Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 11 Jun 1987

Vol. 116 No. 8

Adjournment Matter. - Lisduggan (Waterford) Primary School.

Mrs. Bulbulia

I am pleased that the Minister of State at the Department of Education is here this evening to respond to the debate. A Leas-Chathaoirligh, at the outset, may I indicate to you that I have offered some of my time to my Labour Party Seanad colleague from Waterford, Senator Brian O'Shea, who is on the staff of this school? It is in direct response to the wish of the people who attended a public meeting in Waterford on Monday night last to discuss this school that the public representatives in the Waterford constituency should approach this matter on a non-party political basis. It is in earnest of my wish to observe that that I have offered to share my time with Senator O'Shea, who has an intimate knowledge of this school since he is a member of the staff.

The school in question, St. Paul's primary school in Lisduggan, is situated in an area which houses approximately 9,500 people. It is a good area. The people there are hardworking but, like so many places in the country, it is an area which experiences a fairly high level of unemployment. There are 600 children at this school and 22 teachers. It is no exaggeration to say that these children are being schooled in what is, to my mind and, indeed, the minds of all people who attended the public meeting on Monday night, the most substandard school building in Waterford city.

I have visited the school. I have seen the very real difficulties there for myself. I should like to commend the senior principal of the school, Patrick Bacon, the junior principal, Mary McCarthy, the board chairman, Nicholas Power, the Parish Priest, Fr. Power, the cleaning and ancillary staff and everybody who has anything to do with this school. Certainly they are working in very adverse conditions. The children, too, are experiencing a degree of disadvantage because of the nature of the infrastructure of the school.

The substandard section houses 220 pupils or thereabouts. They belong to the senior section of the primary school and range in age from nine to 13 years. Today, and for several years past in this senior section, which is in deplorable condition as I have already stated, the pupils are experiencing great hardship. Certainly, the public representatives at the meeting were informed in no uncertain terms by all present that they felt enough was enough.

This school was opened in July 1968 in the Manor of St. John, an old family residence which had been vacated by its former owners. The opening at the time was seen as an emergency measure and was accepted by all concerned as an attempt to meet the educational needs of the children in the area. This was the latest housing development in Waterford and was expanding with great rapidity. Parents and teachers proved more than reasonable in their acceptance of these less than ideal conditions at the time. One is tempted to ask if this very reasonableness is now being viewed as a passive acceptance by the Department who are not, or who not certainly seem to be, viewing this school as a priority case. I want to emphasise to the Minister of State that the people in Waterford see it as a priority.

Many inspectors from the Department of Education have visited the school. In 1984 an architect was asked to submit plans. These were gone into in fine detail. The project was actually costed at £485,000 in 1987. The parish commitment to that would be in the region of £50,000 to £60,000. The people there are prepared to take on the burden of that kind of debt to indicate their wish to have the children schooled in acceptable surroundings.

There are many ironies attached to all of this. Last year, for example, good grants were given to the school. Purchased with these moneys were a television, a video, a computer, a tape recorder and some basketball equipment, all of this fine new equipment. The school has a curriculum which is as good as that of any other school in the country. All the equipment, purchased by State funds, is being used in what are positively Dickensian surroundings.

There are administrative problems which I witnessed when I visited the headmaster. The secretary is in one part of the school and the senior principal is in another. I met the senior principal in a tiny office in the substandard section of the school. If he had occasion to speak to the parents of a child, the three of them could barely fit in the one room. I saw 37 children in a classroom which was probably fine in its day when it was constructed in the prefab but which, in terms of today's spatial allowance for pupils, is too small. These 37 pupils were very tightly packed in together. I know from having talked to parents that this breeds a certain irritability in children. It is more difficult from the teaching point of view to run a class when students are a bit more congested than they should be.

Thousands of pounds have been spent by the board of management on remedial work. At this stage it is a matter of throwing good money after bad. Frankly, the options for repair have run out. It is impossible to open the windows in many parts of this sub-standard section, because if you do they will fall out. The school has adopted the expedient of boarding up many of the windows, which makes the rear part of the school look fairly embattled. All in all it is a depressing environment for education and is quite unacceptable. It is an embarrassment to the teachers and it is a serious handicap to them in their efforts to instil some pride in their community in the pupils they teach.

