SELECT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Wednesday, 8 Dec 2004

Vote 26 — Department of Education and Science (Second Supplementary).

Chairman

We will consider the Supplementary and second Supplementary Estimates for the Department of Education and Science referred to the committee by the Dáil on 30 November and 7 December. A proposed timetable has been circulated to members. It allows for opening statements by the Minister for Education and Science and the Opposition spokesperson to be followed by an open discussion on the Vote by way of a question and answer session. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On behalf of the committee, I welcome the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, and her officials. Briefing material from the Department has been circulated to members. I call on the Minister to make her opening statement.

Minister for Education and Science (Ms Hanafin)

I welcome the opportunity to meet the members of the Select Committee on Education and Science to discuss the Supplementary Estimates for the Department of Education and Science for 2004. The amounts required for the Education and Science are as follows: subhead B.8 — Youth — €532,000; subhead B.24 — Redress — €33,395,000; subhead C.8 — Special Needs Assistants — €5,000,000; subhead C.11 — Superannuation of Primary Teachers — €29,127,000; subhead D.4 — Superannuation of Secondary, Comprehensive and Community School Teachers — €13,490,000; subhead D.7 — Superannuation Payments to Local Authorities — €8,483,000; subhead G — Increase in Appropriations-in-Aid — €20,000,000, giving a required total of €70,027,000.

These Supplementary Estimates mainly arise for the following reasons. Subhead B.8 requires a technical supplementary allocation arising from its grant-in-aid status. It deals with the local drugs task forces which were set up to facilitate a more effective response to the drugs problem in areas experiencing the highest level of drug misuse. A total of 36 local drugs task force projects were allocated to my Department in 2001 but the 2004 allocation does not meet their full requirements due to increases under the national wage agreements, salary increments, insurance premiums and other programme costs. An additional sum of €532,000 is required arising from the need to meet local drugs task force financial deficiencies and to ensure proper support for all task force projects under the control of my Department.

The bulk of the Supplementary Estimate request relates to demand led subheads. I will deal with each of them in turn.

Subhead B.24 deals with the operation of the residential institutions redress scheme. The bulk of the expenditure involved is the cost of awards to persons abused as children while resident in industrial schools and other institutions subject to State regulation or inspection. An additional sum of €33.4 million is required to meet the cost of redress claims to be processed during 2004.

When the Estimate was formulated in mid-2003, precise information was not available on the anticipated number of claimants in 2004. Due to the work of the redress board proceeding at a faster than anticipated pace, it is necessary to seek a supplementary sum of €33.4 million to pay the claims processed and to be processed by the board before the end of 2004 which were not originally expected to arrive until early 2005. When this supplementary request was initially framed in early November, an amount of €23.4 million was sought but due to a higher than anticipated volume of awards being cleared by the board in recent weeks, it became necessary to increase the supplementary amount by €10 million to €33.4 million.

Special needs assistants perform an array of non-teaching duties in schools to assist pupils with special needs. An additional sum of €5 million is required to meet the increased cost of special needs assistants in primary schools. This additional funding is necessary to enable my Department to continue to honour our commitment to children with special needs. Since taking office the Government has undertaken an unprecedented level of development in special education services. In October 1998 it took the unprecedented step of declaring that all children with special needs within the primary system should henceforth have an automatic entitlement to a response appropriate to their needs. The Supplementary Estimate is required to fund the extra costs associated with increased numbers of special needs assistants this year, with some additional costs associated with the operation of the part-time work legislation and other pay related industrial relations issues.

The remainder of the gross element of the supplementary amount relates to the following pension subheads: subhead C.11 — superannuation of primary teachers, €29,127,000; subhead D.4 — superannuation of secondary, comprehensive and community school teachers, €13,490,000; andsubhead D.7 — superannuation payments tolocal authorities, €8,483,000. The supplementary amounts for pensions totalling €51.1 million arise from considerably increased numbers of pensions and gratuities awarded during 2004. In recent years the number of teacher retirements has in general shown a marked increase and once a teacher has completed the necessary service or reached the appropriate age, he or she is only required to provide three months notice of intention to retire which makes it difficult to accurately estimate retirement patterns.

