I welcome the Minister, the Minister of State and the Department of Education officials. Mr. Denis Healy, Assistant Secretary, Mr. Seán Harkin, Ms Íde Mulcahy and Mr. Michael Kennedy are present. Perhaps the Minister would introduce the other members of the group.
Estimates 1996.
Vote 26: Office of the Minister for Education.
Vote 27: First-level and Further Education.
Vote 28: Second-level and Further Education.
Vote 29: Third-level and Further Education.
The Minister of State, Deputy Allen, is accompanied by Mr. Vincent Rinn and Mr. Paddy Heffernan. The Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is accompanied by Mr. Liam Kilroy.
Thank you. I would like to keep to the timetable as far as possible. Members might try to organise their questions under various headings while they are listening to the opening remarks. I now invite the Minister to make her opening statement.
It is a great opportunity to come to this committee to discuss the Estimates in detail. We are delighted to make this information available to Deputies. If Members wonder about discussing all the Estimates this probably reflects the fact that the gross provision for the four Education Votes for 1996 is almost £2.2 billion. This represents an increase of over £100 million on the 1995 Estimates allocation. Investment in education has never been more important.
The 1996 Estimates demonstrate convincingly the Government's major commitment to quality in education and to continuing the task of eliminating disadvantage in our education system. These are the first annual Estimates since the publication of the White Paper on Education and they mark an important phase in its implementation. In the introduction to the White Paper I stated:
Government will aim to provide, during its period of office, the resources for the development needs identified in this White Paper, within the framework of the budgetary parameters set out in the Government of Renewal policy document, including the acceptance of the Maastricht Treaty convergence conditions. The amount which can be made available in any given year will have to be decided by the Government in the context of its financial position and its other public expenditure priorities at that time. In this context, the Government will have the opportunity to consider any potential which may exist to reallocate resources within the education sector in the light of demographic changes.
This White Paper statement summarises the broad context against which the 1996 Estimates for Education were framed. The 1996 provision for Education reflects the view that the development of the education and skills of people is as important a source of wealth as the accumulation of more traditional forms of capital. National and international bodies have identified the central role of education and training as one of the critical sources of economic and social well-being in modern society. This is the logical outcome of the increasing centrality of knowledge and skills in shaping economic organisation and national competitiveness. Interlinked with these trends is the emerging economic necessity for life long learning, given the speed with which knowledge and skills become outdated. For these reasons I emphasise that expenditure on education and training is an investment in economic growth and improved social cohesion.
The contribution of education and training to economic prosperity has been underlined in successive national understandings with the social partners and in independent studies carried out by, for example, the National Economic and Social Council and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. These developments have placed education centre stage as part of more broadly based economic and social policies and the Government is committed to continuing this process.
The Government's concern with this key dimension of education complements and reinforces the fundamental contribution of education to individual and societal development. Enhancing the contribution of education and training to economic prosperity requires an independent and dynamic educational system which is systematically linked to the economic planning process. Economic activity is increasingly dependent on the knowledge and skills of people and their capacity to learn continually throughout their lives. Therefore, investment in education is of crucial concern to the State to enhance Ireland's capacity to compete effectively in a rapidly changing international environment.
Our education policies are succeeding. The number of unqualified school leavers has dropped from 3,300 to 2,200 in recent years. In the last four years the number of students studying to leaving certificate has risen from 73 per cent to 80 per cent and we are well on target for the White Paper goal of 90 per cent by the year 2000. Some 16,400 extra students have gone on to third level studies. There has been extensive curriculum reform at first and second level to improve the quality of education for those staying at school. These policies need prudent and targeted investment which will lead to more jobs.
The increased investment in primary education in the Estimates takes place in the context of falling pupil numbers, but it demonstrates that the provision of adequate resources for primary education continues to be a priority for the Government. National and international research indicates that primary education is fundamentally important in determining children's life chances. Benefits derived from primary education are key determinants of the extent to which the individual will go on to participate fully in society; all subsequent education and training are built upon the foundation of primary education.
The Estimates enable the capitation grant in primary schools to rise to £45 per pupil and in schools designated disadvantaged it rises to £75 per pupil. In the four years since I came into office the ordinary primary capitation rate has risen by over 60 per cent, while the targeted capitation rate in schools designated disadvantaged has risen by two thirds.
The Estimates include a provision of £150,000 for a substance abuse programme at primary school level. This programme will be carried out in co-operation with the Departments of Justice and Health as well as the Garda Síochána, teachers, parents and other interests. This provision forms an important part of the Government's strategy to combat the menace that drug abuse poses to our young people.
At second level the Estimates provide over £860 million gross. This is approximately £45 million greater than the 1995 outturn. Second level education is the right of all students who wish to avail of it. Building on the foundation of primary level, second level education is no longer discretionary for any student and is of central importance in ensuring the student's full participation in economic and social life. Therefore, expenditure on second level education, in order to meet the projected increase in participation rates, with the consequent diversification of the range of abilities, and to prepare students more fully for life, work and further education, is a necessary investment in the social and economic well being of the State. The necessity for adequate funding for the variety of new programmes now under way in our schools is recognised by the substantially increased capitation grant of £12 in secondary schools and £27 in schools designated disadvantaged.
However, what is done in the classrooms depends on the teaching profession. The quality of the education system is a vital factor in securing value for money for our investment. The quality, morale and status of the teaching profession are of vital importance and this aspect is centre stage as we develop a first class education system.
The importance of quality pre-service teacher education and in-career development programmes throughout the teaching career are recognised in the White Paper. The Estimates enable me to initiate a welfare service for teachers, commencing next September. This is central to teachers' demands. The scheme, designed to help teachers experiencing problems and difficulties within and outside the school, will involve the appointment of ten employee assistant officers. Following the recommendations of a working party which reported on this issue, this will be a pilot scheme for teachers at first and second levels in three areas.
The negotiations on teachers pay which took place in the context of the current Programme for Competitiveness and Work agreement were a genuine attempt to meet the teachers claims and to introduce flexibility and change in the teaching profession. The democratic procedures of the teachers’ unions have produced a result which poses a challenge to us to overcome the difficulties which have arisen. I put forward a proposal for independent facilitation to address the issues which related to the non acceptance by two of the three teacher unions of the proposals. The Deputies will be aware that my offer has been accepted and I hope a mutually acceptable solution can be found.
Over the past 30 years there has been extraordinary growth in the numbers attending higher education. Thirty years ago one student in ten proceeded to higher education, then provided solely by the university sector. Now, about two thirds of leaving certificate students proceed to further or higher education. Of these students, one third enter the universities, one third enter regional technical colleges while another third enter further education, mainly post leaving certificate courses.
I have taken a number of steps since coming into office to provide more places, more buildings and more facilities in all third level institutions and the 1996 budget marks further progress in this regard. The Estimates provide for gross expenditure in the third level Vote of almost £520 million. This level of funding will permit continued expansion of student numbers in third level education. It will also enable me to progress to development the urban college in Dun Laoghaire, the Tipperary rural business development institute, as well as expansion of the courses in Castlebar which commenced in autumn 1994. The provision also enables me to increase the level of student maintenance grants by 5 per cent, which is twice the rate of inflation.
In the last three years alone, some 14,200 additional third level places have become available to our young people. There will be provision for a further 6,200 places in the university sector over the next five years. These places will be allocated among the seven universities and will be funded by a combination of public and private sector finance. This is the first time public and private funding has been used in this way and it marks a new departure in further investment in third level capital development.
Increases in recurrent grants have been matched by increases in capital funding. Under the 1994-99 national plan, more than £120 million, at 1994 prices, will be spent on improved facilities in third level institutions. The programme is targeted at 23 separate third level institutions. A number of new projects, involving an expenditure of approximately £36 million in 1995, has commenced and others are at an advanced stage of planning. On completion these new facilities will ensure the continuing relevance of programmes to the needs of the individual in society and the economy and bring about improved economic growth and job creation.
The 1996 budget provides for the principal phase of the implementation of the historic 1995 Government decision to abolish full-time undergraduate tuition fees at third level. This is an achievement of extraordinary significance. It demonstrates in the clearest way that higher education is for all — without barriers of income, social status or family background.
