffed, lit, heated and insured. These are schools in an urban and rural setting. With regard to the schools in my constituency I sometimes ask where is the educational research indicating that girls' and boys' schools should be separate or that infant and senior schools should be separate, even when they are on the same campus. Why does this make sense? There is always a vested interest arguing that girls' or infant education is more important, for example, or that the small school around the corner should not be touched. Ultimately, a slightly bigger school with more students will have resources feeding into it, and it is much more sustainable to have a number of schools - either in an urban or rural setting - that are easier to finance and much more sustainable in the long term, with greater numbers of staff and students in classrooms. A greater number of educational resources can flow as a result.

The biggest expense in the education system that should be questioned is not special needs, class sizes, teacher numbers or remuneration but rather our insistence on maintaining this matrix of primary and secondary schools across the State based on different patronages. I know this is an uncomfortable conversation for people and the delegation will not agree with my comments. I am thankful that as soon as I finish my contribution I will have to run. Nevertheless, there must be a question over the fact that we have, as a State, outsourced education to patron bodies, with the primary ethos in our education system a religious one. Over 90% of our schools have religious patronage, which may decide that it is right for parents to send their children to school given a certain religious background, etc. This means that the State, in underpinning that right, must spend more money on maintaining structure. In different rural or urban parishes, there will be a different matrix of primary schools that must maintain an identity.

It is not a simple issue and I wish we could have a palace of a primary school in every parish across the nation, with a magnificent building and staff, along with fantastic resources. Something must give, so what should the education system or the Department do? It should not give in on class sizes, special needs or any other issues related to children. Should it give in on having greater centres of excellence in a wider geographical area, which every child could attend and which would have the best of educational supports? That vision may have to be provided by the educational system. Unfortunately, part of the problem in this regard is that we may be representing measures that do not show a wider vision of what we could provide.

After throwing these issues into the mix, I thank the delegation for the contributions. I appreciate the conversation. There was mention of the back-to-school report and I look forward to the response of the delegation to it.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

Why does the Deputy not stay for some of the answers?

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

There are votes taking place in the select committee.

Senator Averil Power

I cannot say that I will throw any bombshells but I must also go. I am sorry but I will read the transcripts.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I was in third level education for most of my life, lecturing for 35 years, and it always fascinated me that we could have master's degrees running with eight people in the room and two or three lecturers. We were prepared to sustain that within the university system because we liked the idea. It was paid for but the amount of money in question was not great.

I also take Ms Flynn's point about rural decay, which is enormous. I have spent much time travelling around the country and I see it on a daily basis. The smaller school is a way of keeping rural decay at bay. I have heard everything my colleague said and I am a great believer that education should be highly diverse. Our education should not be a Tesco system of education, where we all go to the same school and do the same thing, or the bigger the better. I do not believe in that.

Mr. Loftus is extraordinary-----

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I thank the Senator.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

-----in the way he answered those questions. Is he a Labour man at heart?

Mr. Hubert Loftus

We are independent.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I wondered if Mr. Loftus was from Mayo with a name like that.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

Galway.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

He certainly knows his facts. His comparison between small schools and the points system was completely incorrect. One is an examination system while the other is the beginning of education. That does not work. I understand what he is saying about transparency but I thought it was a bad example.

We spoke about youth unemployment earlier in a private session. What does Mr. Loftus want from us because I am on his side?

Deputy Derek Keating

I join with the Chairman and the rest of the committee in welcoming our guests here today. I will take up from where Deputy Ó Riordáin left off when he referred to the fact that something has to give. I am a first-time Deputy and have a lifelong interest in the welfare of our young people through education, sport and the arts. I find it very difficult to sit in meetings like this and engage in the level of discussion we are having because I know the impact the current economic and financial situation is having on society in Ireland. I find it very difficult but this difficulty comes second when listening to some of the nauseating comments and reports made by Fianna Fáil spokespersons, who are members of a political party that, more than any other, plunged us into the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

I understand the Right Rev. Dr. Paul Colton referred to the responsibility on parent-teacher groups and boards of management and the voluntary sector that takes up so much of the slack. That has always been the way even in the days when we were told the country was awash with money. I know from my work on the ground with boards of management and parent-teacher groups how much of that responsibility was shouldered by the voluntary sector.

One of the contributors referred to how teachers are often depicted as having long holidays and short working hours. I have been married to a teacher who became a deputy principal in recent years for over 30 years. There is a growing awareness, which has been there for years, of that responsibility shouldered by the teacher - the long working hours, the extracurricular activities and, based on my wife's experience, working in what would be classified as disadvantaged areas. I am fully aware of that and I think there is a wider appreciation of what is involved here.