I am seeking an increased supplementary amount in the appropriations-in-aid subhead. The increased receipts relate to payments received in respect of the European Social Fund from the 1994 to 1999 round of funding. The closure of the 1994 to 1999 round of funding was protracted and the payment date for the receipts had not been set when the 2004 Estimates were finalised. An additional €20 million in receipts is anticipated before the end of 2004. The best information available to me at this stage indicates that the Department of Education and Science should receive surplus ESF receipts totalling an additional €50 million before the end of the year. However, my Department cannot be totally assured of receiving these funds before the end of the year. Therefore, for prudential reasons, the increasing supplementary amount being sought is €20 million which has already been received. However, should the level of additional receipts received be of the order of €50 million extra, as is most likely, although not absolutely certain, it will have the effect of reducing the net cost to the Exchequer of the Supplementary Estimate to a relatively minimal sum.

The Government has made education a top priority for its term of office and these Supplementary Estimates are further evidence of our commitment to the sector. They will serve as an excellent foundation for further improvements which we will be able to implement in the coming years. I commend them to the committee.

Ms Enright

I welcome the Minister and her officials. While my question may not directly relate to the Supplementary Estimates, does the Department of Education and Science have a role with regard to the regional drugs task forces or are they specifically the responsibility of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs? Is there interaction between the two?

With regard to the residential institutions redress scheme, the Minister stated an increased number of claims were expected to arise in early 2005. Is it clear how many remain to be dealt with? The resources going to the redress board took up a significant percentage of the overall Estimates increase for 2004 for the Department of Education and Science. While this year's increase was not as substantial, it was significant. I am concerned that much of the overall budget is going to this area rather than education provision in general. The Minister might comment on the anticipated number of claims for 2005 and whether a Supplementary Estimate will be required next year to cover the costs involved.

I welcome the extra funding for special needs assistants provided in this Supplementary Estimate and the Estimates for 2005. The Minister may have been speaking tongue-in-cheek in regurgitating the October 1998 declaration of an automatic entitlement to a response appropriate to children with special needs because while this is aspirational, it has not yet been achieved, although it was declared six years ago. In theory, the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act has gone a long way in this regard. However, while some steps have been taken, we have yet to see full implementation of the Act. We cannot yet state such children have an automatic entitlement in any form. There is a long way to go to ensure this will be the case. However, the Minister has made significant improvements. I welcome the extra special needs assistants.

The issue of resource teachers must be dealt with. While extra resources are provided for 2005, much remains to be decided as to how they will be used. With regard to the weighting system, does the Minister intend to make changes in regard to the clustering of schools as announced and as the special needs assistants became part of the issue? Does she consider that the decision made has impacted negatively on girls' schools? Can she provide data for the committee to show what the decision was based on? While I know a census was carried out, I would like the data to be made available as committee members are receiving much correspondence from girls' schools in this regard. I want to ensure the needs of girls are adequately met.

On pensions, the Minister stated in the documentation on the Vote that a higher than anticipated number of teachers had retired during 2004. She gave as a reason for this that many teachers had reached the required age or years of service. Are there other reasons for teachers choosing to retire when they have not reached retirement age? Is the Minister concerned in this regard? Much recent discussion centred on class sizes. How will the retirement of greater than expected numbers of teachers impact on class sizes and the pupil-teacher ratio? Does the Minister have figures for the number of qualified teachers unable to find employment, a matter on which I asked a parliamentary question? I have received much correspondence from qualified primary teachers unable to get jobs. Despite this, approximately 700 unqualified staff are still working within the system. If the numbers retiring are higher than anticipated, will unqualified staff stay in the system while those qualified seem to be unable to get jobs for one reason or another?

I refer to the resources allocated but not spent in 2004, as well as the extra funding being provided. Will the Minister explain why €50 million approximately was not spent on the building programme? As it is the beginning of December and several working weeks remain in the year, she might confirm whether the figure will be greater than €50 million. In terms of her announcement on Sunday last in regard to the building programme, I would like an open system which would show the relative positions of schools in the programme, as was the case previously. While it was not a perfect system, it was at least possible to know the relative positions of schools. Will this system remain in place? This was not clear from the Minister's comments. She can carry over money each year under the multi-annual scheme which may relieve some of the pressure on the Department. However, schools are under significant pressure to acquire new buildings. An attitude of laxity should not be allowed to develop within the Department as a consequence of its ability to carry over funds. The money allocated each year should be spent. Will the Minister take steps to ensure this happens?