The abolition of full-time undergraduate tuition fees has been achieved at minimal cost to the State by linking it with the abolition of the highly regressive covenant tax relief. I recognise that free tuition alone is not enough.
I have supported a range of initiatives to encourage and advance retention of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds right through the education system, including third level education. That includes the development of links between disadvantaged schools and third level institutions which have been strengthened and encouraged since I came to office. These initiatives include arrangements between Ballymun Comprehensive School and Dublin City University, between the Southhill areas in Limerick and the University of Limerick, between schools in Tallaght and the Regional Technical College, and Trinity College and Dublin inner city schools. These links are in line with the commitment in the White Paper that "each third level institution will be encouraged to develop links with designated second level schools, building on existing good practice."
These initiatives have been underpinned by practical support within the third level sector itself. Last year, for the first time, I established a special fund to support students who suffer from particular disadvantage, as they enter the education system. I decided that practical help was needed to ensure that students from disadvantaged backgrounds would be supported in remaining in third level education. This fund has been substantially increased in 1996.
These Estimates are a concrete expression of the Government's commitment to the education sector. They will enable me, with the dedicated people in this sector, to maintain and improve the quality of our education system and to make substantial progress in implementing the policies of the Government's White Paper "Charting our Education Future."
I apologise on behalf or our front bench spokesperson who is absent due to a family event. I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak to this committee on the Education Estimate. There will not be any confrontation even though I see that the Minister has armed herself with the heavies from the Department of Education, who are welcome. I agree with the Minister that investment in education is perhaps our greatest investment. With a budget of over £2.2 billion, I see a number of areas where there should be reorientation. In particular there is a need to stand back from the day to day running of the Department and assess what is best for our young people. Over the last two years there has been a tremendous increase in crime and concerns about stress on teachers, stress within the school, and stress on families and young people. We must see where the real needs in education are.
We must emphasise the need for early education. The Minister introduced the early start programme and it has done a lot of good, but there has not been enough consultation on it. I would like to see what the Minister could achieve with the programme on a national level. I welcome her initiative on the educationally disadvantaged and the reduction of the naonáin class number to 15. However, this direction is slightly misguided, we needed to solve a problem but, by placing all our excess primary teachers in disadvantaged schools, we will create further disadvantage. I would like to have seen a more balanced approach with a reduction in the pupil-teacher ratio and investment in disadvantaged schools.
One school may be termed disadvantaged and getting resources while the school down the road is not although the same parents and different children could be involved. A complete reduction in the pupil teacher ratio to 13 or 15 would be ideal. We must work towards that and balance it with support services.
I am concerned because remedial education and other support services will not be available this year. Will the Minister clarify if she has additional resources to provide the support services? Disadvantaged schools must be addressed in a way where we have all the facilities available to young people. We need additional capitation. It is easy to rely on statistics and percentages but we should go on the facts, especially in primary education. Those in primary education feel that the capitation grant is too low and should be increased. How can one be eligible at 11 years for £45 and at 12 years of age be eligible for additional resources? That needs to be focused upon.
This is the first opportunity for the Minister to speak after the launch of her White Paper although we did have a debate about what would arise from it. One of its focuses is the introduction of regional education boards. In the Estimate prior to Christmas there was an introduction of £350,000 which has been reduced to £50,000. Will the Minister give us the costings on the introduction of the REBs? We have been waiting for this and would like to know from where the resources will come.
I have a concern with regard to demographic trends; in particular where we have two teacher schools being reduced to one teacher. I have had a number of calls about that. I am concerned not only for the morale of the teacher but for the education of the pupils. It is difficult to teach six or seven classes at the same time. We have proposed there should be two teacher schools and that retention figures should be increased. It warrants some discussion because losing a school can sound the death knell of many rural communities.
The other matter in primary education is the school building programme. Will the Minister advise us how many projects are with her for sanction and their cost? I could list a few for her. Primary school buildings were progressing well with regard to extensions and renovations. What moneys are needed to complete a school building programme for primary schools?
The Minister referred in her speech and previous discussions to reform of the curriculum in second level education to get 90 per cent retention. The Minister is heading towards that with an increase in those sitting the leaving certificate but I worry about what qualifications they will have after the examinations. We are introducing new curricula. We welcome change and realise there has to be change in education but there seems to be too much emphasis on curriculum change at second level. We realise that in-service training is necessary for the introduction of new programmes but almost £6.3 million is provided for in-career development. How much will be made available to primary, second and third levels and to parents? What other organisations will obtain these moneys? Will the Minister issue any more circulars in forthcoming months? It is time to look at what new programmes will be introduced and to see if we have a strategy for in-career development and the introduction of a new curriculum.
We have seen the problems that occurred with examinations. It is probably the last thing the Minister wishes to hear about from this side of the House but, given that we are approaching examinations time, it is important that we can emphasise the integrity of the examination system. It is important not only for parents and teachers but particularly for students. The Minister said she introduced checks and balances after the problem arose in Sligo. With photocopying problems in the Department of Justice and the fact that papers fell off the back of a lorry in County Roscommon, I am almost afraid to get up in the morning to see what other ludicrous crisis can occur. I would like the Minister to re-affirm the integrity of the examination system and inform us when the Price Waterhouse report will be made available.
We have had a number of discussions in the past year about third level education. I welcome the introduction of the post-graduate programme for primary teachers. Can the Minister say when she will be able to announce the programme and how many will be eligible for it? In the course of her Dáil speech on the budget, she referred to the removal of university fees and said the system is now fair for all. I disagree with that and have serious concerns about the abolition of fees. Maintenance grants must be increased to a realistic level because those who attain the necessary qualifications and obtain a place in university cannot afford to go there on £45 per week. The students are over-stretched and that problem must be tackled. I also disagree with the change whereby independent mature students are now only entitled to the adjacent rate. That is inequitable and wrong and the Minister should change it. I have received many representations regarding mature students who come to Dublin or Galway from other areas and who find they are only entitled to the adjacent rate.
There is still a problem with facilities for third level students, particularly library facilities. I was in the UCD library last week and there is not enough room, as somebody commented, to turn a sweet in one's mouth. It is packed. There are not enough computers either. We are trying to encourage young people to be computer literate yet there are not enough computers and there are miles of queues for access to them. We need to invest in additional facilities and particularly in additional library facilities. The Minister referred to the regional technical colleges. What proposals has she to establish regional technical colleges as institutes of technology, a proposal that has been mooted? I am aware that discussions have taken place and I would like the Minister to elaborate on them.
Available resources should be invested in early education and primary education as well as the necessary support services. We need a targeted approach to education which will allow the disadvantaged to emerge from that disadvantage and will not create greater disadvantage for those who are struggling and trying their best. The morale of teachers is decreasing every day and is now at an all-time low. We cannot have a good education system if our teachers are not motivated and I am most concerned about that issue.
I read an article in The Financial Times on 2 February 1996 which caused me great concern. In the UK no fees are charged for third level education. However, there is a move to introduce an admission levy of £300 on students. As far as I can ascertain, the universities are unable to maintain the standards they have always upheld because the Exchequer funds them and can reduce the amount of funding. We have always been proud of the quality of our third level institutions and I do not want to see that quality deteriorate. If, in four or five years time, universities decide they will impose a charge it will be a regressive step. This issue should be examined and we should learn from the mistakes that have been made abroad. We have the disastrous habit of accepting everything that is done in the UK and the US as being good for us. We have the best education system and we should not be misguided into making a name for ourselves and ignoring the pitfalls involved in the removal of third level fees.
One could talk about education until doomsday. The Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is present and he has a major problem with juvenile institutions. We must look at what investment will be required in that area. The Minister of State with responsibility for sport is also present. All of us, including Government Deputies, would like to see a few pounds more coming from the national lottery for the sports programme, which is an integral part of education. There is a need not only to provide sports facilities in schools and universities but also to introduce a sports curriculum, which is currently lacking. There is no initiative in that area but if the Minister of State, Deputy Allen, was allocated more money it might not be necessary to allocate so much money to the budget for the Department of Health. Sport is often the lame duck in the Department of Education and it should be given greater status and resources. It is an integral part of Irish life.