I am reminded of the issue of responsibility. I see the Minister for Education and Science is in the Dáil at the moment. I heard a number of references to this area during the earlier part of the lifetime of this Government. To put it in context, and I am addressing not just groups in education but other groups, when we took office just over two years ago, the Government had five months' worth of money to provide education and services in health, the environment and across the board. We are charged with the responsibility of not only saving this country but also ensuring that the measures are put in place, difficult as they may be, to ensure that children and parents in the future will have a better quality of education and life. It would be easier for us to go over our heads, as other Governments have done in the past, but that would be very foolish in the long term.

Yes, it is very difficult. It is difficult for me as a backbench Deputy to support some of the measures that have been put in place but I trust the Minister in what he is doing. In the context of budgetary constraints, it was said that Michael Collins had more resources available to him than the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, had two years ago. That continues to be the case.

We have a long road to go. My role as a backbench Deputy is to ensure that every measure taken and budget introduced is done in the fairest and most measured way possible. I will conclude by saying that as a measure of the concerns people had, in the run up to the last budget, no group telephoned, e-mailed or contacted me or called to my home more than teachers, principals and people working in education in the voluntary sector. In the aftermath of the last budget, people were on balance happy with the measures taken because they were seen to be fair, particularly in the context of the pupil-teacher ratio. We now know that additional moneys are to be taken out of the budget. This experience today, in addition to the other experiences I have had, will challenge me to go to the Minister to ensure that the budget for 2014 will be the fairest possible in the overall scheme of things. I thank the delegation for coming here today.

Chairman

I was going to raise a question about the issue raised by Deputy Ó Riordáin. I agree with him. My favourite model is a State-run, multidenominational model.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

It is also mine.

Chairman

I know we do not have that and that we have a long way to go before we get there. There have been many new schools in recent years but when one has parental choice as the centre of one's education provision at primary level, parents use that to confer advantage on their child, understandably so. What happens then is that one gets segregation on the basis of class, race and so on. We have schools in Lucan where almost 90% of students are non-Irish. Many of them will get citizenship as time goes on. Segregation definitely exists and it is not through the choosing of the parents or children concerned. It is because they are being left out and must then be catered for by emergency schools. Very often, it is the faith schools that have the best record in terms of integration of different nationalities. That is another issue with which I would be very familiar from my community, as would others. Parental choice can lead to separation and a more unequal system.

I accept the point made by Senator O'Donnell and Ms Flynn. I agree that small schools and smaller classes are better and I see that there is an issue around preserving rural communities. On the other hand, we must go back to the notion that schools are for the community. They are not just for parents and children; they are for the community as well. My father used to say that a school is of as much interest to the man on the No. 26A bus who has no children in school as it is to the parents of children. Schools are about the community as well. Could the delegation go back over the questions that were asked and make their concluding remarks? I will start in reverse with Mr. Loftus. Civil servants are not allowed to be politically aligned and nor are they.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I am aware of that but I thought it was fascinating the way he could go through all the questions. It was admirable.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

We are here to serve.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I was not being political. It is all politics, Chair.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I would make two main points. When the value for money report on small schools is published, it will provide a framework for a wider discussion on many of the issues raised here. The Department would be happy to come back to the committee to have a full debate and discussion on it. The report will address all of the issues, it will not just look at facts and figures, it will also look at the community and rural aspect of small schools. I was educated in a small, two-teacher school. Many of us would have been educated in these schools. It is important to recognise that we are more likely to remember the teacher we had and the quality of that teacher than the number of pupils who sat beside us in the classroom.

I might ask Mr. Lally to talk about teaching and learning.

There has been much discussion about the PTR and the whole business of costs and funding. From his many years experience as an inspector he might focus on the child and what schools are about in teaching and learning and what he sees on the ground in schools.

Mr. Martin Lally

I thank Mr. Hubert Loftus, the Chairman and committee members. As Mr. Loftus said I am with the inspectorate which evaluates teaching and learning in all classrooms in all State primary schools. By their nature, these classrooms and the schools will vary, including, as mentioned, in terms of location whether urban or rural, in terms of gender and language of instruction, school size and the profile of the pupils and their backgrounds. In my experience and that of my colleagues in the inspectorate, the quality of educational achievement of the pupils in a school is dependent on a series of variables that impact both individually and collectively on their attainment. The inspector would view certain key drivers as pushing educational quality and pupil attainment. As such the inspectorate would focus on these aspects when it goes about its work.