Ms O’Sullivan

I welcome the Minister and her officials. None of us has a problem with the provision of more money for education. In this context, I have no issue with the overall level of expenditure and the specific areas in which funds will be allocated. However, I have a number of questions on some of the provisions included in the Supplementary Estimate. Does the Minister have any information on the costs of extra insurance cover in regard to the drugs issue? It is of concern that some of the allocation should go on insurance premia, as referred to by the Minister.

The original sum allocated by a decision of the Dáil to the residential institutions redress scheme was augmented by the provision of an extra €10 million yesterday. The approximate average cost is €77,000. If I have done my sums correctly, this indicates that the Residential Institutions Redress Board expects to deal with 130 more cases in a short space of time. Was the board's initial calculation inaccurate or has there been a significant increase in allocations in recent weeks?

A parliamentary question was tabled in the name of one of my colleagues on 25 November regarding the overall costs of the redress scheme. The response indicated that "the recent report from the Comptroller and Auditor and General estimated that the final outturn would be in the range of €605 million and €828 million". I do not understand this and suspect there is an error in the response. It seems to indicate two different figures or perhaps it meant to point to a figure somewhere between the two. Will the Minister clarify this and also indicate how much of the final cost of the scheme will be expended by the end of this year and the expected level of expenditure in future years?

I understand the decision to include additional institutions under the provisions of the redress scheme has recently been implemented. What are the financial calculations in regard to the associated extra costs? This is not an issue that relates directly to the Supplementary Estimates for this year but will have to be considered in the context of next year's expenditure figures. Does the Minister consider the Comptroller and Auditor General's estimate is broadly accurate?

Like Deputy Enright, I welcome the extra allocation for special needs assistants. However, I also share her concern that some children may not receive the special needs assistance they require according to professional assessments by educational psychologists. When will the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Bill 2003 be implemented in its entirety in terms of children being entitled to an individual assessment, an educational plan and associated supports? I have already welcomed the Minister's decision to review the implications of the implementation of a weighted system. However, recent research undertaken by the INTO indicates that many disadvantaged schools will lose special needs assistants and teachers under such a system, while relatively well off schools will gain. I am unsure if the Minister intends to incorporate a weighted system with regard to special needs assistants. Will she clarify that assistants will continue to be allocated on the basis of individual need?

Regarding the provisions for superannuation in subheads C.11 and D.4, I am concerned that more teachers seem to be retiring than expected at the start of the year. Presumably, the Department knows how many teachers, according to age, should be retiring in any one year. However, the figures are €29.1 million for primary teachers and €13.5 million for second level teachers. This is of concern in the context of the shortage of teachers in the system and the need to reduce class sizes. Is the Department examining the reasons teachers retire unexpectedly early? The Estimates indicate a sum considerably in excess of what was expected. Both the Minister and the committee will be anxious to know the reasons.

In general, I share Deputy Enright's concern that the Department should spend all funds it can possibly scrounge from the Department of Finance on the education system at all levels. The Deputy has already asked about the building programme. I understand the carry-over cannot be more than 10% of the amount allocated. Will the Minister give the committee an undertaking that no more than 10% of the budget will remain unspent this year in order that no money will be lost? Will any consideration be given to the drawing up of a substitute list of schools that could slot in at the end of one year if other schools are unprepared for work to commence? The latter would not be removed from the list but included in the allocation for the following year. Such a system would facilitate progress for schools desperately in need of building work in situations where money remained unspent. We are all agreed that as much as possible should be spent on school buildings.

Mr. Crowe

I welcome the Minister and her officials. Like everybody else, I had hoped the budget would deal in a significant way with the problem of educational disadvantage. Unfortunately, the levels of expenditure announced do not go far enough in dealing with the serious problems experienced in many areas in this regard. Given the resources available, the Government is in a unique position to address this problem but education has not been given the priority it deserves. The previous Minister made many speeches about educational disadvantage and funding deficits but many students face a lack of financial support and inadequate facilities. The Government had the chance to deal with the problems of deprivation, overcrowding and underheating in the context of the booming economy. However, the budget fails to bridge the gap in funding in any serious way and leaves us way behind many of our European neighbours.

