School Transport Service: Motion.

An Cathaoirleach

Before I call Senator O'Shea, I wish to tell him he has 20 minutes and each speaker after him has ten minutes.

Mr. O'Shea

I move:

That Seanad Éireann calls on the Government to make additional funding available to Bus Éireann in order to maintain the school transport service at its present level throughout 1989.

It is the third time I have spoken on this issue in the House in the past 12 months. I raised it first in June of last year on the Adjournment and I raised it again on 8 February this year. There is an ongoing situation of uncertainty which we in the Labour Party feel requires clarification urgently. The Minister, Deputy Fahey, who responded to us in the House on the last occasion on 8 February told us that the Department were saying to Bus Éireann that they had to provide the service without any reduction or without increased charges on the money that has been allocated. We would contend very strongly that this Pontius Pilate attitude to what is a very severe problem and a problem that is going to get worse is just not good enough.

We are talking about a company which employs many people. There are, for instance, 1,600 drivers of private contract buses in the school transport system and there are 1,100 people working for Bus Éireann in school transport. Last year we had the spectre of privatisation being floated, and in four counties — Sligo, Laois, Cavan and Clare, the business of privatisation was at an advanced stage. Just before I raised this matter in the Seanad last June the Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, met with a high-powered delegation from the Congress of Trade Unions which included representatives of the teachers' unions.

I am very glad to say that the General Secretary of my own union who was subsequently to become the President of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions was one of that delegation. The teachers' unions were there to show their support for Bus Éireann because of the excellent service which was being provided. Indeed, the excellence of the service was referred to by the Minister in her speech on the Adjournment in June of last year and again by the Minister in February.

The problem arises regarding the allocation. Last year £1.5 million was withdrawn from the allocation at the end of the year. This remains a debt for Bus Éireann and I would suggest is causing a certain problem with the finalising of accounts there. Then we found out last October that 18 per cent of the allocation, which is somewhere in the region of £5.8 million of the estimated cost of the running of the service, was being withdrawn. We were talking about a figure as estimated by Bus Éireann to run the service of £35.3 million in 1989. Out of that £35.3 million some £3.7 million comes in in charges. The net cost to the Department would be in the region of £31.6 million. There is a further £5.7 million taken out of this. The directions are that there is to be no reduction in service, there are to be no increased charges. This just does not add up. It makes absolutely no sense because since 1986 in real terms the cost of running the service has been reduced to £3 million.

What are the alternatives? We have had, as I said the last time I spoke here, a very prominent trade union representative saying that 800 jobs would be at risk and 70,000 school children nationwide in September of this year, will face very severe problems. That is 70,000 out of 170,000 children who are catered for.

The Department continue to make payments at the 1988 level. The upshot of this is that come September there is going to be a very, very serious problem regarding funding. In fact, it is highly questionable how efficiently the system will run and, as I said, one prediction from a trade union source is that 800 jobs are at risk and that 70,000 children nationwide could be without the service.

The Department, and the Minister as I understand it, have had no discussions with Bus Éireann, with CIE or with any interested party as to what is to happen in September. Indeed, a spokesman for the Department was quoted on the "Morning Ireland" programme earlier this year as saying that there would be no diminution of services in the present school year. As we all know, the present school year continues until the end of June. What is going to happen in September? It is not good enough, it makes no sense. Bus Éireann from about April each year start to do their forward planning for the September intake. On the basis of what is happening at the moment how can they plan? Is it the secret intention of the Department, their unstated intention, to introduce charges? There is a formula into which the charges will fit very neatly, that is, if you introduce £1 per week charge for the primary school children who are presently travelling free and the children in secondary schools who pay £20 per term up to intermediate certificate and pay £34 per term from intermediate to leaving certificate subject to a family maximum of £70. If these charges were doubled it brings in a very neat figure of £5.7 million. We in the Labour Party would be utterly and absolutely opposed to any such move. We certainly fervently hope that it is not the intention of the Department to do this. Not alone do the Members of this House and the Members of the other House have a right to know what is intended, the people involved with Bus Éireann, whether they are the drivers who work directly for Bus Éireann, supervisory staff, administrative staff, or indeed the contractors who provide 40 per cent of the service to Bus Éireann, they deserve to know where they stand in September.

The other side of the coin is this. If these charges are not introduced — and let me state again my absolute and utter opposition to any such move — how can services be maintained? The Minister owes it to this House to tell us exactly what is envisaged. To sit there and make bland statements, such as the Department expects Bus Éireann to provide the service without any reduction and without any introduction of charges or increases of existing charges, just is not right and is an insult to the Oireachtas. Two of us here present are teachers. Our colleagues want to know what is happening. The stark reality is that Bus Éireann has come out of last year down £1.5 million. They are being paid at the 1988 rate, for this year. Is there any plan in the Department? Is this some sort of blunt instrument type of Thatcherism — that you say you are not giving the money, let September roll on, some kind of a service is there and some jobs may be lost?

