Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 Jun 1990

Vol. 125 No. 6

Adjournment Matter. - Whitehall (Dublin) School.

Mr. Costello

I welcome the Minister to the House. I particularly welcome the fact that the relevant Minister turned up for a debate of this nature rather than sending along a Minister of State who does not have quite the same level of responsibility. The matter I raise tonight is the need for the Minister for Education to urgently provide permanent accommodation and proper facilites for the pupils of St. Aidan's Christian Brothers Secondary School, Whitehall, Dublin 9, to replace the present totally inadequate prefabricated structure which has been in existence for over 20 years.

This year St. Aidan's CBS in Whitehall is celebrating its 25th anniversary. The school was founded in 1964 when a request was made to the Brothers to set up a school in the area. They replied with alacrity and in September 1964 the school was opened to serve the Whitehall, Larkhill, Beaumont, Santry and Ballymun areas in what was then the primary school, Bun Scoil Linbh Íosa. In 1966 they went ahead and purchased over nine acres of land to set up a permanent structure. In 1967 the late Donogh O'Malley introduced free education. This was not just the year of free education, it was also the era of the great prefab, this fibreglass, wood and chipboard structure which had a planned, built-in obsolescence after ten years.

One of the great tragedies of that time was that so many temporary structures were established when permanent structures could have been established for almost the same amount of money. In 1967 it cost £218,180 to construct the prefabricated structure in St. Aidan's when the estimate for the permanent structure was £280,000. It was intended to be a temporary structure because planning permission was got for only seven years and was never renewed. All this was forgotten about as the years went by and, of course, the structure began to deteriorate.

From 1977 onwards there were constant running repairs that cost in the region of £70,000. At the beginning of the eighties the school management were looking at the situation to see what would be the future for their school. In 1983 they commissioned an architect's report which was a damning criticism of the structure as it was at the time. The roof was "in a very sorry state" to quote the report and there had been poor quality work done on the original structure. The felt lining was not of sufficient quality and there was water ponding on the roof. It was unsafe to work on the roof and instead of the impermeable marine plywood that was specified, there was a lot of chipboard panelling. There was a lot of wet rot seeping through. The solution was to reroof the school at that time, which was the beginning of the eighties, at an enormous cost. There were structural problems as a result of the wood absorbing the water that was getting through from the roof. The report was confirmed by the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards in the same year. The minimum cost to shore it up would have been £0.5 million that would have been uneconomical in the circumstances.

It was at that point that very serious attention was given to getting the permanent structure that had been promised initially. In 1984 the management were promised a school to accommodate 450 pupils and this number was increased to 550 in 1986. At this time planning permission was sought for the construction of the new school. In 1986-87 a new heating furnace was installed and grant aided by the Department of Education on condition that the furnace be incorporated into the new school building. Obviously the intention was that the new structure would be in place very shortly. In February 1987 we had an election and Deputy O'Rourke became Minister for Education. Since then virtually everybody in the political arena has been beating a path to the Minister's door in relation to this school.

There is agreement on all sides — from Deputy Bertie Ahern, Minister for Labour, who is a past pupil, to the Taoiseach, Deputy Charles Haughey — that the Minister should seriously do something about this. While they were beating a path to the Minister's door she was beating around the bush. Meetings took place both public and private. There was a Private Members Bill, questions were raised in the Dáil, there was an Adjournment debate——

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

There was no Private Members' Bill.

Mr. Costello

There were statements made that the matter was under review and that it was being looked at in the context of the capital programme, in the context of available accommodation and in the context of rationalisation. All along, there was an indication that the matter would be set right eventually. It was a long-fingering exercise by the Minister. In 1989 a meeting was held with the Minister and she promised a reply within two months but nothing happened.

In May of this year there was what I would regard as a disgraceful happening when a parliamentary question was due to be answered in the Dáil on 22 May. Brother Heneghan the Provincial was called into the Minister's Department to meet with her officials. The following day the question came up and as an indication of the Minister's concern it was stated that she was meeting constantly with management. I thought that was very sharp practice indeed. Today there was to have been a meeting between management and representatives of the school and the Minister or her officials.