Among the aspects we focus on when we make our evaluation judgments would be the following: planning and preparation by the teacher, that is, how well they have planned and their level of preparedness for their lessons; the way they manage and organise their classrooms; the way they monitor and assess students' work; and their own personal knowledge and competence, which would include the methodologies they might use. Factors in this latter aspect include whether they are current and appropriate, and skilled in the use of bulky class teaching methodologies, including differentiation. This is a particular methodology employed to ensure every child gets an education that is geared, programmed and tailored for their particular ability. Additional factors include the quality of pupils' learning experience and the student voice. We would tune into the student voice and make our judgments on it as we would on the quality of the leadership and management of the school and the level of engagements by parents and community.

These are among the many factors and variables that we look at when arriving at our judgments. I am not trying to dismiss the role of class size as an influencing factor on pupil achievement but what I am endeavouring to do is provide a more balanced and accurate representation of the many factors that are involved in pupil attainment. In my opinion and in the opinion of much research, it would be misleading to inflate the impact of school size by comparison with the impact that these other factors and other variables would hold on student attainment.

My colleague, Mr. Hubert Loftus, mentioned the value for money review, of which I was a part. At the request of the value for money review committee, the inspectorate conducted an analysis of data it holds from its own inspection programmes to ascertain whether there is a relationship between the size of the school and the quality of the student outcome or learning, as indicated by inspectorate judgment and the views and opinions of parents and pupils that were gathered from questionnaires. I can speak further about this in a moment if members wish but the finding was that extremely minor differences were noted in the areas evaluated and there was not a significant correlation or relationship between school size and the quality of student outcomes. This is something that is reflected in other international research. The benefits of small class size were found to be most prominent in the earlier years but it has also been shown to have a short-lived effect and it diminishes over a short period with the result that the majority of countries consider that investment in education is better channelled into some other competences and variables, most particularly, teacher ability, teacher competence and teacher upskilling and training rather than on reducing class size as a single variable.

Ms Eileen Flynn

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell asked what we would like. There are a few things that might be useful. We would very much like a definition of what is meant by a small school.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

That is a very good question.

Ms Eileen Flynn

Is it eight pupils, 17 pupils, 50 or 85 pupils? Currently they are all variables in the system, depending on what report one reads.

Second, I would like people to appreciate what they have. They have local democracy in action and management for free. Third, I would like people to acknowledge that statistics and money are the crudest things one can use to measure what we are talking about in childhood education. The PTR does not reveal the human story. Fourth, I would like joined-up thinking. What does it cost to keep a child at school currently? I suggest it is less than €1 per day, per annum. Where can one get better value than that? If a child drops out of that system for the want of support or resourcing or special needs being addressed and becomes a burden on the State, what is the cost of keeping that person supported in an alternative setting? I suggest it is approximately €70,000 per annum.

Finland was mentioned by one of our colleagues. So far as I understand, the Finns prioritised their education system over multi-annual budgets and said they were not to be touched because they saw that the children in schools at that time were the adults of the future to recover from where Finland found itself. Perhaps we could learn from that.

There are three other issues. We are working on an amalgamation document and we have a discussion paper ready for patrons because we do not represent them here. Essentially, the discussion paper is a patrons' issue but we are prepared to share it with anybody who wishes to see it. We are also working on a document on inclusion, which we have provided to the patrons, in order that schools can become inclusive. I agree with the Chairman that we cannot have a school at every crossroads but we can make what we are more inclusive of people who perceive they are not of that nature.

Finally, whatever else is done, do not change the PTR.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

It was a good question and it was not a nine minute speech.

Ms Margaret Gorman

I wish to respond to Deputy Aodhán Ó Riordáin's point in regard to being rooted in what is best for the child - I think that was the expression he used. This is what we say consistently and we are always saying that the child is always lost.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

He is still waiting for an answer.

Ms Margaret Gorman

That is the one aspect of the education system that is missing. We talk about employment and resources but we rarely talk about the child and what is best for the child. Consistently when we attend meetings with the Department and various other stakeholders we ask where is the child in all of this. We do not represent patrons and, obviously, the Catholic patrons have very strong views and much to say on these areas.