That brings us to another question. Under the Programme for National Recovery any forced redundancies in the public service are not allowed. That was at the basis of the meeting held just before I raised this matter in June of last year and, indeed, the Minister for Education and her colleague, the Minister for Labour, were present. One outcome of that meeting, which I know still irks trade union representatives, was that the Minister gave an undertaking at that meeting to respond in writing to Congress. My information is that that never happened. She did make contact by phone later on in the summer, but we still have the situation that we are facing charges, facing vastly reduced services or we are facing redundancies. There is only one solution to this, there is only one way in which this can be done, and that is by putting back the money which was taken out because there is no fat in the estimate from Bus Éireann.

I believe, and I stated this when I was dealing with this problem, that the real reason why the privatisation moves were made last year was related to the problem of the replacement of the fleet of school buses presently operated by Bus Éireann. I instanced at that time how the Minister for Education had spoken about £80 million to replace all the buses. The Minister for Finance had a different figure; his figure was £50 million. The figure of Bus Éireann for new buses was £20 million. If we take the middle figure, the £50 million figure of the Minister for Finance, and divide that by the number of buses it comes out at £100,000 per bus — the cost, in fact, of a super coach. Therefore, the figures of the Minister for Education and the figures of the Minister for Finance were way off target. Bus Éireann have been replacing their fleet and at this stage 130 of the older Bedford school buses have been replaced by 95 former service buses and 32 secondhand buses. I explained, when I spoke here last June, how those buses were available. The board of CIE have taken a decision to provide an additional 32 secondhand buses and 20 further service buses in the present year, so that by the end of 1989 Bus Éireann will have replaced 182 of its buses at absolutely no cost to the Exchequer. Let me stress here again that we are talking about a company that has streamlined its operation very much on the capital side and I have outlined this in terms of the replacement of fleet. On the revenue side I pointed out that since 1986 Bus Éireann, in real terms, are running the service for £3 million less.

There are no discussions going on. The Department has just ignored the situation. My colleague, Senator Ferris, will deal later on in more specific detail with the concerns of the trade union movement and indeed with the concerns of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. The issue is considered so important that the major union involved, the Irish Transport Union, has directly communicated with the Taoiseach seeking a meeting, because they feel that no progress is being made with the Minister. There is no progress and no meetings are taking place. It is not good enough. What exactly are the Department at? They seem to be into an ongoing exercise of crucifying employees of Bus Éireann, parents, children, who as time goes on are in great doubt about what service will be there and whether there is the possibility of charges. Let me say, in case I forgot to say it earlier, that charges are totally unacceptable. The Minister owes this House the answer to our questions.

There is only one answer to this problem, there is only one solution to it so that services can be maintained at their present level without any introduction of charges and that is to put back the money that has been taken out. As well as the £5.7 million taken out this year there was £1.5 million taken out last year. I would like the Minister to tell us why that £1.5 million was taken out and on what basis it was taken out. There seems to be almost an "ask me a number" approach regarding reductions for school transport. It seems to be an area that is particularly targeted for privatisation; but, on the other hand, the Minister for Education's discussions with private bus operators did not indicate that they would feel capable of running the service. Indeed, the Department found that the operations that were to have come on stream in the four counties last year were not cost effective and were not going to improve the system. I am at a loss in regard to this. That is why I keep trying to find out the rationale behind it. Why not state intentions? We had the Book of Estimates in October. We had the budget in January. Still the Department are not telling us what they intend to do.

May I refer to the amendment that is being proposed by the Government? It is mind-boggling. It says it "notes the Government's decision to maintain school transport services at present levels throughout 1989 within existing criteria and at no increased charges." Admittedly, that is rather difficult to understand. This is the sort of amendment on which Government Senators can argue that they supported virtually anything on it. It notes the Government's decision. I note that there is no confidence in that motion regarding the Government's ability to deliver on its decision. It is a question of sufficient money not being there. This is merely a noting amendment. It is telling us nothing except that the Seanad notes the Government's decision. Everybody who knows anything about education or school transport knows very well that it is utterly and absolutely impossible to provide the service at the same level as at present without charges for the rest of this year. The system will work until June, but there is a very large crisis facing us in September. It is about time this Government came clean with the people who work in Bus Éireann, with the contractors who are employed by Bus Éireann, with the parents, children and teachers.

We talk about planning for education. How can anyone plan for education? How can parents plan with any confidence for education when they just do not know what sort of services will be available to their children. Perhaps this is? just a cynical exercise in the Department, saying that they expect Bus Éireann to come up with a proposal on how services can be maintained and no charges introduced inside the present rules and perhaps in late summer there will be a Supplementary Estimate coming from somewhere and the money will be found then. That is something that may happen. If that is what is about to happen, it is cynical and a crime against the young people of this country.