We will have an opportunity to discuss specifics with the two Ministers of State when we deal with the Vote in detail.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Estimates for the Department of Education. As always on these occasions, we start on a point of agreement. As the Minister said, the provision for education reflects the view that the development of the educational skills of people is as important a source of wealth as more traditional forms of capital. Nobody would disagree with those sentiments.
As we are discussing the Estimates, there is no point in elaborating on areas of agreement. There are some areas that need to be teased out but we can deal with them when questioning the Minister. I will restrict myself to the areas about which I was concerned when going through the Estimates.
I have a bugbear about pre-school education. I recently referred to this in the House during the debate on a Private Members' Bill introduced by my party and the Minister interrupted me and referred to the "Early Start" programme. Providing pre-school education in Ireland is very difficult and problematic, notwithstanding the introduction of the "Early Start" programme which is good in a limited sense. So much falls through the grid in dealings between the Departments of Health, Education and Justice. The Minister of State, Deputy Currie, has a co-ordinating role but pre-school education was only fleetingly referred to in the White Paper. Yet the early years are critical to the development of our children. Early intervention can be of great benefit during this period, particularly for disadvantaged children.
It is desirable that the Department of Education be given an all-encompassing role in pre-school education and assume responsibility for the entire area. Coordination in that area should be more developed, particularly as it relates to the Department of Health. The Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is firefighting and has a difficult job. On the one hand he must deal with truancy, and on the other problems in various institutions.
In referring to education I wish to draw back the shutters on what is currently perceived as early education. National school teachers are not adequately trained to teach the very youngest children.
Having considered the figures, I am aware that spending on education has increased dramatically. We are all pleased about that. However, we must inquire if we are obtaining value for that increased expenditure. The recent report on truancy estimated that almost 40 per cent of young people, approximately 26,000, leave school officially categorised as educationally disadvantaged. We need to examine the reasons for this when considering how money is spent on our education system. Some children leave school without any recognised qualifications and have difficulty with literacy and numeracy skills. I do not believe in "mother-in-law" research, but anecdotal evidence shows that children leave school without being able to spell or read. These 26,000 young people form a considerable cohort and this problem must be addressed.
The figures indicate that our current emphasis has not been successful in identifying and dealing with difficulties. A major social cost is incurred as a result of the failings to which I referred. Educational disadvantage translates into short-term and long-term unemployment. Early intervention is a critical aspect of educational policy and we do not adequately emphasise it.
In 1990, first level education accounted for 35 per cent of the total education budget. This figure has fallen by three per cent, notwithstanding the fact that the actual amount has increased. When it is considered that deficiencies at first level contribute to our social problems, this must be reexamined. As Deputy Coughlan stated, resources must be allocated in places where they can be most effective and I believe this is at first level. The gaps which appear through lack of resources cannot be stemmed by designating schools as being disadvantaged. A more comprehensive approach must be utilised, particularly through the use of psychological services and remedial teachers and a more progressive view must be taken in this regard. It is heart-breaking for parents whose children are failing within the education system, cannot cope with it, are difficult or have psychological problems. It is difficult to inform such parents that they may have to wait months or years for their children to be assessed. That problem is not appropriate in our society and we must try to address it. The critical intervention must occur at the very early stage.
I am not anxious to deal with the Estimate in great detail because that will be done through a discussion of the individual headings. However, the area of the curriculum at second level also needs to be addressed. As Deputy Coughlan stated, there is a danger of an overload in this regard. We must consider the area of syllabi and curriculum, vis-�-vis the current needs of our children. This is obviously an ongoing and critical consideration and it will be stated that there are new curricula in the school system which address various problems or lifestyles. However, this tends to be piecemeal.
There is also a difficulty with regard to the points-driven entry to third level education. This is not specifically the problem of the Department of Education; it is a social and cultural problem. Does the Department attempt to address or take responsibility for this problem? An attitude still exists that children should receive an education which is directed, as in the past, by reverence for the more academic subjects. Should there be a more vocational emphasis in the system, and should not that emphasis be valued? Changes in the education system have not been matched by changes to attitudinal values outside the system among parents and society in general. When conversing with prospective employers of young people, it is ironic that they talk about the skills required to enable people to get on with their workmates and show initiative, while, on the other hand, the final part of our education system does not value these skills. I admit that to a large extent the argument is a philosophical one.
With regard to third level education, UCD has been operating a very effective lobby. Many Members were invited to the campus to see students queuing to use the library and witness the lack of facilities. An immediate problem exists for third level students in this regard and it will be very difficult to address it in the short-term. I know there has been increased funding but, unfortunately, according to the UCD students, current students are not benefiting to a great extent. I do not want to rehash the free fees argument with the Minister. However, I greatly fear, from the feedback we are getting, the increase in the level of maintenance grants is insufficient. Disadvantaged people still cannot avail of third level education because of the maintenance system, despite the availability of free fees.
We spoke last week about the regional education boards. The Minister has a provision for £50,000 under the subhead for 1996. In the grand scheme of things, can she give us an estimate of the figure in three or four years' time? The resources should be put into education rather than bureaucracy. I am afraid that is the way we are going. We continue to disagree on this, but I feel very strongly about it.
We spend £40 million a year on school transport. It is a very centralised system. The CIE buses are operational for no more than 400 hours per year and lie idle for much of the time. There is a great case to be made for managing this system locally. This would be much more efficient and school buses would be available to schools for trips and educational tours. That should be examined with a view to savings within the system. We might then have a less costly and more efficient system.
Deputy Coughlan referred to the area of sport. I was talking recently to some Deputies about sport. I questioned the difference between boys' schools and girls' schools, because boys' schools get a half day on Wednesdays to play games. Sport and physical education are not valued as much as they should be in the education system, particularly for girls. All the research shows that girls do not participate sufficiently in sport. In terms of overall health in later life, the incidence of osteoporosis would be greatly lessened if girls were encouraged to become involved in sport. We should be conscious of the deficit in the participation of girls when we are developing policy in relation to sport.
Deputy Coughlan raised a point in relation to grants for mature third level students. That was introduced as a change last year in the rules for processing third level grants. Up to last year, different counties administered the third level mature students' grant scheme in slightly different ways. Two counties interpreted the rules differently from every other county.
I raised this matter with the Minister in the Dáil. I cited the case of a bank official in County Cavan who applied for and was granted a mature student grant. She got a college place in Cork and was devastated to find she was only given the adjacent rate because she was not retaining an address in Cavan. I made a case for her which, unfortunately, was not successful. The Minister responded by ensuring every other county administered the scheme in the same way. Accordingly, if a student was not retaining an address in the county in question, they could only qualify for a grant at the adjacent rate. That is grossly unfair and should be changed quickly.
My county of Westmeath took a mature view of it and asked how a student could be expected to keep two addresses. If a bank official in Mullingar gets a mature student grant and a local factory worker's child gets an ordinary grant and both go to college in Dublin, the ordinary student gets £1,600 a year to survive, pay rent and so on and the mature student gets £600 a year. That does not make sense to me. The change was a retrograde step and should be reviewed.
The Minister has sensibly rowed back from the centralisation of the processing of third level grants. I commend her on that very wise decision. I ask her to take a further step in that regard and allow the local processing of third level grants at a central place in each county. In Westmeath — and I am sure other counties are more complex — the vocational education committee processes some applications and the county council processes others. They then have to pass them to each other, which leads to confusion and duplication as the full expertise is not available. In the county council with which I am most familiar there is a girl who knows the scheme backwards and ends up processing most of the applications. She is somewhat frustrated by having to send many of them to the local vocational education committee for final clearance. That could all be centralised locally rather than nationally, with one processing point per county.
The point made by Deputy Keogh in relation to primary education is very important. Children's futures are often either secured or unsecured by their experience of primary education. We should focus much more of our resources and attention on primary education. The 1980s were devoted to the tremendous expansion of the regional technical colleges. We should devote a decade to primary education, pour all available extra resources into primary schools and give teachers the necessary motivation.
I am glad the two Ministers of State for Education, Deputy Allen and Deputy Currie, are present. The Minister of State, Deputy Allen, is handling the scarce resources available to him extremely well. It is only fair to compliment him on the manner in which he manages to disperse such a small amount of money.
The Minister of State, Deputy Currie, who has been given the important child care portfolio involving co-ordinating various Departments, has done the job very well and has broken new ground. I know the kind of pressure he is under.