Currently, the roofs in this flat roof building leak in many places. Five rooms in all are quite severely affected by this. The doors and the windows are rotting and the toilet facilities leave a lot to be desired. These prefabs, which are on a solid concrete base, have been in existence since 1970. Normally one expects a ten to 12 year life expectancy from such buildings. It is quite obvious that in 1987 they have far overrun their time. In fact, those who were around when they were put in were told by officials of the Department that they had a certain functional obsolescence, which is a marvellous term and which is meant to indicate that they have a life span. They have certainly come to the end of that life span from what I have seen.

The crucial issue, the bottom line and the question which I hope the Minister will answer here this afternoon is when will permission be given to go to tender in the case of St. Paul's primary school. Already the go-ahead has been given to draw up plans, and permission for the bill of quantities has been given. Could permission to go to tender be given in October or November so that this school can be included in the 1988 Estimate and can a start be made in the spring of next year?

The board of management, the staff, the pupils and parents need hope. They need assurances that their genuine needs are recognised and will be responded to by those in authority. It is not good enough, in 1987, for pupils, teachers and all connected with this school to experience the degree of substandard facility which is their lot at present. I earnestly entreat the Minister to be positive in his response, despite the fact that there are constraints on spending. Indeed, all present at the meeting recognised that. They did not feel they were asking for something which was not their due. They have been patient and I want the Minister of State to recognise that. They need hope and encouragement. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.

Mr. O'Shea

At the outset I thank Senator Bulbulia for affording me half of her time to deal with this very urgent and important Adjournment Matter. As she stated, I am a member of the staff of that school. I have been there since 1970.

The St. Paul area in Waterford has grown from a green field in the sixties to its present population of 9,500. The school was opened in 1968 at a time when a number of larger schools had been built in urban areas but the expected numbers did not materialise, leaving spare classroom space that never came into use. That famous term, already alluded to, "functional obsolescence" was used. The first section of St. Paul's school was built with a limited time span in view. It was a prefabricated, wooden framed building.

As St. Paul's school developed the numbers increased very rapidly. At the various stages both teachers and pupils suffered short term hardship. There is an old house near the school, the Manor of St. John, a very historic building which is in community use. It was there that the school started. At various times classes were held in the Manor of St. John while extensions were under construction. A room in the parish Church was used at another time. For a period two teachers and two classes shared one room, one group going in for the morning period and the other group going in for the afternoon.

There has always been excellent parent support for the school. The standard in the school has always been extremely high. The spirit of co-operation between the school and the community brought the school through the period of growth and development, with its many difficulties. As time went by, the school reached the stage when it became necessary to divide it into a senior and a junior section. The senior school remained in the original building and the junior school was placed in the two later extensions which were built in the conventional style with a much longer life expectancy and much better facilities.

As the years passed, however, the senior school gobbled up money on necessary repairs. Despite all this, there was a perceptible deterioration. Sums of money made available from the Department of Education in recent years proved totally inadequate and the board of management began discussions with the Department to have the building replaced and to add necessary facilities so that the school could operate to its maximum potential in the interests of its 295 pupils.

The type of conditions which obtained in the school are certainly not conducive to full job satisfaction for its 11 teachers. Some years ago a school uniform was successfully introduced into the school. This has added to the pupils' pride in their school and in their area, but the physical appearance of the school, both inside and out, does not stimulate the pupils. The school environment plays a very big part in developing the pupils aesthetically. Unfortunately, the building as it stands does not help this.

There are also the health factors. There are leaks in five classrooms. There is a type of mineral felt roof on the early section and once that starts to leak it is very difficult to deal with. Indeed, in recent times teachers were forced to leave classrooms because of leaks and at present two classes in the senior school are occupying classrooms in the junior school.

However, until six months ago the board of management and the teachers were happy that a six classroom extension, with a general purpose room, a new principal's office, a medical room and a library would be provided in the near future. The teachers who were consulted at various stages during the design process saw an end to their problems and were prepared to continue on in the less than satisfactory conditions in the short term. About six months ago all progress stopped. Letters to the Department of Education went unanswered and the teachers, earlier this year, informed the chairman of the board of management that, unless something was done in the immediate future, the matter would be referred to the INTO for appropriate action.