Mr. Ferris

I second the motion in the name of the Labour Party. We totally reject the Government side's amendment which, if you read it as Senator O'Shea has read it on to the record, is either the miracle of the loaves and fishes or a three-card trick — now you see it and now you do not see it. It is impossible for us, no matter how responsible we are in this House, to relate this amendment to the Estimates published under this heading. It is impossible to look at the estimate prepared by Bus Éireann and the trade union movement and to reconcile that with any statement that has been made by the Minister, the Government or indeed by the Minister of State who is present. We welcome the Minister of State, Deputy F. Fahey, who has always been helpful and co-operative with us. However, we feel that tonight the Minister herself should be here because there is a case to answer and there is no satisfaction forthcoming from the Minister in this area. We are afraid that the case to be answered is not being answered. I shall quote the Minister of State's response to Senator O'Shea on the Adjournment Debate on 8 February. We would not be wasting our Private Members' time again if we were not concerned that there is a major problem about to arise in this area, an area that affects many people.

The Minister on that occasion, on 8 February 1989, column 2120 of the Official Report, said:

Indeed, the Senator will be aware that substantial savings are required in the current year, as he has pointed out, and are expected through the entire system of Bus Éireann. For the present it is the intention to examine all possible avenues for a reduction of expenditure within these existing structures. I consider it a matter for Bus Éireann to come forward with proposals for savings on administration and other costs which will meet the Government's target without reducing services to schools.

The Minister said that in February, which means that he is looking for additional savings to meet the demand of the Government. The Minister then says in her amendment that the service is going to be continued as it is. The Estimates published this year, passed by the Dáil, show £25.8 million under this heading. Taking into account the contribution from parents and children of £3.7 million, it is still a total of £31.6 million. That in the considered opinion of Congress and of Bus Éireann is £5.8 million short of what is required but the problem is compounded by the fact that the Department withdrew £1.5 million from Bus Éireann at the end of last year, which represented a short fall on the previous year.

Bus Éireann are expected to carry an overall shortfall this year of £7.3 million and still maintain the service. Bus Éireann are saying, and rightly so, that that cannot be done without serious consequences for the service itself. We reckon that on the division of this allocation this service will discontinue in September unless the Minister is honest enough to say that there is going to be a Supplementary Estimate. From all the statements so far that we can garner, there is no Supplementary Estimate forthcoming.

This does not just involve people employed in the public sector represented by the Congress of Trade Unions. As is pointed out by Senator O'Shea, this involves many private contractors as well, and rightly so, because we have advocated that this school transport system can only function if it is a mixed system of the public and private sectors operating this service throughout Ireland. The difficulties of servicing rural Ireland properly means that there has to be a mix. There are 770 Bus Éireann school buses, 40 minibuses, 100 service buses on a part-time basis and the extensive use of existing scheduled services. So Bus Éireann within their remit can manage with the estimate that was given last year to actually provide a service with the exception of the £1.5 million shortfall. The private sector are producing about 1,100 private contractors who employ themselves about 350 buses and 1,250 minibuses or motorcar systems. This involves a total employment in the public sector of about 1,089 people and the private contractors employ about 1,600 people.

The private contractors have confirmed that it would be administratively impossible for them to carry these children throughout the country, so there should be no question of privatisation in this sector. There are 86,000 post-primary children, 59,000 primary school children, 9,000 special school classes — handicapped and otherwise — 12,000 concessionary passengers carried in total, of which Bus Éireann deals with 60 per cent or 99,000, and Bus Éireann through the private operators contract out the other 40 per cent, which is 67,000. Those are extraordinarily high numbers of people who are depending on this service. The board of Bus Éireann and the Congress of Trade Unions are so concerned that they have decided that the Minister has not properly addressed this problem, and so much so that they have taken it upon themselves to write directly to the Taoiseach. If there was a dialogue going on between the Minister, as she said there was about to be, and Bus Éireann or indeed the Trade Union Movement, whose members cannot be made compulsorily redundant, there would be no need for the Irish transport workers to write to An Taoiseach, Charles J. Haughey, in the following terms:

Dear Taoiseach,

Thank you for your letter of the 28th February in relation to Bus Éireann School Transport Scheme.

It was necessary to write to you initially on the 10th January, in view of the manner in which Bus Éireann is being denied the necessary financial support to operate the Schools Transport Scheme. There was a shortfall of £1.5 million in payments from the Department of Education in 1988. The provision by the Department for 1989 in respect of the School Transport Scheme is £25.8 million, which leaves the Company short of finance by £5.8 million or £7.3 million in total.

Therefore, it is only a matter of time before large-scale redundancies occur within Bus Éireann unless there is corrective action taken by the Government. Should these redundancies take place, it would certainly be at variance with the intent and spirit of the Programme for National Recovery between the social partners.

We believe that plans currently being debated at Department of Education level, to privatise the School Transport Scheme even on a pilot basis, if proceeded with will decimate this Company, which currently employs just over 2,000 people.

Taoiseach, it was against this background and coupled with the Minister for Education's negative responses to various representations over a period of time on this vital subject, that I found it necessary to write to you on 10th January last.