I call on Deputy Frances Fitzgerald. I ask Members to focus their remarks on the general area. It includes sports — Vote 26 — the special schools and so on.
I congratulate the Minister on a number of initiatives she has taken, especially her decision to put more money into disadvantage and to target it more effectively. We are in great danger of creating a two tier society. The key way to tackle this is through educational interventions, which we are beginning to make.
I am concerned that we are still not identifying quickly enough individual children in the classroom who are in need of specialist help. We do not initiate appropriate psychological assessment, including counselling, backup and appropriate intervention in their families at an early enough stage. Teachers would support me in this. They often find it hard to get this kind of specialist help into the school. How does the Minister see these services developing in the coming year?
In the broader framework, the Government is making progress in identifying disadvantaged areas and moving resources into them and into the schools. However, in terms of getting the necessary specialist help into the schools, will the Minister outline her plans? For example, where are we in addressing the issue of a basic schools' psychological service? We are still asking children to fit into an educational system as opposed to having a system to meet children's diverse abilities and skills. We are still struggling to get more diversity into the education system than is there at present and this task will continue.
I support what has been said about pre-school services. Does the Minister see her Department playing the lead role in the development of pre-school educational services in the coming years? Does she identify this as a task for her Department? The Department of Health and the Department of Equality and Law Reform are also playing a role here. Does she see the primary development of pre-schools taking place via her Department? The early start is still a pilot project.
I join with my colleagues in their remarks on the role of the Ministers of State at the Department of Education, Deputies Allen and Currie. The greatest investment in child care to date from any Government in the history of the State has taken place in the past 18 months. Real breakthroughs have been made. It is a very demanding area; there is almost a crisis a day as the Minster of State, Deputy Currie, knows well. However, progress is being made and initiatives are being taken.
We have a serious truancy problem. In the primary sector the problem is one of identifying the children at risk. How does the Minister of State, Deputy Currie, see the plans he is developing for tackling truancy working and what is the time scale before we see more action in this area?
On the issue of sports in the curricula, what plans does the Minister of State, Deputy Allen, have for sports within the primary school sector? It is very neglected. There is gender bias and this issue must be addressed at a Departmental level. I am a mother of three boys and I see the opportunities they get via sports, which is very important. However, there is clearly an imbalance. I would also appreciate the views of the Minister on this. It is a very serious issue and it has implications for health, for socialising and for networking in later life.
Girls' sports are completely under-developed. They are also undervalued. How can we accelerate the valuing of them? There have been great changes, such as in netball and basketball, but we still value football, rugby and other boys' sports much more. It is reflected in media coverage. It is a multi faceted problem which will not be solved easily but is on the way to being solved. Will the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Allen, undertake initiatives that can accelerate this process? How do they see matters developing in the Department under their leadership?
We all support the commitment to areas of disadvantage and a great deal has been done. The Minister stated that the education system is a source of wealth. She went on to state that it is systematically linked to the economic planning process. This is a new kind of language in educational thought. It slightly chilled my humanities type approach to education as being a love of learning and a broadening of the mind. There is an Orwellian tone to the Minister's statement; perhaps the strange debate which came out of nowhere on the future of history as a core subject may be related to it. Will she develop her thinking here?
One group is disadvantaged over and above everybody else. It comprises people with specific educational problems and needs — the handicapped. I am not familiar with the details of the O'Donoghue case and the problem of identifying needs which arose there, but I am familiar with the demands of a constituent of mine, Francis Murphy, about whom we have corresponded at length, and who has special behavioural and educational needs and problems. A place was not found for him.
There is a failure in our educational system and ethos to accept that we have an obligation to the mentally handicapped in the area of mainline education to provide fully for their needs. There appears to be an absence of a legislative commitment to them of the kind which exists, for example, in the UK and America. This follows through in the area of school assistance. Under Vote 27, provision is made for education assistance. A major programme was announced last September but it now appears to be frozen and we are not able to respond to any needs. For example, we have corresponded with regard to a school — Saint Patrick's, Drumcondra — in my area where there are two children in wheelchairs, involving their parents attending the school almost constantly to look after their needs.
The Minister's introduction was a gloss. Are we making progress? Are we setting new targets? When can we see ourselves as a society being able to respond to these most disadvantaged of the disadvantaged? These people have the mental, physical and other disadvantages which may or may not coincide with the socio-economic disadvantage which the Minister has been targeting effectively in a welcome way.
With regard to targeting socio-economic disadvantage, I have again been in correspondence with the Minister and have not yet received a reply. A number of schools were identified for the special 15 to one ratio. How was that ratio chosen? I presume it was picked on an analysis of the schools and, therefore, the Minister must know to which schools and areas it will apply. How will the Minister cope with some of the issues which Deputy Coughlan raised, such as the neighbouring school which is almost as disadvantaged? The Minister may be in a position to give the committee more information on that matter.
The pre-school programme ran into problems in my area with the local pre-school play groups who felt to a degree that they were being displaced. I did not support that view. I felt there was room for both and I tried to argue for such harmony in my area, and I think I was successful in that.
There were formal negotiations with play groups about the introduction of this programme and, clearly, it is a matter which the Minister will run into anywhere there is talk of developing it further. First, what happening to those negotiations? Second, is the Minister looking currently at an expansion of that pre-school programme because I support it and think it is valuable? Like everybody else, play and physical education is undervalued.
I know that when the Minister took office she found a primary school network in which the fabric of the schools was in an unbelievable condition. There was a famous list of 150 schools. For the purposes of an update, what is the present position in that regard? I think all the schools on that list have been addressed. Certainly, many of them have been dealt with, I am glad that almost all of them in my area have been addressed.
Are we at the stage yet where the Department can start looking at the vital extras, such as adequate proper physical recreation and play areas? What about the timetabling of physical education from primary level onward? I referred in earlier debates to my experiences visiting Taiwan, where children spend about three hours per day on physical education from their earliest primary education, although they do not begin school as early as Irish children. It is integrated in their physical welfare, meditation skills and the eastern attitude to life. I cannot expect a transfer to that overnight, but does the Minister see the inclusion, in the next century of between half an hour and an hour of physical education per day? At present, I think physical education is voluntary and schools fit it in as they can. There are often extra charges for parents and children are lucky if there is half an hour of physical education per week, never mind per day. In addition, schools often do not have the facilities. When there are huge spaces around schools protected by palisade fencing, there is nothing inside it except grass, which is the only facility. We could do more to make sure what little time there is for recreation can be used in a way which develops children physically. I understand there were other priorities, but has the Department dealt with the basic fabric of school buildings to the point where we can start looking at these other desirable developments?
The area of responsibility of the Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is difficult to address because it spreads across a number of Departments. There is no indication in the Estimates of extra places in special schools under this particular heading. Are these schools being affected by the extra investment this year?
Will the Minister of State, Deputy Allen, who has responsibility for sport, tell the committee when he will announce the second round of major grants? Perhaps they have already been announced and I missed it.
On Vote 26, why has there been a significant increase in subhead A7, consultancy services?
Subhead B7 mentions the expenses of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Will the Minister be directing her attention to the development of a proper curriculum for children of the travelling community? There is much confusion in this area at present as to whether the education of the children of travellers should be dealt with specifically in a classroom setting with all other children, which I think is the preferred option, provided some sympathetic consideration is given to promoting the culture of the travellers. This is an important issue which is coming from the task force on travellers which was debated in the Dáil recently.
Subheads B10, B11 and B12 relate to grants for the provision of recreational facilities. Is it time the Minister examined this and brought these subheads together because I am sure there is overlapping? One gets confused sometimes on pronouncements and statements on the issue generally. Is it time to examine the efficiency of handling the grant aid under those three subheads?
While I am addressing that matter, has the Minister of State, Deputy Allen, any comment to make on the provision of an Olympic size swimming pool? I know he is committed to it. I raise the matter as our swimmers will compete in the Olympics with some hope of success. The matter has been around for far too long and it is time to settle it, once and for all.
Under subhead B20, there has been a significant increase for the provision of "miscellaneous". What precisely does that cover?
I am disappointed that the psychological service provision does not appear to allow for any significant expansion as it is generally regarded as being efficient. Is it the Minister's intention to expand the service this year, and by how much?