Mrs. O'Rourke

With me, but I was booked to be here for three hours so the meeting could not be held. The Senator is a signatory to the motion.

Mr. Costello

I understand that it was cancelled sine die.

Mrs. O'Rourke

No, it was cancelled because Senator Costello summoned me to the Seanad.

Mr. Costello

It was cancelled at 24 hours' notice.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The motion was put down in Senator Costello's name.

Mr. Costello

I understand management are available to meet the Minister at any time. This Adjournment debate was originally agreed to two weeks ago.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Senator made an arrangement with Deputy Frank Fahey on the telephone to cancel it. Sharp practice I call that.

Mr. Costello

No, he made the arrangement.

Mrs. O'Rourke

He made the arrangement and the Senator agreed to it. Let us be clear.

Mr. Costello

I agreed to it in order to facilitate him. He was down in Connemara and specifically requested——

Mrs. O'Rourke

Let us have all the facts now.

Mr. Costello

The fact is that it has been cancelled sine die.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Incorrect again.

Mr. Costello

Does the Minister intend to meet the management of the school?

Mrs. O'Rourke

I will be answering and I have some very sharp facts to put forward about this case.

Mr. Costello

I will be very anxious to hear what the Minister has to say. There has been a long-fingering exercise going on for over a three year period on this matter.

Mrs. O'Rourke

What happened when the Senator's party were in Coalition?

Mr. Costello

The Minister has been in office for three years and three months.

Mrs. O'Rourke

What happened in the years 1983 to 1987?

Mr. Costello

I am in the Seanad for seven months and I have raised the matter.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Senator's party were in power.

Mr. Costello

I know the Minister responded very well to an Adjournment debate that was held on the Model School in Marlborough Street and I hope her response this evening will be in the same vein because this school is extremely deserving of her immediate attention.

There are 700 pupils in the school and the prefabs are in an atrocious condition. They are very unhealthy. They are very hot in the summer and very cold in the winter. There is water coming through the roof. Shower and changing rooms are used for construction study classes. Cloakrooms are used as computer rooms and dressing rooms are used for woodwork. This is totally inadequate in the present circumstances. The 1989 Act dealing with health and safety, which no doubt the Minister will be circulating to schools in the near future, will pose major problems for this and other schools in relation to electrical wiring, the use of materials that are not fire-resistant and so on.

In relation to Saint Aidan's, there are at present 1,200 new houses being constructed in the vicinity so it is not a question of a drop in population in this area. Indeed, there have been suggestions that there is excess capacity of schools in that particular area. There is no excess capacity in the voluntary secondary sector; it is the only voluntary secondary boys school in the area. As the Minister knows from the constitutional requirements in relation to education, there is choice. We are very strong on the denominational character of schools and parents have the right to choose the school of their preference. In that context, the parents have been extremely involved in regard to the school. They have already collected in the region of £150,000 for the school and they are entitled to their choice of a voluntary secondary school. If Saint Aidan's is not given a permanent structure, then that choice will not be there.

The school management have met the Minister's officials and there have been suggestions which I would regard as unworthy that the Brothers were not committed to the school, that they had no intention of staying there and that their commitment was not on any permanent basis. That is not good enough because there has been a categorical response from the Christian Brothers that they are committed and that should be accepted in the vein it has been given.

There have been suggestions that talks have been going on at a higher level than the level I have been talking about in relation to the management, the parents and the teachers. I would like to know what has been going on. Are there two tiers of negotiations? What actually has been going on in relation to this school? Is this all a smokescreen that negotiations have been going on at a higher level in relation to the CBS, Saint Aidan's in Whitehall and is there another level where parents, staff and management are consulted?