That is a damning letter to the Taoiseach from the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. It is a condemnation of the attitude of the Minister for Education and how she deals with this problem. It is triggered off by representations within the trade union movements which have been made to us and have indeed been put in writing to Mr. Kennedy, the Managing Director of Bus Éireann, who has replied to the Congress of Trade Unions as follows:

The current financial position is as follows:

(1) in 1988, full services were provided during that year at a total cost of £31.8 million to the Department of Education. When the final payment for these services was made by the Department of Education, a sum of £1.5 million was deducted and has since not been paid.

You, Minister, are stealing money they need to run the service and if that money is not replaced I am afraid that Bus Éireann, as it is constituted, will not be able to survive. Decisions have been made by people who are outside the political arena. It is our statutory responsibility to pin the Minister with the responsibility for making the case to Cabinet in the presence of the Taoiseach, to ensure that the service which she has committed herself to retaining remains as it is. That can only be done by a Supplementary Estimate or budget at the end of the year. They cannot continue stealing the subsidy from Bus Éireann. If they do, a Chathaoirligh, it means there will be an intent to cross-subsidise within Bus Éireann, Iarnród Éireann and Dublin Bus. There is no way this can be done without damage to the overall structures. We have a responsibility in this area. I hope the Minister on this occasion will respond positively to the Labour Party's pleading for the service.

An Cathaoirleach

Before I call Senator Mullooly there are certain words that are not parliamentary language and "stealing" is one of them. It is a pretty strong word.

Mr. Ferris

We will let things stand.

Mr. Mullooly

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

notes the Government's decísíon to maintain the school transport services at present levels throughout 1989 within existing criteria and at no increased charges."

I am delighted, as I am sure the Minister is, that we are debating this motion and the amendment to it tonight. The motion raises the question as to what exactly the position will be in relation to the school transport service during 1989. It is important that this situation should be clarified for everybody's benefit. By everybody I mean pupils, parents, teachers and school authorities and also Bus Éireann who provide the service as agent for the Minister for Education.

I say this because the school transport service is a very important service. It is particularly important in the part of the country which I come from, and indeed throughout most of rural Ireland. Without such a service many thousands of pupils would have extreme difficulty in attending school on a regular basis. It is no harm to point out that the present school transport scheme was inaugurated in 1968. This year marks its coming of age. I believe that everyone concerned can look back with satisfaction on the operation of the scheme over the 21 years which have elapsed since then. As a result of the post-primary school transport scheme, access to second level, and consequently to third level education, became a reality for many families for whom prior to 1968 such access was only a dream.

The proposer and seconder of the motion made great play of the fact that there has been a reduction in the 1989 Department of Education provision for school transport and they have raised many questions in relation to the level of service which will obtain during the remainder of the current year. The amendment, however, sets out exactly what the position will be for the rest of 1989. The Government's decision is that throughout 1989 the school transport services will be maintained at present levels within existing criteria and without increased charges. I am satisfied this decision will be widely welcomed throughout the country.

The fact that the Government are striving for greater cost efficiency in the operation of the school transport service should be commended rather than criticised. Despite the reduction in the Estimate, to which the mover and seconder of the motion referred, the payment which will be made by the Department of Education to Bus Éireann for the provision of the school transport service will still be in excess of £26 million. In anybody's language this is a substantial amount of taxpayers' money. Besides, as I understand the situation, the payment from the Department of Education to Bus Éireann for transport services is only part of what Bus Éireann get by way of subvention from the Exchequer. Therefore, the reduction in the payment for the school transport service cannot be looked at in isolation from Bus Éireann's overall operation. It must be looked at in the context of that company's total budget.

The Government have a responsibility to the taxpayers of the country to ensure that the greatest possible value is got for every pound of public money spent. It is only right they should demand that Bus Éireann, in common with every other State organisation, should strive for greater efficiency. The greater the level of efficiency which is achieved in every sector, the more substantial will be the savings which will be made. The Government would be failing in their duty if they did not strive for such efficiency.

It is not correct to suggest that efficiency can only be achieved at the expense of the service or by a curtailment of the service. In fact, not alone could greater efficiency lead to substantial savings but it could also result in an even better service. I believe it is generally recognised that, in common with other State companies in recent times, there is an increasing level of efficiency in Bus Éireann. Consequently, I am confident there will be little difficulty in maintaining the school transport service at present levels on a reduced budget.

I would not presume to tell Bus Éireann where to look for economies but I am satisfied that there must be areas of the country where it would be possible to rearrange the service so that a greater number of fee-paying pupils could be accommodated. I believe the operation of the service in every part of the country should be examined with a view to reducing cost and generating more income. When the school bus routes were originally designated I am satisfied that pupil distribution at that time was a significant factor in influencing the decisions which were made in relation to routes and pick-up points. In many areas the position in regard to pupil distribution has changed very much over the years. Yet, in the majority of such areas the traditional routes are the ones which are still being used; the routes which were serviced by a big bus are still being serviced by a big bus and the routes which were serviced by a minibus are still being serviced by a minibus. These are all matters which could be looked at in the context of seeking greater cost efficiency.