I see there is a significant reduction in office premises expenses, subhead A6. Is that to do with efficiency? It is a considerable reduction on last year's Estimate, and I would be interesting in hearing how it was achieved.
On Vote 27, subhead E, grants towards the employment of caretakers in national schools, are there caretakers in all national schools now? Is there an embargo on hiring such people? What are the qualifying conditions for the provision of caretakers? If a caretaker retires, is the funding of a replacement guaranteed through the Department?
I understand there was some concern with regard to visiting teachers to the travelling community? What is the current position with regard to that scheme? Will it be expanded? I know, from my contacts with the travelling community, that they found that service useful.
On that issue, as it is covered under first level education, is it the Minister's intention now or in the immediate future to deal with the perennial problem of the children of travellers moving from one area to another, often involuntarily? Their education suffers major disruption as a result. I refer in particular to the ability to transfer primary school children's records from one school to another. It is really a matter for the Department to act as a spearhead to achieve this. I have no intention of lecturing the Minister as I know she is well aware of the issue, but I want to know whether she proposes to tackle that important issue as it is interfering greatly with the travelling community's primary school children. I was surprised to note that under subhead F1 aid towards the cost of school books is decreasing this year, as is the amount for special education under subhead F2. I would have thought that expenditure would at least be held at last year's level, if not increased.
I know the Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is examining the issue of truancy. Some of the schools he visited in my constituency are anxious for this matter to be brought to finality in the interests of the children. They are a little disappointed it has not been finalised yet but they are aware of the Minister's interest in the matter. Out of control children at primary school level pose a problem. They are only few in number but they can cause havoc in their families, community and school settings.
The provision of school meals is unfair and unsatisfactory. I know it is a matter for the Department of Social Welfare and the local authority. However, this scheme is applied haphazardly in schools and the Minister for Education should demand that it be regularised once and for all. I am told by principals and teachers there are children in certain schools who are hungry and are unable to study. I would have thought schools meals were intended to cope with that eventuality. In so far as the service is being provided haphazardly in schools, the Minister should examine it seriously and consult with her Cabinet colleagues to thrash it out once and for all.
A great deal of work has been done in targeting resources at primary level and in areas of disadvantage. The Minister's recent announcement on the 25 rural and urban schools is welcome. I presume the policy is to consider the use of extra resources as they become available from a reducing population at primary level — not taking anything out of service but targeting the resources at particular areas. That has to be the policy we develop. I would welcome its application in rural and urban areas of disadvantage and I would like to see it developed in an holistic approach bringing in the community and involving the parents as a resource so that primary schools in disadvantaged areas do not have to stand alone.
I am glad to see an increase in teachers' salaries, and perhaps the Minister might like to comment on the recent and present industrial relations issues, their current state and their implications for the Estimates.
I thank the Deputies who said a word or two in my favour. The questions put to me relate to truancy. I am conscious that it is a complex issue which extends to my other responsibilities in the Department of Justice. I am aware that the child who does not attend school is not only starting off with a serious disadvantage in life, particularly if he lives in disadvantaged areas where education is the key to his future, but he has additional opportunities to become involved in crime. There is a greater likelihood that the child who does not attend school will end up in other institutions, such as Oberstown House or Trinity House.
Truancy is a major problem and, apparently, is increasing. The School Attendance Acts under which we operate date from 1926. I am mildly surprised that many of the reforming Ministers for Education did not tackle this problem years ago. Conditions have changed greatly since 1926. When I mitched from school I left home in the morning with my school bag on my back like a good boy going to school and I returned home about 4 p.m. pretending I was coming from school. I did not do it often because I was too fond of football. Nowadays the situation is greatly different; children may not leave home pretending to go to school in the morning. Instead of parents chasing children out, as happened to us, it may be that parents keep the children at home. Indeed, the children may stay at home out of humanitarian concern for a parent who is using drugs or alcohol and is not capable of looking after himself.
Different social and economic conditions apply now. In looking at the truancy problem I have to bear in mind the changed situation. We cannot look at the problem of absence from school on its own; we have to look at the reasons children do not go to school. That may relate to the attractiveness of the school. It may be that the child does not find the curriculum attractive, as well as other factors. The issue is very complex; this is why the truancy report was commissioned. Shortly after I came into office I set up a task force to look at that truancy report, to make recommendations to me and to proceed to legislation. We have made very considerable progress in that respect and the task force has reached a very advanced stage in its consideration. I hope that school attendance legislation will be published before too long. It may be published before the summer recess but I hope it will be in place by the autumn. That is proceeding quite quickly. That timetable could, of course, be upset by other factors.
Deputy Keogh referred to the fact that I find myself in a fire fighting role; this happens to me too often. That is the nature of the my job but I assure her that as far as I am concerned fire fighting is only a part-time job. My day job is a much more constructive one. I am proceeding quite quickly in the three Departments on a number of fronts and I hope that I will get time from my fire fighting activities in order to do these things satisfactorily.
We have other problems. The issue of resources comes into consideration as well. Under the 1926 legislation there were school attendance officers in the Dublin Corporation area, in Dún Laoghaire, in Cork. They also operated in Waterford. In the rest of the 26 counties the job was given to the Garda Síochána. I hope to extend that system across the 26 counties.
When does the Minister expect to be able to publish the report of the task force on truancy?
We are combining the task force report with heads for legislation.
Will it not be published in advance?
No, I will be proceeding to legislation. I hope it will not be long delayed and it will probably be available faster than anticipated.
I wish to see the report.
We had the original truancy report. Then I set up a task force in the Department. That report was not for publication. I will heed the Chairman's advice. There are also quite controversial issues such as what we ought to do in relation to the issue of suspensions, which is an increasing problem. Deputy Flood can assure the schools I visited in his constituency that things are happening.
I thank previous speakers for a number of the comments they made about my role in the Department. A number of questions were put. One, put by a number of speakers, related to the role of women in sport. Deputy Fitzgerald said that as a mother of three boys she saw what was on offer to them. As a father of three girls I can see the barriers for girls and women in sport, especially in schools.
In conjunction with the new national sports council, there will be a special group looking at the role of women in sport. This arises from a national forum on women in sport held about 18 months ago. Arising from that and from discussions I had with groups involved in this area I have announced the setting up of a special working group to look at the impediments facing women in sport, at a participatory level, at administrative and management level and in business in professional sport. I am concerned about the sudden drop out factor. Girls have a major interest in sport but there is a drop out factor at about 15 years of age for different reasons. This new group will act quickly.
I will be announcing the membership of the new sports council within a matter of weeks. I will be reducing the numbers on the council by almost half so it will be more focused. I have accepted fully the recommendations of the John Tracy group in relation to the role of the sports council and I will be moving quickly on the whole question of women in sport.
In regard to the question of physical education in schools, the strategy group I set up under the chairmanship of Mr. John Tracy advertised for submissions and expected to get grandiose wish lists related to grants and facilities. However, most of the submissions — there are already over 400 of them — have focused clearly on a number of issues. The whole question of sport in schools, including sport at pre-school and primary level, is one of those issues. I do not want to cut across the Minister in regard to the question of physical education but I know that the national council for curriculum assessment is looking at the whole question of physical education in schools.
The whole question of sport in the education system will be one of the main issues addressed when I publish the national policy in the autumn. The strategy group has received about 400 submissions but we have also invited all the political parties to get involved and I am very pleased with the response so far.
The question of recreational grants was raised by Deputy Flood. At present we have about 1,400 applications for projects worth about £500 million. The value of the grants applied for is about £46 million. My budget has gone from £4 million to £6 million but in the order of things this amounts to the distribution of the loaves and fishes. Distribution is carried out under very strict criteria.
In line with a directive from the Department of Finance, next week we will be publishing an advertisement in all the national newspapers inviting further applications. Many of the applications with the Department since before 1994 are somewhat dated now. In regard to some of the grants we allocated in December we found that the projects have already been proceeded with so those applications are invalid. We will be publishing the criteria and we ask that applicants who applied prior to 1 January 1995 reapply so as to update their applications. We will be inviting anybody who has applied already and who feels their application should be updated to do so.