I know the staff of this school. I have worked with them in my capacity as a teacher in the ASTI. I have met the management who have produced an excellent briefing document on the whole situation. The school has a wonderful academic and employment reputation at third level for those youngsters who have gone through it. That will be acknowledged far and wide on the north side of Dublin. They are a community of staff, management and parental involvement which is exemplary in the Irish context and which has made Irish education respected worldwide. That is why the IDA and the Government can go abroad and state, without fear or favour, that Irish students can hold their own against any others anywhere, and why Ireland is marketed abroad as the country with bright, educated youngsters and the young workforce of Europe. This is all being done by teachers, management and parents in extremely difficult circumstances. It has been done without the resources, the plant, the structure and, nowadays, without the necessary personnel as well.

Saint Aidan's have done the work in more difficult circumstances than most teachers and most management have operated. It is time we got an absolutely clear statement to take us out of the state of Limbo we are in, to tell us straight where the Department of Education stand in relation to Saint Aidan's post-primary school. The decision has to be made. We cannot go on as we have been going on for over three years now. We need confirmation of what is happening with the school. What is the future of the school? We have got the school, we have got the staff, we have got the commitment from the management and the parents. We have got the school's excellent record. I have no doubt it will continue to have an excellent record in the future.

There is an incontrovertible case for the proper construction of the school that was promised long ago in Saint Aidan's. It is up to the Minister. She has to make the decision in this matter and I suggest she has been somewhat tardy in coming to a decision. I believe the statistics are there to justify the establishment of a permanent structure. The decision should be taken once and for all. I am asking the Minister to give us a positive decision here tonight.

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

I want to thank Senator Joe Costello for raising this matter on the Adjournment and immediately to strongly refute two untruths which were told here in this House tonight, about me and about my office. I will refute those first and then I will go on to deal with the debate. One was when the Senator highlighted the date of 21 May and said that the answer to a Dáil question was the only reason a particular management were brought into my office. That is a complete untruth and while I have the attention of the House I will refute it. There is a campaign among some particular people and I do not know the reason. I understand from colleagues that the tenor of public debates has been extraordinarily defamatory to me. That really does not cost me a thought because I am who I am and I have not reached the age I have without being truthful in all respects in public life. I cannot allow what the Senator has said to go unchallenged. He said that because there was a Dáil question, that was the only reason.

He called it sharp practice and said it was the only reason management was called in. May I read a fact, please? The situation was discussed with Brother Heneghan, Provincial, in February 1989 and particularly the question of accommodating Saint Aidan's in the reorganised Ballymun Comprehensive complex. He undertook to consider all aspects of the matter very closely and to report back to the Department as soon as possible. I quote: "The Christian Brothers Provincialite has now informed the Department that it cannot support"— bear in mind the date was February 1989 —"the proposal to relocate Saint Aidan's in the Ballymun Comprehensive Schools" and then it went on to give various reasons. Following on that in recent months, there has been an upsurge in the provision of new housing in the area surrounding Saint Aidan's and at present 1,000 new houses are under construction as planned, all points which the Senator raised.

The matter had gone on too long and on this I am in agreement with the Senator. I wanted clarity on various aspects of the matter, not least on the future commitment not just of the Christian Brothers and their very fine record in that school but throughout the whole country in the voluntary sector. We are engaged in major talks because of the unfortunate and unhappy experience of religious orders where their numbers are decreasing rapidly. Therefore, it behoves the Department of Education and the Government in general to look very critically at money they put into privately owned sites.

Let me be very clear on it and very explicit about it. When you put money into a community, comprehensive or vocational school, the whole site and building is in complete public ownership and reverts back to the Government should there be no further need for it as an educational unit, or it can be reverted to some other useful purpose. In the Carysfort episode last summer, quite frankly, I found it very difficult on behalf of my Department, to get the money back which the nuns in Carysfort owed me.

That is a side issue. They have agreed to pay it. The matter has not been completely resolved yet but it did go back to the brink. I want to clear up the point. Therefore, within the last two years when the numbers have declined everywhere——

Mr. Costello

There is no money going back to the Department of Education in this case.