I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate Bus Éireann on the arrangements which the company devised last year to facilitate the replacement of the school bus fleet as the need for this arises. These arrangements should have the effect of reducing maintenance, repair and running costs over the coming years. In addition, I am quite sure that Bus Éireann, like every other individual and organisation in the country, will have benefited from such factors as reduced interest rates and the other reduced operating costs which have become a fact of life since the Government came to office.

It is heartening to note that there will be no increase in school transport charges in 1989. I am not opposed to the principle of making reasonable charges for services paid for out of public funds, provided that the people who are asked to pay the charges are in a position to do so without undue hardship. Charging for services results in a greater public appreciation of the value of the services for which the charges are made. However, in the case of school transport charges one has to take account of the many parents who are only slightly above the medical card eligibility limits and who have great difficulty in meeting all the costs associated with keeping children in education. In most cases such parents are not eligible to qualify for the free book scheme and they must also meet exam entrance fees in full. This, of course, raises the question of whether entitlement to a medical card should be the criterion on which decisions in relation to all these matters should be based. This is a question I have raised many times both in this House and outside.

As I said earlier, the scheme will be 21 years in existence this year. I feel it is appropriate that we should compliment CIE, and more recently Bus Éireann, on the manner in which they have handled the operation over that period. Over the years as a public representative I have had occasion from time to time to contact the school transport office for my own area which is based in Athlone. At various times I have had queries in relation to changes in bus routes, pick-up points or catchment boundary problems or other problems which are brought to my attention and I always found the people with whom I dealt to be most courteous and most helpful. They were always prepared to listen and discuss every case at length. While my representations were not always successful I was on every occasion given detailed explanations and reasons for the decisions which had been taken.

I would also like to pay tribute to all the drivers who have been involved in the school transport scheme over the years. They have an exceptional record for safety and efficiency over the 21 years the scheme has been in operation. I think the record will show that both accidents and complaints against drivers have been very few and far between.

While the day-to-day operation of the scheme is carried out by Bus Éireann as agent for the Minister for Education, it is a matter for the Department of Education to determine the eligibility of pupils for the scheme. In this regard I would like to pay a tribute to the Minister for Education, Deputy Mary O'Rourke, and to her Minister of State, Deputy F. Fahey, who is here this evening, for their willingness at all times to listen to representations in relation to school transport problems and the individual cases of hardship which inevitably arise from time to time. My experience is that both the Minister and the Minister of State are at all times prepared to have such cases investigated and to respond in a positive manner whenever possible.

I am sure that everybody in this House and everybody involved with or with an interest in education will welcome the Government's decision to maintain the school transport services at the current levels and within the existing criteria during 1989. Because of the Government's decision as outlined in the amendment, the extra funding which the motion calls for is not necessary and I would, therefore, ask the House to give its approval to the amendment.

Mr. Harte

On the question of the transport service for school children I would like to put the emphasis on employment. I would like to read a letter to the Taoiseach from Mr. Tom Walsh, National Group Secretary, Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, Industrial Group No. 4.

Dear Taoiseach,

Thank you for your letter of the 28th February in relation to Bus Éireann School Transport Scheme.

An Cathaoirleach

I think you may be about to read a letter that Senator Ferris has read already into the record.

Mr. Harte

My major concern, as a person associated with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, is the question of employment, and the situation that has developed nowadays of throwing people onto the scrap-heap. There is no doubt that CIE are not happy with the situation. On the question of redundancies, CIE are quite satisfied that they will have to lay people off.

From the information I have gleaned, the estimated cost of providing the current level and standard of services as required by the Department of Education in 1989 is £31.6 million. The provision in the Department for school transport is, however, only £25.8 million which represents a shortfall of £5.8 million. There is no case for the cross-subsidisation of the school transport services and the consequences of this shortfall are, therefore, very serious for the school transport scheme and all associated with it. Discussions have taken place with the Department officials and it has been pointed out to them and to the Minister that it is not possible to provide the school transport service to current levels and standards in 1989 unless the full estimate of £31.6 million is made available. This is the information available from CIE.

This estimate actually reflects a reduction of £3 million on the 1986 costs in real terms and shows that considerable savings have been made in recent years. The Minister for Education has stated that "Bus Éireann is providing an efficient, safe and cost effective service" which is in total contradiction to her attitude on funding the scheme.

Bus Éireann are aware the Minister has stated that there should be no reduction in the scheme for this school year. Bus Éireann have stated they will do their best to meet the target. However, they express some doubts with regard to the current provisions. They believe there will be very little funds available for transport for the new term beginning in the autumn and, as a consequence, there will be large-scale reductions. Therefore, it puts them in the awkward position of trying to make plans to meet the situation. I do not know what options have been put to the board, but I understand that the board of CIE will not be able to meet the costs and inevitably this will lead to redundancies.

Many points arise from the Department's attitude to the board. The sad situation is that there are no discussions taking place between CIE, Bus Éireann, the Minister and her officials. The contradiction is that under the terms of the Programme for National Recovery, Bus Éireann staff cannot be made redundant compulsorily; yet, in essence if there is no money there will be redundancies.