The question of the confusion that may arise because of the different schemes was mentioned. In this advertisement we are combining the two schemes and we will apply the criteria depending on the level of grant applied for. There will be one form for all schemes and the level of grant applied for will decide which scheme the applicant enters.
The issue of the 50 metre pool goes back many years. A decision to proceed was revoked in 1991. We received a consultant's report in December 1994, which recommended a pool which will cost, by present day standards, about £20 million. Tallaght was the optimum site but because of budgetary constraints, the project has not proceeded. I said in the Dáil recently that if there are interested groups who want to get involved with the construction of a 50 metre pool, either in a joint venture or alone, we are open to offers and proposals.
There is interest from the private sector. I met a group this morning who have put initial proposals regarding a private venture, which I have asked them to flesh out. The proposal from DISC was seen by the Department and the consultants as unrealistic as it would have been a major loss-maker. If we spend major finance on a project, we do not want to incur an annual loss. It needs to break even. If there are private interests who want to talk to us about a venture, we have an open mind on the issue.
Did the Minister say he has grants of more than £6 million for this year?
No. I have £6 million to allocate this year.
Will the Minister advertise for applications?
We have to advertise, because many of the 1,400 applications submitted are out of date.
Can the Minister put a value on those 1,400 applications?
About £500 million.
This situation is a farce which has nothing to do with the present Minister; he probably inherited it. Inviting applications to disperse £6 million, when there are applications worth £500 million submitted already, is crazy. The system needs to be examined, as Deputies are demented because of it. Whether one is a Minister or in opposition, one may support one grant out of fifty.
Fine Gael is in government now. We can deliver everything.
The Minister would do a great service, apart from all the good work he is doing in his Department, if he sorts this situation out. Many groups and organisations take trouble preparing fine plans and maybe even incur expense by hiring advisers. They then find out they have received only a tiny fraction of the grant for which they applied. If the Minister wants to utilise the scarce funding efficiently, he should tackle this issue.
The application form requires that applicants do not send in expensive and grandiose plans drafted professionally at enormous cost. We ask for brief and concise outlines of the project and the estimated cost. We do not ask organisations to go to enormous expense to prepare the simple application. We will advertise to update the list of applications. The problem is when we allocate grants and projects have been further developed. The only way to resolve this problem is to obtain greater resources.
One of the purposes of the strategy group is to have a plan for sport. We may then be in a position to obtain greater resources. There is a greater argument to be made for sport in relation to health, crime prevention and drugs. I would prefer to see a greater emphasis on the development of youth services in combatting crime, rather than the current justice and health based approach. We have to realise prevention is better than cure, and certainly less expensive. If we can prevent a problem arising by investing in the youth and sporting area, we will do a good job.
Are the criteria for applications spelt out simply? Simple, straightforward English is important, especially for local groups who cannot incur expense and then ask TDs to do the applications for them.
I will now deal with the first level education Vote. There was a great deal of interest expressed in the special assistance for schools in disadvantaged areas scheme. I have consistently invested in and targeted disadvantaged areas. I was concerned about what we were aiming to do with funding targeted towards these areas. For this reason I brought in the Combat Poverty Agency to examine the scheme, the criteria we use, and our aspirations for it. We launched the report earlier this year and I will make it available to anybody who is interested. I also recently produced a small brochure on breaking the cycle of disadvantage.
The Combat Poverty study concluded that we needed to be more targeted and transparent in how we approached the scheme. It suggested that disadvantaged designation in a community should be confined to about 16 per cent of the school-going population. The need to raise capitation grants is a different issue. The report also stated that we needed to look at the rural, dispersed disadvantage as well as the large urban disadvantage. This posed a challenge.
The educational standards of parents impacted more than research made us aware of. Most people would be aware that interest in education at home predetermines whether the child even goes to school. The support measures had to be defined in the report and positive discrimination was specifically requested.
The initiative I have launched has been described as "a radical response" to a situation which required such a response. I have taken the demographic dividend and the teaching numbers into account, as the biggest objective was to reduce class size dramatically for these targeted areas. While I had reduced disadvantaged class size from 39 to 29, the report advised intervention to make progress. To do this requires courage on the part of a Minister who has to suggest to her colleagues, the teaching unions and the parents' associations radical intervention which puts on hold what is required generally.
We are discussing junior and senior infants and first and second classes of no bigger than 15 pupils for the urban schools. I requested having a small sample class which would prepare us for the shock in following years. The Combat Poverty Agency and the Educational Research Centre in Drumcondra were very clear in their advice. These schools in urban areas will have the same pupil-teacher ratio as the early start programme. For the first four classes there will be intervention by parents, specific training and a co-ordinator. More importantly, schools will have to draw up a five year plan because they must signal to us and to the Education Resource Centre, which we will use to select schools under the criteria, their plans to break the cycle of disadvantage. This is what this intervention is doing.
The provision of food will also be involved. I take the point made by Deputy Flood in this regard. I taught in the inner city and I distributed school lunches at 9.30 a.m. because children came to school without being fed. A programme is being implemented which is carefully targeted and is fully in accordance with what the Combat Poverty Agency and the Education Resource Centre have recommended to me.
Rural disadvantage affects smaller schools and these will be clustered. We have a home/school liaison programme in urban areas and we will seek to use this as an aid to teachers. Each school will receive a circular. We know which schools are disadvantaged and we have already identified them. We will specifically target the worst ones. Not every community is in such crisis that it requires the provision of hot food in schools. I must be careful in using language like this so that I do not write off whole communities. We are not writing them off but are making an investment.
The Chairman referred to my use of economic terms. The budget for the Department of Social Welfare is double that of the Department of Education. It therefore makes economic sense to target resources at education because we will then be aiming to provide for the full development of pupils so that they will go on to second level, benefit by the changes being introduced there and advance to third level. We must make an economic input into allowing education to develop the whole person.
Deputies will be aware that people talk about loss of teachers and changes in the schedule. When I became Minister the average number of pupils in classes was 39. This has been reduced to 35 and 1,000 teachers have been retained in the system and used in a targeted way. This is not totally my idea because I would have proceeded more gradually. However, the research I commissioned recommended that this was what I should do and I accepted it.
Deputy Coughlan asked about school buildings. I inherited this situation from Fianna Fáil.
The Minister's charts are not going any higher in Donegal.
We inherited many problems in 1987.
I am outlining what I inherited. I have cleared the dramatic list. I have dealt with indoor toilet blocks. I think it is sound and wise to invest in buildings. We have changed the curriculum and have made great demands on teachers. Children are now living in better housing and there is no way they should go to school in some of the buildings which remain. One of the advantages of my visiting schools is that I can see the condition in which they are. There are moves to carry out a general survey of schools and I hope we will be able to agree on the priorities of schools.
Did the Minister say there will be a survey?
We are continuously surveying schools. The INTO has surveyed——
Did the Department start a survey last year?
The INTO gave me the results of its survey. We decided to carry out a survey throughout the country so that we would be able to identify the needs of schools. In some counties schools are extraordinarily neglected but in others schools are extraordinarily well served. There does not seem to be a particular reason why this is the case. We must come back to the responsibility of boards of management to interact with the Department on the needs of their schools.
Is the survey, which is based on the INTO survey, ongoing?
The INTO carried out a survey and it presented the results to me. We then initiated our own questionnaire for schools. This information will shortly arrive in the Department and must be processed. If we seek increased funding we must have the necessary information. We were able to use the INTO survey on primary school buildings as basis for our survey. We have also established a maintenance of school buildings programme. From next January each school will be paid £2,000 and £9 per pupil. The small maintenance grants, about which people made representations to the Department and TDs, will now become the responsibility of boards of management. Boards will make their decisions with regard to their buildings. I expect that this programme will be a success.
With regard to primary teacher numbers, we are beginning talks with teacher training colleges about a new graduate programme. I hope to be able to make a specific announcement on this shortly. The general principle of repeating the graduate training programme for primary teachers has been accepted.
With regard to pre-schooling, we compare well with other European countries because our children begin school at four, even though the official entry age is six. When we talk about the development of kindergarten or pre-school systems in other countries, we must take into account that children in these countries do not enter the primary school system two years earlier than the official age of entry. The setting up of pre-schools was a specific intervention and there are now about 50 of them. There had been differences of opinion in communities about the situation previously. Dr. Anne McKenna, who serves on the European network which deals with pre-schools, chairs a committee which involves people with different interests in this area and which is to report to me.