An item that stands out in the Supplementary Estimates is the increased sum for superannuation payments as a consequence of the greater than expected number of teacher retirements in the last year. Is there a reason more teachers have retired than planned? What effect will this have on class sizes? There is a higher than average turnover of teachers in schools designated as disadvantaged and in disadvantaged areas. Is the retirement rate similarly higher than average in these schools?

The Minister is aware that serious disadvantage is being experienced in many areas. The committee has discussed the recent report, How are Our Kids?, which documented the difficulties faced by children in my area and the effect of large class sizes on the progression of students. That more teachers than expected have left the sector will have a seriously detrimental effect on efforts to deal with the problems faced by students in disadvantaged areas. The Minister made a statement on 7 November on the reduction of class sizes to 20 pupils. However, the increased number of retirements may result in the position getting worse rather than better. Some 180,000 students are in classes, the size of which exceeds the target of 20, to be met by 2007, as set by Fianna Fáil in its manifesto. How many more teachers than expected left the system this year? What effect will this have on the pupil-teacher ratio? At approximately 24.5, the ratio in Ireland is well above the OECD average of 22 and far behind that in many of our European neighbours. It was suggested 2,500 extra teachers would be required to reduce class sizes to 20.

Increased investment in recruitment as well as capital investment are required in the teacher training sector. Is there any proposal to remove the cap on spending and investment in Mary Immaculate College, Limerick and St. Patrick's, Drumcondra? Additional funding will be used to replace dilapidated buildings rather than lead to an increased output of teachers. The Kelly report called for a total review of the training sector. Does the Minister have any plans to undertake such a review? If so, will it focus on increasing the number of teachers in the system?

Other speakers spoke about the Residential Institutions Redress Board. I have already raised the matter of day pupils with the Minister both publicly and privately. Does the Minister have any proposals to examine it? I have been approached on a number of occasions by the families of day pupils because the terms of the scheme do not apply to them, although many been abused in institutions mentioned in the Schedule. However, the fact that they were day pupils seems to bar them from redress. Will the Minister look into the matter? Many day pupils were physically, psychologically and sexually abused and do not have the money to go through the courts. It causes great pain and anxiety as well as guilt on the part of their parents. I appeal to the Minister to look at new ways of addressing the issue.

If we are serious about tackling disadvantage, our deeds must match our words. There must be greater investment in the school building programme and an extension of the Early Start programme to include all schools serving disadvantaged areas. There must also be greater increases in funding for the National Education Welfare Board as I am concerned about its ability to fulfil its statutory duties.

Ms Hanafin

I thank members for their interest and support for investment in education. As each member raised similar questions, I will answer them by topic.

We do not have responsibility for the regional drugs task forces. That is a matter for the line Minister. Neither do we have specific information on insurance costs, which is proving to be a difficulty. I hope this money will go some way towards addressing the issue.

With regard to the Residential Institutions Redress Board, there have been 4,828 claims to date and 2,107 awards or settlements. Of these, approximately 60 are up for review. The average award remains €77,000. To date, the total amount committed is €163 million. Thirteen new institutions have been added to the Schedule. It is expected that this will give rise to approximately 100 extra cases. On the basis of the average award, an extra €700,000 or €800,000 will be committed to meet these new claims.

Applications must be made to the board within three years of the establishment date, namely, 15 December 2005. It will obviously take a couple of years beyond that date to process the applications but the board is committed to paying all requests for payment of awards within 28 days. This is why there is pressure at the end of this year rather than next which is when we anticipated the expenditure would be made. A number of awards were made in November and December, which explains the revised expenditure figure. We anticipate costs up to 2005 to amount to approximately €170 million with the same amount in 2006 and approximately €85 million in 2007.

Members mentioned the comments and costings of the Comptroller and Auditor General. It is interesting to note that he has reduced his initial estimate of €1.04 billion to €800 million. We anticipate the final figure to be between €600 million and €700 million, including legal and administrative costs.

I do not intend to include day pupils under the terms of the scheme. The duty of care and responsibility was not the same for the State or institution when the children were not residents.

Mr. Crowe

Does the Minister intend to look at the issue again?

Ms Hanafin

We do not believe it is covered by the apology or the establishment of the board. It relates to the State's duty and responsibility for inspection of the institutions involved. The children concerned went home and were in the care of their parents. Those resident in residential institutions were in their care.