Bus Éireann have been introducing secondhand buses into the school fleets since the mid-seventies. We have talked about safety and efficiency but there will be more talks if a contingency plan has to be drawn up to make up the shortfall in money. Bus Éireann are not even sure how much money the Minister will spend on funding school transport up to the end of June and they are not even sure what they will have left for the end of the year. Does the Minister expect CIE to start funding the shortfall out of their own subsidies? This is not practical for them and they will not be able to do it. They are doing a great job in recent times particularly since the management changes and so on. The workers have given a lot. Here we see that not only will some families be put in great jeopardy trying to get the children to school but that the people who are depending on Bus Éireann for a livelihood are liable to be caught in the trap of redundancy and thrown on the scrap heap the same as many other people. I do not know if the Government expect CIE to fund the school transport scheme from their subsidy. If so, does the Minister or the Government realise that they are robbing Peter to pay Paul? The inevitable consequences of that will be forced redundancies in Dublin Bus and Iarnród Éireann which would be contrary to conditions in the Programme for National Recovery that apply to the staff of CIE.

Is the Minister aware that CIE are considering the compulsory redundancy of 1,200 people? That is our information, which is of major concern to us. As members of the Labour Party we have an association with many of the trade unions and it is up to us to do something. What is the Minister's attitude towards privatising the school transport scheme? If this happens does the Minister realise that the black economy can develop while at the same time 1,200 people can be put out of work? We wonder how this can be reconciled with the repeated statements from the Minister that CIE is efficient and gives value for money and is providing an excellent and satisfactory service for over 20 years.

We also wonder if the Minister will ever pay the £1.5 million that is owned to CIE since last year? The Irish Congress of Trade Unions so far have not had a reply from the Minister confirming the undertaking she gave them at a meeting with the Minister for Labour, Deputy Ahern, in 1988. Perhaps the Minister will tell us something about that? We wonder why Mr. Walsh of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union has seen fit to write to the Taoiseach to express his serious concern about the Minister's failure to respond to the various representations both on the funding and pilot schemes. For example, we understand that the Minister telephoned the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to tell them that the pilot schemes were not going ahead while at the same time it was common knowledge that she was endeavouring to get the private bus sector to take over and administer the scheme.

If these are charges, so be it. We have tried to dig out the information and this is what has come to hand. We do not know the full extent of its accuracy or otherwise, but the onus will be on the Minister to give us some explanations. Is it that the Minister has failed to persuade the private sector because they are aware of the massive amount of administration involved and that the only way they could give effect to the scheme is by operating the black economy?

These are all matters of concern to us and to the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. We are very concerned about the effects of this, not only that children would be deprived of a chance of getting to school because of the extra cost to families, but also the inevitable consequences leading to redundancies. We see it as the crudest possible use of public moneys. In the end you are working towards uplifting the status ridden society that we have at present, even though the taxpayers and the public will be the people who will have to meet the costs.

The board of CIE are satisfied that they cannot meet the situation and that both the union and themselves will have to come together for discussions. It would be rather unusual to see the Minister having the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the board of CIE jointly snapping at her heels. We have posed some questions to the Minister. We trust that in the responses we will get some information on it read into the record.

Mr. McGowan

I welcome the opportunity of saying a few words on this amendment. First of all, it is very important for Members of the House to stand up and voice their opinions clearly on an important issue such as this. Expenditure on school transport is not much different from expenditure on social welfare, health, education and the whole area of public service. I believe it is popular for all of us in public life to give the impression that we are always looking for more in order to appeal to the people on the ground whom we represent. That might read well, but the reality is that those who are paying for the services today are very alert to what the Government are doing about expenditure. That is why the Government are getting credit for their positive approach. This country has done very well because our school transport expenditure is a very substantial bill.

I would compliment those in charge of administering the school transport service for maintaining the service in 1989. I come from County Donegal, a county that has more school transport problems than any other part of the country because of sectarian differences and all the problems associated with rough country terrain. We are happy that the system has been maintained at its present level. I ask the Minister of State to urge his Department to review the situation. Every public representative in the country is aware of what has been said by all of the private operators who are working for CIE. They say that if they got half of what CIE are getting they would run a more efficient transport service. That might be an exaggeration.

I am satisfied that the scheme was set up to benefit CIE. The survival of CIE was a consideration when the school transport system was set up. I was on many deputations to the Department. I met the officials from CIE and from the Department, and I know that it was an important part of CIE's revenue. I believe that too great a part was going to CIE at the expense of restricting the service on the ground. The input of taxpayers' money through the Government is a substantial benefit to CIE.

I hope to see the day when the Department will review the whole school transport system and that we will cut out the awkward, difficult procedure of employing CIE to employ other bus operators in the country. In this day and age when people run their business very efficiently, it is inefficient to put money into CIE to hire people down the country to run a school transport service. I hope we will get rid of that system, that we will extend the service. I believe that for the same amount of money we could substantially extend the service to many parts of the country. If CIE now have to be subsidised, if they are ever to stand on their own feet, it is about time that it was looked at. There is no room for inefficiency. I certainly hope the Government are able to maintain the school transport system but I believe it will be extended only if there are substantial savings. I am looking forward to that being done.