The demographic dividend is being held within the system. Specific questions were asked about declining numbers. There is a considerable decline in the primary sector and we are using increased funding to spend more on each individual pupil.
Deputy Flood's contribution gives me an opportunity to repeat the objective in the White Paper with regard to the enrolment of traveller children in primary schools. We see a big role for regional boards in this area. This issue cannot be dealt with in a piecemeal way. Each region must spell out in its plan its provisions for travelling children, pupils with disadvantage, gaelscoileanna and multi-denominational education. The needs of traveller children must be accepted and met. School plans must contain admission policies on travellers.
The NCCA has developed the curriculum and assessment procedures. Visiting teacher services are working well and will continue. We also feel that modules for teachers' in-service programmes on traveller culture are important.
As regards monitoring school attendance patterns, there is a big drop off at second level which concerns us. We have set ourselves an objective that within ten years all traveller children will complete a junior cycle, but there is a big drop off between one sector and the other. In the pre-school or early start programme there is a special heading for travellers. There are 55 pre-school classes for travellers and 188 special classes catering for 2,600 traveller children who are specifically integrated into that plan. In the meantime an ongoing committee is examining the implementation of the recommendations on this.
Arising from the special education review committee's report we had a series of workshops, and this was one of the sectors we dealt with. We set ourselves targets and the review is ongoing. The investment is being well spent but the return can be slow. That is why we have not just taken recommendations from a report. It is ongoing so that the community itself can get feedback.
There were savings last year because some of the computer programmes did not get up and running, although they are expected to do so this year. We are examining the financial evaluation systems within different budgets. The training of staff reflects more what happened last year and what is expected this year. On the building side, the decentralisation in Tullamore is completed and there is an office there.
The provision of caretakers applied to schools of 500 pupils and more; then it was brought down to 400 and it is now for schools of 250 pupils or more. There is a capitation grant for the payment of caretakers. For disadvantaged schools it is 200, and ten teachers for special schools. The downward movement is continual because people need the services of a caretaker. We have been moving systematically each year to improve it. The question of equipment for special schools must be referred back to 1992 and what went in from 1993 to 1995. We are meeting the individual needs for this.
I am concerned about disruptive children and we now have a pilot scheme in place in Tallaght providing a high concentration of teachers so that, without sending children out of school, we can put in place a service for children who are disruptive in the classroom. We are monitoring it, but it began only last September. It was a special response which came from school principals who outlined their needs to the Department. We want to put a programme in place because we will be called upon to deal with this more and more.
Deputy Costello mentioned the disadvantaged, but I have already covered that on the primary end. We have already been able to supply Deputies with specific information requested.
We have piloted the schools psychological service into certain areas. The drop in numbers will help us at primary level. We will also look at teacher training because there is a role for the teacher in identifying needs and to have sufficient psychologists available. I refer Deputies to the role of the education boards whose remit will include responding to the need for central assistance services available in a region. The identification and response to schools' special needs will be dealt with at area level.
I want to make sure we get to the next item on the agenda even if only for ten or 15 minutes.
The Minister skipped over how much money will go into career development, but we will raise that issue again. Every time we want to find out anything about additional resources, psychological services or remedial teachers, it is all left until these REBs are set up.
It is not.
Every time we open our mouths the Minister says it all depends, and that everything has to be regional. That is the answer the Minister gave to my colleague about the psychological service.
The Minister did not tell me if she was going to expand it. She did not answer that.
When I arrived in office there were four, now there are 14. It is being expanded.
It was done by the Minister's predecessor.
The White Paper, Charting Our Education Future, sees the future service needs of the community being delivered through the education boards. Specific tasks are being assigned to education boards, and they will include——
That means the Minister is neglecting her role until she can off load all her problems onto the REBs, the same as the Department of Health.
The Minister is not expanding on it at all.
I am sorry that there seems to be some doubt regarding my replies about ongoing investment. Since last year we have had another £100 million to discuss. That is not leaving anything to the future, it is actually day-to-day expenditure. There have been vast improvements in the system, even in the past 12 months.
I asked whether the Minister was expanding the school psychological service this year. All I required was an answer, yes or no, but I received neither. I was referred instead to some board.
It is being progressively expanded.
This year?
It has gone from four to 14 and I intend to expand it.
This year?
Within my term of office.
The Minister will be here for centuries.
The Minister either is or is not going to expand the service. It is all right if she is not, I understand. I am simply asking a question.
I do not intend not to expand it.
The Minister is not expanding it this year.
There is a need to expand it right across the country so that it is available in different areas.
But not this year.
We will let the Ministers of State depart. We will take some questions on second and third level.
One of the schemes the Minister referred to is the new employee assistant officer one, but I do not know if it refers to first, second or third level. What kind of people are they? Is that the psychological service that we are developing this year rather than the one directly for the pupils? Pupils depend a lot on the psychological health of their teachers. I would like some idea of who these people are and what kind of people they are.
Demographics are beginning to give us a lot of positives in the primary area, but it will still go the wrong way for a while in third level. Can the Minister indicate for how many more years we will have a growth in numbers entering third level? When does that even off and begin to go the right way? I welcome the developments in the four or five special scheme areas mentioned, but the net effect is that unless you have not got a third level college nearby there is no advantage.
There is a need to find some way of expanding it nationally next year. That could be done through partnerships where there is no third level college, or through area employment groups capable to taking this on with additional resources. BYTE has been extremely effective and is working in Ballymun in my own constituency, but there is also a need for it in Finglas South where third level participation is extremely low. They have no third level college nearby to twin with.
What has been suggested for this year might be adequate in terms of expansion for one year, but we should certainly look at something which is national or universal. How is the special fund for disadvantaged students in third level education accessed and applied? Dublin City University, which is in my constituency, is having some difficulty with expansion plans and is having planning hiccups. Local people are concerned about the nature of the chemical and biological experiments it is conducting. What other places are planned for that university which suffers from the same problem as those on the south side, inadequate library space? It has the worst ratio of space per student of any of the colleges. Will the Minister respond to those points.
As regards transition year, I am sure the Minister is aware of the divergence of its application. Some people say it is terrific, while others say it is a pain in the neck and destroys some young people. In fact, in some cases it might be partly responsible for encouraging youngsters to drop out of school and I have come across that in my constituency. I am sure the Minister is aware of the application of transition year, but it is too vague. One of my children is going through that process and is often left in a classroom with nothing to do; students are, to some extent, left to their own devices. That matter should be tackled or streamlined. Some absolute guidelines should be laid down as to what can and cannot be done. While there is criticism about the application of transition year, I hear complimentary comments as well.
I would like to refer to an issue which has been frequently raised, youngsters having to carry school bags. Regulations should be brought in whereby schools would be responsible for ensuring that students did not carry bags above a certain weight. When I ask my children why they do not leave some of their books in their lockers, they say they cannot do so because they must bring them home for exercises. That is wrong. It is a health issue and should be tackled on that basis. I know Ministers for Health and those working in the health area have raised this issue, but nothing has been done.
Planning fees for PE halls at Kilinarden Community School, Holy Family Community School and St. MacDara's Community College have been approved. However, when people heard that these halls were going ahead they did not realise that only the planning fees had been approved. Three members of the Labour Party serve this area; two in Dublin South West and one in Dublin South Central. If, as the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs suggested, there will no election until November 1997, it might be 15 months from 30 April 1996 before building commences. In the interests of the Minister's colleagues in the Dáil, I suggest the building should commence before the general election because it is a serious issue and people feel disgruntled that they got wrong information, which certainly did not come from my side.
Colásite de hÍde is the all Irish second level school to serve the Tallaght area. The Department owns a fine site comprising 12 acres in the Tymon north regional park There is a dog fight between the vocational education committee, which will provide the school with the Minister's help, and the local authority. As a result, no school is being provided on the site. It was intended that the school would be on the site by September, but that is now impossible. The Department owns the site and it should say to the local authority that it wants clear possession so the vocational education committee can provide the school. The local authority is using the Department to frustrate the provision of an all Irish second level school on that site by saying it would prefer it to be in a different location. It is a classic case of the local authority trying to use the Department to frustrate the people in the area. I ask the Minister to give this matter her attention and to instruct the local authority to hand over vacant possession of the site so that the Department can get on with it.