The problems with the school building relate not only to leaks. Ventilation is another severe problem because windows cannot be opened. The toilet facilities are inadequate. Because the school was designed piecemeal there are different levels on the school site. This involves a certain level of unnecessary danger in the play area. Indeed, because the school was not designed as a unit there are many problems regarding access from one area of the school to another.

The proposed replacement which, in effect, is an extension of the junior school complex, will rectify many of the existing problems relating to lay-out. Because of the different levels of the school complex, the back playground is often flooded in heavy rain. This causes huge problems in terms of access to and exit from the senior school classrooms. The senior school has no general purposes hall and has only limited access to the general purposes hall in the junior school. The remedial class is in a converted hallway and dampness comes through the tiled floor. The remedial teacher has to place heavy duty polythene on the floor to protect rolls of paper and other materials from the dampness.

The teachers, parents, pupils and board of management have been more than reasonable throughout the life of the school. Up to six months ago it appeared that the unfit building would be demolished and that at long last a satisfactory school complex would be provided for both the senior and the junior school. For six months now the school has been ignored and the patience of the parents and teachers has finally run out. It was proposed at a meeting with parents last Monday night to withdraw children from the school until there is a firm commitment to provide the badly needed and long overdue replacement building. The teachers have referred the matter to the INTO for strong action and the district representative is about to undertake a full investigation and then report on the conditions in the school to the national executive of the union who will then decide on the next step.

We are talking about a community that has made great strides in spite of many economic difficulties. There is quite a level of unemployment in the area, but the parents have put tremendous effort into helping the school. I could not begin to describe the many ways they have helped over the years. The attitude of the staff, of the board of management and of the parents at all times has been one of dealing with difficulties as they arise. We have compromised on many issues so that the school could function as effectively and efficiently as possible despite all difficulties. But we have reached the stage now where, unless this building is provided very rapidly, much of the work that has been done in the school is put at risk. For instance, we have no proper library room. There are library books in the school but the access of pupils to those books is limited because of the lay-out of the school and the absence of a proper display area. We have computers, videos, etc. but our major problem is that there is no effective area to bring the pupils to. The new technology which has been provided — and I recognise the generous grants that came from the Department of Education and which helped to provide these — is not being utilised to the full and the pupils are not benefiting to the full.

It is absolutely imperative that a commitment be given that money will be provided for this school in the Estimates as soon as possible. If the money is not provided before the spring of next year it means that the staff and the pupils have to spend another winter in this building. That in itself is totally unacceptable. We want a commitment that this will be the last winter that the pupils of St. Paul's are subjected to these conditions.

Minister of State at the Department of Education (Mr. F. Fahey)

First, I apologise for being slightly late and holding up the House. Secondly, I wish to thank you for welcoming me on my first occasion to address this hallowed House. It is a pleasure for me to do so. Long may this House continue to do the good work it has been doing. I have a keen interest in the debate that has taken place in recent times.

I want to thank Senator Bulbulia and Senator O'Shea for their contributions on the question of the improvement of Lisduggan national school. I am aware of the serious situation that exists there. The Department of Education are concerned about the condition of the buildings and are anxious to proceed as quickly as possible with the improvement. However, we have serious difficulties to contend with, which I will outline for you in a moment.

As both Senators have said, the school is divided into junior and senior schools and there are prefabricated classrooms which require to be replaced. The need for replacement was brought to my Department's attention in September 1982 by the local inspector. Having had discussions about the matter with the school authorities, it was generally agreed that the temporary accommodation was unsuitable and should be replaced. In February 1984 the chairman of the school's board of management made formal application for grant-aid for the provision of six permanent classrooms and the appropriate ancillary accommodation. The processing of the application commenced in February 1984. My Department agreed in principle to grant aid the cost of providing an extension which would bring the permanent accommodation of each of the schools up to nine classrooms. In August of 1984 my Department authorised the reverend chairman to employ his own design team to prepare architectural plans and the planning process has now reached the stage where an acceptable plan has been produced. The next step in the proceedings will be to negotiate with the school authorities for a suitable local contribution.