I accept what has been said in regard to parental preference. Recent surveys of parents on preference show that parents have opted for the system that we have. One thing we might suffer from in Ireland is that we always feel we are the poor relation, that we do not do things best compared to international practice in terms of our own systems. If we look across the world, at our nearest neighbour, at France and Germany, it is clear they all have multiple systems of delivering education at primary and other levels. The important point is that it does raise standards. If one happens to be the parents located in one area where one's child attends the one school where standards are not what they should be, what is the basis for raising standards in that area?

Those are some brief comments in respect of some of the questions raised.

Chairman

I understand the Irish Primary Principals' Network, IPPN, conducted a survey. There is a move towards the multidenominational system or Educate Together. So far as I remember, the most recent survey by the IPPN indicated a 60% move towards a multidenominational preference

Ms Margaret Gorman

In fairness, in 42 locations throughout the country, parents were surveyed in terms of preference and the vast preponderance of parents wanted to stay where they were in terms of faith schools.

The other point in regard to that is that there is the issue of social segregation, white flight and so on, of which we are all aware, but it is the faith-based schools that are to the forefront in addressing this aspect and I think the Deputy accepted that point. That is another consideration. By being located in the various areas, that is something that can be accommodated.

Chairman

Deputy Griffin is indicating but I am not taking any more questions at this stage because we are concluding the debate.

Rt. Rev. Dr. Paul Colton

I share with Deputy Keating the experience of being married to a deputy principal except I have only 27 years experience of that against the Deputy's 30 years. I was delighted to hear the Deputy's affirmation of parental involvement and voluntary contributions. The reason I emphasised that they are essential and that the schools have said that they could not live without them is that this committee in its report of last month suggested they should be discouraged, if not completely prohibited. That is not realistic as things currently stand in our experience.

The other point to emphasise is that in our view the cutbacks, which we were invited to come here today to discuss, as well as the pupil-teacher ratio, are having, albeit unintended, a disproportionate impact on our minority communities. We understand the budgetary argument but when we hear it we also hear a subtext that might be interpreted as our not being able to afford minorities in this current configuration. When the budgetary argument is being put, which we understand, and we have do our share of sharing the pain, we wonder where minorities in the current configuration are to fit in. The current configuration is what Deputy Ó Ríordáin raised. I am sorry he is not present to hear my answer because he seldom replies to me on Twitter either. I was looking froward to what he would have to say but the question he asked is a big one and the Chairman also addressed it.

The brief we came to discuss today was the pupil-teacher ratio and cutbacks but invariably I have found of late that when we discuss education matters in this country there is always somebody who broadens the debate, sometimes it becomes a bit of a non sequitur or a red herring, and obfuscates the specific issue by saying we should not have our current education system and that we should have a different one. There seems to be a naive implication that such a different education system would be free which of course it would not be. I accept that Deputy Ó Ríordáin, Senator O'Donnell and the Chairman were not saying that. However, those are big questions. We were invited here today to talk about the pupil-teacher ratio and cutbacks. From my point of view, and I am sure from the point of view of General Synod Board of Education, if the State wants to discuss the bigger question, we would be happy to do that. We would ask how do we fit into the bigger question. The Chairman rightly identified the issue of parental choice, which is a human right that has been affirmed. Parental choice is a driving force.

Finland was mentioned. Religious demography very much comes into this. It is all very well to say that a State multidenominational model is best but how do we guarantee the rights of minorities in a situation where there is an overwhelming religious demographic factor of one kind? Finland is a good example of the inverse of that where the vast majority of the population is largely secularr, and where, in effect, the religion is a folk religion and residually evangelical Lutheran. It is a good inverse comparison and worth studying. I know a good deal about Finland as I have been there many times in the course of my work.

Those are all big issues which we would be open to discussing but we have not been asked to do so and we were not invited here today to discuss them. Parental choice is hugely important. I do not think it is the route that the Minister seems to have chosen. Instead of consolidating that model, he has chosen a pluralisation of patronage models. It seems he is taking a different route and I wonder if he realises the realpolitik that we cannot get the one Tesco model.

My colleague, Dr. Fennelly, had a good point and, if I may, I will allow him conclude on that. Ms Eileen Flynn mentioned the need for joined-up thinking, and her point is about that as well and the need for some sort of council of education to address these big questions which I did not come here to discuss but which are very interesting.

Dr. Ken Fennelly

It occurs to me that in the 1960s when we were moving from one type of paradigm of education to another, namely, from a theocratic to a mercantile paradigm, we had a whole research process and an OECD-led council of education report was published. It seems to me that at this point in time we are at that juncture again. There is so much going on in education. We are talking here about the nitty-gritty details of finances and so on, and there is a crisis in finance, but there are curriculum changes, changes in literacy and numeracy, patronage and third level rationalisation.