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

I would like to express my thanks to the Senators who contributed to this debate and to say I appreciate the concern they have expressed in regard to the school transport system. The issue before the House is, in the first instance, whether the existing level of transport service for our school children will be maintained.

At the outset I want to allay the fears of the Senators on this issue. The school transport service will be maintained at its present level throughout 1989. The Government are committed to this and the Minister for Education has made statements to this effect on a number of occasions already. There need be no fears, therefore, that the children will be left without services from September or at some other time during the year or that services will be curtailed. There has been quite a bit of scaremongering on this issue and I want to say categorically that there is no basis for such claims.

In regard to the matter of funding, you will be aware that the Government have been concerned at the high cost of running the scheme and have sought to have it reduced. While the prime responsibility is to ensured the satisfactory delivery of a transport service to approximately 160,000 primary and post-primary pupils, the Department have the responsibility to ensure that the State gets the best possible value for the money it expends on this service.

There is general acceptance of the fact that Bus Éireann are doing a very good job in delivering the service under the terms of the scheme. Their expertise and spread of operations were of inestimable value in the establishment and consolidation of the scheme and continue to be vital factors in the successful provision of day-to-day services. Great emphasis is placed on the care and safety of children and on the fair and consistent application of the terms of the scheme. The Minister on a number of occasions has expressed her appreciation of Bus Éireann's role in these areas and I want again to put on record that appreciation.

The House will accept, however, that notwithstanding these very positive aspects of the operation of the scheme, the Government have to be satisfied that it is fully cost effective. The view is that the cost of the scheme — currently over £30 million in net terms — is unacceptably high and that measures have to be taken to reduce this cost. The allocation made in the 1988 Estimates provided for a reduction of £1.5 million in the amount payable to Bus Éireann in respect of add-on administrative charges and this was duly implemented. The Government decided in preparing the 1989 Estimates that further savings of £5 million on administrative charges and other costs should be effected in 1989. The provision in the Estimates has been allocated accordingly.

As I have said, however, the Government have stipulated that the necessary savings be found without reducing services to schools. In making their decision on the Estimates, the Government asked that Bus Éireann be approached with a view to effecting savings. Officials of my Department met representatives of Bus Éireann without proposals emerging at the time as to how Bus Éireann would propose to meet the Government target. I would like to recall that the idea for pilot projects which was proposed last year was mooted because of the large cost of replacing the school bus fleet. In 1987 Bus Éireann estimated that this would cost over £20 million. However, when arrangements were in train for the pilot projects Bus Éireann succeeded in making a deal for the purchase of good secondhand buses in Britain at a cost of £1-£1.5 million a year over a five-year period. In view of this arrangement, it was decided to defer the question of pilot projects.

The replacement of the school bus fleet concerned capital expenditure. I want to emphasise, however, that the achievement of current costs savings is also a major element in the objective to provide a fully cost effective school transport service. Such savings could be expected through the entire system of CIE. Of course, it will continue to be necessary to have a rigorous but fair application of the provisions of the scheme to ensure equitable treatment for all within our cost limits. These provisions have served their purpose well over the years in meeting the objectives of the scheme which is to provide a basic level of service to those children who would otherwise have difficulty in attending school regularly. It is not proposed to change these conditions.

In regard to charges, I know that concern has already been expressed, and again here tonight, about the likelihood of increase in view of the reduced funding. I want to assure the House that there will be no increases in charges in the current year, nor will any new charges be introduced. I think this is noteworthy in the light of the fact that there has been no increase in charges since September, 1987, and it is a reflection of the Government's concern that a basic service be available to all eligible children at the lowest possible cost to parents.

For the present, therefore, it is the intention to examine all possible avenues for the reduction of expenditure within the existing structures. I consider, however, it is a matter for Bus Éireann to come forward with proposals on savings on administrative and other costs which will meet the Government's targets without reducing services to schools. I have every confidence it will be possible to achieve our targets in this way, to continue to provide a highly efficient and satisfactory school transport service.

Mr. O'Shea

One is rather touched by all the compliments coming both from the Minister and from the Government side regarding the efficency of Bus Éireann, regarding the marvellous way they have run the service, apart from some rather extraordinary statements from Senator McGowan to the effect that the private operators could operate at half what CIE are getting. I do not proposes to deal with that. I think that comment is sufficient in itself.