Ms Enright

Is there any litigation pending against the Department with regard to this issue?

Ms Hanafin

I understand from the Secretary General that there is.

Ms O’Sullivan

Does the final estimated figure include possible court case costs? People have a right to go to court if they do not make a claim to the redress board. Is this provision included in the Department's figures? There have been one or two cases so far.

Ms Hanafin

The Secretary General advises me that they are excluded from the figures. There have only been three such cases.

I thank members for their comments regarding the progress made within the area of special needs education. I must keep repeating two points during the next year. First, I am reviewing the weighted system regarding the allocation of resource teachers. Second, I am not reintroducing third level fees. No matter how often I say it, I must keep repeating it.

As originally outlined, the weighted system would have an adverse effect on small rural and disadvantaged schools. For that reason, we are completely reviewing of the system. There are 350 teachers. We want to ensure children deemed in need of attention and special extra care do not lose out as a result of the system. Therefore, we are anxiously addressing the issue. International evidence shows there is greater demand amongst boys than girls. We can point members towards this evidence. I will look also at the issue of clustering to ensure small rural schools are not adversely affected.

There is a huge increase in the numbers of special needs assistants and resource teachers. In 1998 some 300 children benefited from the services of a special needs assistant. Today almost 6,000 benefit. This represents enormous progress. The work of the teachers concerned and more particularly the children involved will be enhanced by the Special Education council and special needs organisers, 80 of whom are working around the country. The council will be placed on a statutory basis shortly. That will improve the system in terms of liaising between parents, health services and schools to ensure special needs assistants are deployed in the best way to benefit the children involved.

Mr. English

How soon will the review take place because parents are very anxious? There is no point in producing a report in a year's time.

Ms Hanafin

A circular issued in June 2003 outlining what the allocation would be. Whatever is provided for in the review will have to be in place for the forthcoming academic year to ensure children can benefit.

On the issue of the school building programme, a number of bills have arrived in the Department. Therefore, the sum unspent will not be anything like that originally indicated. More particularly, we will only carry forward 10% of the figure of €50 million and will not be sending anything back to the Department of Finance. The reasons for this vary. They include, for example, projects late in securing planning permission, appeals to An Bord Pleanála, and projects in slow in attracting tenders. That was one of the disadvantages in adopting a big bang approach at the beginning of the year where everything was included in a list and announced. This did not allow for flexibility in moving from one stage to the next. Up until now there has been a stop-start approach to financing. It was not always determined how much one would have the following year, whereas now we know exactly that over the next five years there will be €3.4 billion available to be spent on buildings. Therefore, it will be easier to plan.

Schools will know where they are in the system and it is my intention to allow for the flexibility mentioned by Deputy O'Sullivan in order that if one school is not proceeding with its project, another can advance in the process. It must be borne in mind, however, that much of the work can only take place during the summer months. This puts pressure on the system, given that much of the work cannot be done while children are in the school. I am trying to ensure there will be enough in the pipeline to keep the system flowing in order that if a project is not likely to proceed or incur expenditure in a particular year, we can move another along. Given the substantial amount we will have to spend next year, it should be possible to do this.

Deputy Crowe asked if I would consider lifting the cap on funding. He was so busy in his constituency that he did not notice we had lifted it for both Mary Immaculate College and——

Mr. Crowe

I was talking about male teachers.

Ms Hanafin

——St. Patrick's Training College. We are giving €16 million to Mary Immaculate College and over €6 million to St. Patrick's Training College to facilitate them in building the necessary infrastructure to train more teachers. We are working with the HEA on how to implement the Kelly report, bearing in mind overall priorities. Our initial priorities were focused on teacher training and therapies. Approximately €92 million has already been released under the scheme — over €80 million on one and €12.5 million on the other.

One good reason so many teachers have retired this year is the numbers for the previous two years were down. Because of benchmarking and the fact they would be able to go on a substantially higher final salary, they all decided to retire this year. That was the real reason there were so many retirements this year. In addition, they only had to indicate three months in advance their intention to retire. People are also retiring earlier in other professions. This will have no adverse effect on class sizes. The pupil-teacher ratio has been reduced to 17.4 in recent years because of the number of extra teachers allocated to schools.