Mrs. O'Rourke

——it behoves us in the voluntary sector to look very critically at where we were putting our money. Therefore, school by school, each case is being scrutinised in that way. That is no secret. Of course, nobody will thank me when I am gone if there does not seem to be proper accountability for what we have done. It arises out of two things, the demographic change and because more and more teaching orders find that their mission is completed in teaching and they have other fields they wish to conquer. Many Orders are coming to us saying "we will not be in this particular town in five or in ten years time. We wish to let you know that will be our plan." On that basis, any voluntary sector application for funding of a major nature — as distinct from £200,000, £300,000 or £400,000 — is being looked at in that context. My dates and my facts are quite clear and I will not have my reputation impugned by the Senator or by anybody else or accused of sharp practice when I am attending to my brief.

Mr. Costello

What about 21 May, the day before the Parliamentary Question?

(Interruptions.)

Mrs. O'Rourke

Having said that, Brother Cashell and Brother Heneghan at my request——

Mr. Costello

The Minister said that I said an untruth.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Senator said sharp practice.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Fitzgerald)

Will the Senator allow the Minister to continue?

Mr. Costello

Why did the meeting take place on 21 May and the Dáil question was answered on 22 May? The meeting was referred to in the Dáil question.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Am I to come in here and have the Senator shout "sharp practice" at me when I have my facts about meetings with both the senior management and the junior management.

Mr. Costello

Why did the meeting take place? The Minister has not answered that.

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Senator does not like the facts. His sort never do.

Mr. Costello

I want facts, not waffle.

Mrs. O'Rourke

At my request the Department asked if Brother Heneghan, who is, I understand, the superior of a certain number of schools, would put in writing to me the intention of the Order. That has now been received in my Department and I insist that I looked for that. Why should I not? I am looking for it everywhere I go now. I was quite insistent that I would get reassurance on that point. That request has now arrived in my Department.

The Senator said I was tardy. This issue does not rest with me. It rests with the Department of Finance because there is a commitment between the Departments of Education and Finance on a stay on major development of schools in urban areas where the numbers are seen to be decreasing. Armed with the commitment given——

Mr. Costello

A sum of £23 million was taken back in 1987.

Mrs. O'Rourke

——by Brother Heneghan I will make my submission to the Department of Finance. I quote from the 1988 agreed report between the Departments of Education and Finance which states:

Where there are no defined catchment areas consideration of an application from any school for new accommodation shall have regard to the accommodation situation, actual and projected, within reasonable access of the particular school or area. In this context and in the light of the school transport provision, a distance of three miles is not considered unreasonable.

On foot of that, the Ballymun situation, which is one mile from St. Aidan's, was looked at. I am of the opinion, as are many people, that this school has too fine a tradition for it to be lost to the area. At the same time, I cannot give the commitment the Senator requested tonight. Within the last week I received renewal of the commitment in writing from Brother Heneghan which I would need for a further case to be made. I will consider that commitment, I will consider all the facts and then I will consider what to do.

The third untruth the Senator said was that my office confirmed that the meeting with Brother Cashell and others was sine die, deferred. Those words “sine die, deferred” were never used by anybody in my office. I stand over that. I was summoned here for a three hour debate. I have been in this House since 5.20 p.m., it is now 9.20 p.m. and I never left it. I do not take any credit for that, I am paid for it. The point is that I was summoned to a debate in the House which takes priority over any other arrangements one may have made for a meeting. Of course that was fully explained, I presume, to Brother Cashell and his interested group. May I say that, it is an untruth to say that the words “sine die” were used by my office when deferring that meeting. That is not so. When I have considered the letter from Brother Heneghan and then looked at all the demographic and other factors, I will be reporting to the relevant authorities and will arrange to meet the interested parties.

Mr. Costello

Has the meeting been deferred? We have had discussions, meetings, debates, parliamentary questions and Adjournment debates. This is the second Adjournment debate and it has been three years and three months——

Mrs. O'Rourke

The Senator's party were four years in office. What was the Senator doing about it from 1983-87?

Mr. Costello

May I finish the question without interruption from the Minister? I need the Chair's protection against interruption from the Minister. May I ask her when is this going to end?

The Seanad adjourned at 9.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 7 June 1990.