The planning of the project has not been without complexities but it is sufficient to say that the way is now clear for the conclusion of this phase of the planning process. I have little doubt that it will be possible to reach agreement with the school authorities on the local contribution element of the cost. It will, of course, be necessary to carry out the usual check on enrolments trends. This is a standard procedure when any major building project reaches a decisive stage in this case the prelude to the preparation of the tender documents. When the matter of the local contribution has been settled — and I am instructing my Department's primary building branch to take up this matter with the school authorities as soon as possible — the project will be listed for authorisation to proceed to the preparation of the tender documentation.

The timing of the authorisation will depend on the availability of capital to finance the project. This is where the difficulty arises. I must point out to the House the extreme difficulty we are faced with in the Department of Education at present in that at my last count we had approximately 60 projects at this stage — ready for receipt of tender documentation — but held up for the simple reason that we cannot allow them to go out to tender until we are in a position to finance them in a fairly reasonable period of time following on invitation to tenders. The entire 1987 allocation had been expended by the previous Government before they left office. Therefore, at present I am faced with the difficulty that, the full allocation for 1987 is expended, and I have approximately 60 projects sitting there waiting to go to tender.

Since I took over this position in the Department of Education I have had a stream of deputations and questions in the Dáil and representations from Senators and TDs and school managers around the country about their particular cases. It is clear that there are several hundred cases of a similar nature to Lisduggan. Clearly, it is going to take quite some time before those cases reach commencement of construction stage. Approximately 25 cases went to tender this year and that does not include the 60 waiting in that position at present. Lisduggan is at a stage behind those 60 and therefore it gives an indication of the pressures that are on at the moment. In fact, I have asked my Department officials to give me some indication of what length of time it would take to deal with all the plans which are now on the planning boards. They tell me at the present and most recent rate of progress it would take approximately eight years.

We are, therefore, faced with a very serious problem. I have chosen to spell out exactly to everybody what the extent of this problem is. My Department are now in the process of trying to give priority to the various schemes. We will decide what are the most urgent cases to be proceeded with on the basis of unfit and over-crowded accommodation and we hope to come forward with those priority lists for everybody to see.

Our second objective at present is to try to reduce construction costs as far as possible. At present my Department are actively engaged in trying to design buildings which will be of first-class specification standard but at the lowest possible cost. We will be attempting to replace existing structures rather than constructing new schools, because the day of building new schools at a cost of £400,000 and £500,000 is gone. We have to go back to simpler methods of design and cheaper methods of construction, and we are engaged in that process at the moment.

It is in that context that I have to view Lisduggan school. I will take careful note of the points made by both Senators today. I will have an official from my Department visit the school to give me an up-to-date report on its condition, to establish exactly how serious it is in relation to other projects which are ahead of it in the planning stages. But, I have to be bluntly honest and say that we will have no progress in regard to this school this year. I am concerned at the fact that we may not have much progress next year either if we proceed with the projects which are ahead of Lisduggan in planning.

In order to establish how serious the problem is, we will have an immediate look at the school and consider it in the context of how it rates on a priority basis with other schools throughout the country. Perhaps I did not understand this while I was on that side of the House. Listening to the story which I heard today from both Senators, which I am satisfied is correct, and the facts about every other project throughout the country, it is very difficult to know exactly what to do, or what schemes or projects should be allowed to go forward. We will look at all the projects and decide which are of urgent priority and try to deal with them. Hopefully, I will be putting those priorities before politicians and attempting to get agreement on the worst cases and therefore we will proceed with them.

The number of man-hours lost in my Department in dealing with representations from all of us, including myself, is much too great. We are clogging up the system. If we can agree on what the priorities are, understanding that only so many can go ahead each year for the next two to three years, we can allow our officials to get on with the job of dealing with the planning of those projects and, in particular, get on with the job of attempting to do it on the basis of reduced costs as far as possible. I am quite satisfied that costs of up to £40,000 per classroom are far too high and costs of building schools at £350,000, £400,000 and £500,000 are far too high. If we are to continue with this level of what I described as Rolls Royce building, it will be a long time before we reach the cases that are in need of immediate attention.

I hope that is satisfactory. I am sure it is not, but I feel an obligation to spell out the reality of the situation. I would love to be able to say to the Senators that Lisduggan school will be put to tender before the end of the year but I have to be mindful of the situation. I will certainly have this school examined and report further to both Senators having done so and, at that stage, perhaps, we will be able to see where it rates in the priorities with other schools around the country.

The Seanad adjourned at 4.55 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 17 June 1987.