For the benefit of the House, and for the benefit of the Minister, let us see what exactly Bus Éireann do. There is a list here of the duties they carry out. There is the verification of eligibility of primary pupils, the planning and organisation of routes, checking road conditions, timetables, loadings etc., allocations of vehicles to meet ongoing requirements, recruitment, payment, supervision of private contractors, ensuring all vehicles meet laid down requirements in terms of insurance, operating licences, road worthiness, certificates, driver licensing, driver fitness etc., collection of charges and issue of travel permits in each school term, monitoring and control of costs, supervision and checking of services — that is for 6,250 routes — undertaking a wide range of safety-related procedures, special requirements associated with transport of 9,000 pupils attending schools for mentally and physically handicapped, liaison with the Department of Education, transport liaison officers, school managers, principal teachers etc. Regarding aspects of the scheme I am sure the next item is one that strikes a chord in this House — responding to members of the public, local associations and public representatives on queries arising.

The point of view that is being put across is that, out of an estimated cost of £35.3 million, with charges of £3.7 million, which brings us down to £31.6 million, you can wipe out £5.7 million and retain the service at its present level. As the Minister has said, there is no question of charges coming in this year. I feel that approach is insulting to the intelligence of the Members of the House. Senator McGowan made comments about the efficiency of the system. In my own area in the south-east five people operate the system for five counties. There is a very sophisticated computerised system there. It runs in the face of reality and logic to say that such a cutback in the allocation to Bus Éireann can be effected and that the service can be maintained with no charges introduced.

A recent letter from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions puts another perspective on what we are talking about. It was sent to the Managing Director of Bus Éireann and said:

At a meeting on Thursday 16 February, 1989, the unions representing members in Bus Éireann expressed serious disquiet regarding developments in regard to the School Bus Scheme.

The representatives noted the extent of the shortfall in funds being provided for the Scheme by the Department of Education.

The unions discussed the likely impact of the shortfall in funding on workers in the School Bus Scheme and on the workers in the company. They agreed that before deciding on any course of action, they should seek information from the company as to the effect of the reduction in funding.

It would be appreciated if, as a matter of urgency, you could let me have information regarding the company view of the effect of the reduction in the funding for the Scheme, together with any proposals the company may be considering in respect of the Scheme or Bus Éireann.

Should you consider that a meeting to discuss the matter would be of assistance I shall be obliged if you will contact me.

We have heard that savings can be effected throughout Bus Éireann, that somehow or other savings can come from scheduled services or from within Bus Éireann. If Senators look at what is happening they will realise that type of approach does not relate to the situation we are talking about. The bottom line is that school transport was cut back by £1.5 million last year, the service was operated at a cost that was £1.5 million more than was provided by the Government. This year the service is going to cost a further £5.7 million more than the Government have provided, if it is to continue at its present level.

I take the Minister's point that there was some sort of meeting between the officials of Bus Éireann and officials of his Department, but is it not also true to say that the officials from Bus Éireann indicated that they could not possibly operate within the limits of the money provided?

I find the whole approach of the Minister's Department lamentable. We know as little going out of here tonight as we knew coming here. No talks whatsoever are going on. The unions are seeking to meet the Taoiseach because of the way the Minister for Education is dealing with the situation. The 1,100 people directly employed in the school transport service in Bus Éireann, the 1,600 drivers who are involved with contractors, the 170,000 children and their parents and the teachers of those children do not know and cannot be convinced there will be a service next September at the level we have at the moment without charges. Let us cut out the codology. Come September, the money will be virtually spent. What happens in September? The Minister's Department know that Bus Éireann are providing a service at the level of the estimate that was given to that Department. The Department still hold the position that £5.7 million is being cut out of that. Early in September the system will no longer be able to work and there will be a grave problem. As I have already stated, it is seen as costing as much as 800 jobs and, even more important, 70,000 children will be left without service.

Let us show a little respect for the people in this House, particularly the people on this side of the House who have raised this matter. The Minister and his Department are arguing that what is there facing us, according to any logical evaluation of the situation, will not happen. The Minister knows that the money will have run out by the second week in September. What happens then? He has not addressed himself to that question. Pious platitudes are trotted out by Members on the other side of the House and by the Minister regarding the very efficient and safe service that is provided by Bus Éireann.

I have given a list of the functions of Bus Éireann. I have also indicated the low levels of staff that are required for administration. As the Minister found out last year when she tried her pilot projects, these magical little schemes that are dreamed up on the sleeve of somebody's shirt do not work out. In the real world of school transport that figure of £35.3 million is the actual figure required to keep the service at its present level, without charges or a diminution of service.

There is no way that we in the Labour Party will accept the amendment by the Government. It is very significant that the Fianna Fáil Senators in this House did not come out a lot more firmly in support of the Minister's colleague, the Minister for Education, in her decision. It is nothing a decision but no more than that. There is no confidence in the Minister because, I suggest, the members of Fianna Fáil realise that extra money will have to be found and will be of the order of the £5.7 million we are talking about, of the £1.5 million that was not provided last year. The cynical exercise continues since last year, through the Book of Estimates in October, through the £1.5 million reduction on the final payment last November, on through the budget, through to the time we last raised this issue and onto tonight.

The situation is absolutely and utterly unacceptable. I will come back to the Minister in September. I believe this cynical exercise will be cured by a Supplementary Estimate coming in later on this year when much pain has been caused to many people, particularly many young people.