On the issue of class sizes, we have a teaching schedule which works on the basis of a maximum class size of 29. That there are approximately 200 children in four or five classes with over 40 pupils is unacceptable. Seven years ago there were 2,000 such children. This should not be the case. It involves banding at local level. This means there are other classes in the school with fewer children. I am working towards ensuring no child will be in a class with over 40 pupils. Of the 101,000 in classes with between 30 and 40 pupils, 96,000 are in classes with less than 35 pupils. Therefore, the maximum class size is reducing all the time. I reckon that less than 200 children are in classes with over 40 pupils and that approximately 5,000 are in classes with between 35 and 40 pupils.

I am constantly working to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio in line with the staffing schedule to 29:1. The number of teachers retiring has no effect on it because it is creating job opportunities. That 700 teachers retired this year meant there were plenty of employment opportunities for graduates. On any one day in our schools there are approximately 700 unqualified teachers. This begs the question as to why there are graduates who cannot get jobs. There are casual sick days when somebody is brought in to cover but they are not qualified teachers. Some are probably excellent teachers. They may have qualified as secondary school teachers and have a H.Dip. but they are not qualified primary school teachers. There are approximately 200 such teachers, some of whom have been in the system a long time and are providing a good teaching service. An issue that has to be addressed is that if qualified primary school teachers are available, it is they who should be employed.

The question of teachers in disadvantaged schools has been raised. There is a high turnover of such teachers. I am looking to see what professional support can be given to them in recognition of the fact that some of them are finding the task difficult. We must bear in mind that in many of our disadvantaged schools class sizes are already considerably smaller. Most have between 15 and 20 students. There are also extra capitation payments, extra resource teaching hours, learning supports etc. There is a substantial difference between disadvantaged and other schools.

Deputy Crowe asked about literacy levels and the difficulties experienced in disadvantaged schools. What was interesting about the report on literacy levels in such schools was that the real issues revolved around the use of books in the home and parents reading to their children. It was during the launch of the report that I announced we were allocating €500,000 to buy fun books for children which I hope they will have for Christmas. This is being organised through the libraries to encourage reading as a pastime. It is hoped that will ensure the children and their families can improve literacy rates because there is a direct correlation; it is not only linked to what happens in the schools. That was an interesting finding and it highlights the direct link and the fact that the whole school community — the parents and the families — has as much to do in this area as the teachers.

Deputies will be aware that funding for next year for the disadvantaged area has been increased substantially and will be targeted at the people who need it most. I hope that answers most of the questions raised.

Ms O’Sullivan

Can the Minister, through the Department, use some muscle with schools that persist in employing unqualified teachers even when qualified teachers are available? It appears to be a matter for the school primarily, but is there anything the Minister can do from the Department? She could send a circular instructing them to employ qualified teachers, but can she use any muscle in this regard?

Ms Hanafin

I can do even better than that. Rather than telling them they should, we have written to them asking them why they are employing unqualified teachers. It may be done in isolated regional areas. If somebody is sick for a week a local person is brought in to do the work but they are unqualified teachers. We are particularly anxious to know why unqualified people are being employed on a regular basis and we have written to schools in that regard. Once we have that information we will consider how to address the issue.

Mr. Crowe

What about the funding for the education welfare board?

Ms Hanafin

The funding for the education welfare board for next year has been increased by 20%.

Ms Enright

The Minister referred to children reading books but in a number of disadvantaged areas children are going home to houses where the parents do not have the skills to help them. We provide children with the mechanism but we have to provide the parents with the mechanism before they can assist their children. I am aware there is an increase in the Estimates for adult learning.

Ms Hanafin

I will make two points on that. First, we hope to work through the books, as it were, through the home-school liaison officers who do tremendous work in involving the parents and bringing them into the school for paired reading between parents and children. We are seeking to expand that to include the family. In the same week the report on literacy levels in schools was launched, interestingly, the National Adult Literacy Agency launched a report about family literacy which basically made the same finding. A number of the children surveyed had between zero and nine books in the home, which is difficult for those of us in houses falling down with books to imagine. The problem is being tacked at different levels.

Chairman

We have now completed our consideration of the Supplementary Estimate. On behalf of the committee I thank the Minister and her officials for attending today's meeting. The meeting is now adjourned.