I signalled at the outset that this committee - this is one of the benefits of a committee such as this in service to the Oireachtas - can deliberate on where we are going or what are we doing in education, and where is the overall strategic thinking. It has been mentioned a few times that there is a need for joined-up thinking, and I believe serious consideration should be given to the formation of some sort of council of education to bring all these disparate groups together, namely, the Department which is represented here, the management bodies, principals, the INTO, the ASTI, and the university departments of education that are currently doing research. There is no connection among all those bodies on a policy level. I cannot see any national policy body that is bringing those together in a strategic way, certainly at primary level. There must be reflection on that. I put forward the view that we need to talk to the OECD again, take a council of education approach on all these issues and ask where we need to go. That could be chaired by a former President to give it gravitas and to steer it in the right direction. I throw that into the discussion as a reflection having listened to the debate.

Chairman

Mr. Loftus wants to make a final comment.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

To clarify some points, the small schools value for money report will provide a good framework for a discussion and when that is published, it will be useful for all of us to meet again for a discussion at the committee. It is comprehensive.

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

When will that be published?

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I have done my bit and it is on the Minister's-----

Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell

I do not doubt that.

Mr. Hubert Loftus

In fairness to the Minister, it has been only with him for three weeks. It is comprehensive. He has many priorities with which to be dealing. He is in the Dáil today answering questions and, in fairness, he will want to consult with his Government colleagues and then publish it in due course.

In terms of the Church of Ireland schools and the impact the budget measure might have, it is important to clarify that the Department treats schools of all types of patronage equally. The schools with fewer than 86 pupils, which were in the cohort to be affected by the budget 2012 measure, represent approximately 1,100 schools. About 10% of those schools would have been in the Church of Ireland family of schools. Of those 1,100 schools, there was an impact in respect of 64 schools in 2012 and of those 64, approximately 10% would have been in the Church of Ireland family of schools.

Rt. Rev. Dr. Paul Colton

That is 50% of our schools-----

Mr. Hubert Loftus

I know but that is the position in terms of the impact.

Reference was made to Finland. An important point to make is that many other European countries are not in the same boat as we are with regard to trying to resuscitate the finances of the country in terms of trying to manage where we are at. Furthermore, they do not have the same scale of increasing demographics that we have to try to manage at the same time.

Clarification was sought in terms of a definition of a small school. There is no internationally recognised definition of a small school. If we consider two of our nearest neighbours and take Scotland as an example, it would regard a school of up to 100 pupils as a small school.

Just across the Border in Northern Ireland, they would regard a school of up to 50 pupils as a very small school, and one with between 50 and 85 pupils as a small school. What we did concerning budget measures and value for money would be within international norms. I wished to clarify those points.

Chairman

I am going to conclude.

Senator Marie Louise O'Donnell

May I say one other thing?

Chairman

Yes.

Senator Marie Louise O'Donnell

I was glad to meet the assistant chief inspector with the Department of Education and Skills. I was also fascinated to hear him speak about the teacher being the most important point in any classroom. He is right. It is something that is completely lost in third-level education, however, because the prerequisite to teach at third-level is to have no teaching qualification. This is a big issue with me. I taught in Carysfort as a young lecturer for years and I am a great believer in the teacher being the great motivator and inspirer, no matter how many people are to one's right or left. Perhaps we can speak about that in the future since it has been raised as an issue. I am delighted to hear that it is so central now because it was not so heretofore and had become unfashionable. Teachers are central to any education whether one is five or 23 years of age but that point is completely lost on universities. At third level, it is all about plugging in and hoping that will motivate people in some way, or using some postgraduate - who has no qualifications in anything - to teach, especially first and second year undergraduates. That is a little aside of mine.

I thank Mr. Loftus for answering those questions.

Deputy Derek Keating

May I leave the meeting, as I have to attend the Dáil soon?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Derek Keating

I did not want to leave without thanking our guests and the officials, especially those who may be married to worn-out teachers.

Chairman

I wish to emphasise that as Mr. Loftus said, because the Minister is in the Dáil with members of this committee it has clashed with today's meeting. I apologise because, as Chairman, I did not foresee that. I wished to explain that situation.

We will put the two suggestions on our agenda for meetings in the coming session - both the patronage issue and the schools value-for-money report.

I wish to thank everybody for attending this meeting. We will now adjourn until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 when we will deal with the Department of Social Protection budget.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.25 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 10 July 2013.