When will the student support scheme be available? It is anxiously awaited because it is well into May and we would like to know which colleges in the UK will be eligible for grant aid. The situation as regards the adjacent grant for mature students is a bit unfair. Perhaps the Minister will see what could be done to change that. Does the Minister have any new proposals to change the name, role and status of the regional technical colleges? Will any legislation be introduced in that regard? As regards the amount which has been made available for examinations this year, will the Minister introduce an additional estimate if the Price Waterhouse report contains any proposals on technology or proposals to have examiners travel to schools to look at practical work?
Will the Minister comment on the revamping of the vocational educational area and on what was contained in the newspapers today? There is nothing in the Estimate to give us a clue as to what may happen. Will the vocational educational committees be rationalised? Will the urban college in Dún Laoghaire be completed by election time next year?
We spoke about the problem of girls and sport. St. Michael's, the largest girls' school covering the Finglas area which is located in Finglas village, does not have a PE hall or a prospect of one. I gather the Department sees itself in a position to fund such facilities in the near future. This is a large school with 800 girls and this situation is unacceptable. It is the major second level girls school in Finglas. Holy Faith Girls School in Glasnevin had to build its own, largely by fundraising activities. This is an area of great deprivation. These girls are making that jump and these improvements may help them to develop other skills and make the school environment more attractive. They would have this if they were studying in a more comfortable environment.
The question of setting up another regional technical college type college in the north west of Dublin has been around for some time. Where does that debate currently stand? Both Finglas and Blanchardstown want the college. I would like to see Finglas get it because it would increase third level participation levels in the area. Can the Minister tell us if that proposal is still around?
The welfare officers are being appointed to provide a welfare service for teachers; this has been mooted for a long time. I set up a working party involving management, teachers and the Department and it put forward proposals. It recommended a two year pilot employee assistance scheme for primary and second level and it would initially operate in Dublin city and County, Cork city and County and Counties Galway, Mayo and Roscommon. Details of the appointment of the ten employee assistant officers are being finalised and the scheme will be in place by September 1996. This is part of the ongoing investment in the teaching profession taking place in the Department.
Would they have been social workers or teachers in the past and what kind of role will they play?
The working party will spell out the job description. I have given a commitment that employee assistant officers will be in place by September 1996. I thank the teachers' unions which were prepared, in a difficult year, to sit on this committee with us. I will have more specific details on that matter the next time I come to the committee.
Another question was asked about when we would get through the population bulge. That bulge occurred in 1980. Matters will only stabilise at third level by the years 2015-16. We are in an era of lifelong learning. Other European countries, whose demographics are different to ours, have responded positively to second chance and return education. I do not envisage that the need to invest in third level buildings will ever peter out. We should concentrate on when the present school population will finish at third level.
A number of questions were asked about the use of regional technical college names. I went to the regional technical college annual general meeting — the regional technical college is celebrating its 25 year in existence. One of the recommendations made in the steering committee report was that we examine the use of these names. The colleges are in a better position to recommend proposals on this matter to me so I have invited them to do it. The colleges are examining this matter and they will now meet as a council of governors, which is a new move.
I like the point the Chair made about twinning regional technical colleges and universities but how can they be twinned if one does not have a third level institution. The Chair suggested that we look at the partnerships. Many of the education system provisions are being dealt with in the partnerships. VTOS would be seen as a preliminary to third level. We have an extra 1,000 VTOS places and I am using them to respond to a study on the issue. These places are being more generally distributed.
While people with little or no means qualify for grants, there are always people on the fringes. A large element of this scheme puts in place physical facilities for those with physical disabilities. Professor Seán Kelly of UCD is chairing a committee, which includes people from the NRB and the different colleges and regional technical colleges, and it has made recommendations to me. Some people need individual help while others have trouble with the buildings. That committee is now in its second year.
DCU is part of the 1,200 new college places initiative. Some £6 million has been earmarked for it under the RDF and it is also involved in the private public funding scheme.
We surveyed transition years. Both great and terrible remarks have been made about it. The Department said that 11 per cent of schools need to be guided, 89 per cent would be seen as satisfactory and 60 per cent as good. It may be useful if I send the committee a copy of the survey. We were conscious that one bad criticism or place of poor practice could have a downward effect on good schemes. The transition year scheme is available to all schools and a framework is now in place. We will help the schools having difficulties and will use the teacher centre network as a resource centre.
The Deputy is right about school bags. Children often do not know what they have in them. This should be seen as a health issue and I have encouraged schools to adopt book rental schemes. I have had many complaints about it and I often tell parents to bring it up at parents' association meetings and put practical measures in place. People often find it easier to write to me than to raise it at school meetings, although I have encouraged increasing the role of parents on committees.
I will take the remarks make about the local authority and Colaiste de hÍde on board. The details of the student support scheme must be made known to the Revenue Commissioners by 1 July. There were categories in the Finance Act and the Department must make them available to the Revenue Commissioners. We have a deadline in place and I hope we can meet it sooner rather than later.
What colleges will be eligible for the student support scheme?
It will cover new, private and overseas colleges. That information is currently being sought by the Department and our deadline is 1 July.
Will we not get it until then?
I hope we will. However, for tax relief, we are talking about money spent next year to be claimed back. This will come out well before the results are available.
This scheme has been finished since last December.
We are working but we must be careful that we meet the requirements laid down in the Finance Act and that any information is available.
The point made about adjacent grants applies to all third level institutions. We cannot let people in one county benefit more than others. People should be financed in education. How one uses those resources and decides the priority areas is another matter. It was announced this year that tax relief will be available to mature students who attend college part-time. There have been areas of steady improvement.
The Deputy said we should put all our resources into the primary sector. If one examines the available OECD information, primary level is not in need of more investment as opposed to third level. It is a matter of priorities and how things are done.
Regarding the rationalisation of the vocational education committees which was signalled in the White Paper, the commission on school accommodation has been appointed. The technical group will make a report to a steering committee on which all the partners are represented. This report is not available to me and I read the item the Deputy mentioned in the paper today. However, the rationalisation of the vocational education committees is ongoing.
Regarding PE halls, we started with the aim of trying to reduce the number of prefabs and then to consider the inadequate teaching facilities. The Deputy appears to think the Minister with responsibility for sport and the Minister for Education are based in the one building and deal with school halls and community needs. I share the sentiments that first class PE facilities should be available. However, this also relates to available resources.
Independent Price Waterhouse consultants were engaged to report on the examination system. I am awaiting the report, but I took the opportunity at Easter when I visited the teachers' and parents' conferences to announce a package which will be in place for the 1996 examinations. No craftwork is travelling and this matter is being considered. The practical examinations are over at this stage. The Deputy asked if a Supplementary Estimate was required, but it is not indicated that this is required. Technology is improving our interface. Human error will always occur, but the Minister and the Department's responsibility is to ensure systems are in place to detect errors when they arise.
The Price Waterhouse report will outline the story of last year's failure of the systems. It will also make recommendations to me about changes for future examinations. However, the consultants have indicated that the changes I outlined at Easter would form part of their recommendations. Rather than delay the changes by waiting for the report, I thought it better to move at Easter before the practical examinations began. The report will include recommendations arising from last year's experience and previously. Technology is improving all the time and facilitating the Department. This area involves 100,000 students and new technology will benefit the system. Human error can occur.
There is a price to be paid.
If the committee considers the experiences of previous Ministers, we must ensure systems are in place. The systems failed last year. The school examinations begin the week after next and it is important that quiet surrounds this aspect at this time as parents and students prepare to face the national examination system.
I thank the committee for the tenacity of members. If they require more information, it will be made available. I also thank the officials from the Department who spent an extraordinary amount of time preparing the information. We are willing to share it all.
I thank the Minister and the Minister of State for a most informative afternoon. I also extend the committee's thanks to the officials.
I join in the thanks to the Ministers and the officials. The committee's next meeting will be held next Wednesday at 5.30 p.m.
The Select Committee adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until Wednesday, 29 May at 5.30 p.m.