Phil Hogan
Question:6 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Education and Science the amount to be spent on primary school buildings in 2005; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [30488/04]
View answerThursday, 25 November 2004
Questions (6)
Oral answers (7 contributions)
The allocation of capital funding for each of the sectors within the Education Vote is governed by the Five-year Multi-Annual Framework for Capital Expenditure 2004 — 2008. This framework provides an allocation for each of the five years and allows a carry-over into the following year of unspent capital up to a limit of 10% of a current year's voted capital allocation.
It should be noted that the Minister for Finance has indicated that he will deal with adjustments to capital envelopes as part of his budget speech on 1 December and accordingly I am not in a position today to indicate the precise allocation for primary buildings in 2005.
I assure the Deputy, however, that within the €50 million carry-over capacity available to me I will ensure that any saving in relation to primary buildings in the current year is fully compensated for in setting the 2005 allocation.
Will the Minister announce only the 2005 building programme in December or will she announce the five year programme? Given that public private partnerships have been used only for post-primary schools to date does she intend to use some public private partnerships for primary schools? How does she intend to prioritise? Priority was allowed for when the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Dempsey, changed the way the building programme operated but schools are still unclear as to whether they are at stage 1, band 1 or whatever and what that means and how soon it is envisaged progress will be made? Does she intend to change anything in that area?
I will certainly publish my five-year allocation of capital and within a framework the stages at which the different schools are. It is important to have flexibility to deal with emergencies and changing priorities over the next five years. In the initial stage I will announce those ready to go to tender and construction and then those that are ready to move up to the next stage. However, I do not want to be in a situation, where we find ourselves at the end of this year with an under-spend in the year and without flexibility to move over the next couple of years. We are aiming to ensure that schools know where they stand and how soon they will be able to move. However, because there are local considerations regarding planning permission, it may not be possible for me to say that a particular school will move in 2006 as an appeal to An Bord Pleanála could hold it up for quite some time. These are the issues we have to take into consideration. My aim is to ensure there is as much clarity as possible for schools all over the country.
In regard to the PPP programme my intention is to build schools under PPP. It is not as easy to do it at primary level because of management issues, largely boards of management. If there are trustees it is not so easy to go into partnership with a builder or developer who will manage it over the next 20 years. I am trying to see if there is any flexibility but it is not as clear cut as for the post-primary level where we are aiming to do more.
Is the Minister aware of the finding by the Comptroller and Auditor General that PPPs are more expensive that any other method? Last year a number of schools that urgently needed extra classrooms were told to use either their PE room or general purposes room as classrooms because they did not feature in the building programme. Can the Minister give a guarantee that will not happen next year? There is one such school in the constituency of the Minister of State, Deputy de Valera, and one in mine. Will the Minister ensure that those schools get back their PE room as a PE room and get a classroom?
In regard to the provision of accommodation we have to look at the amount of money available at any one time and where we can provide temporary accommodation or, perhaps a devolved grant, to a small school to build on a extension. That would be preferable but it would not be possible to give a blanket guarantee at this stage to say they cannot use the facilities available to them. I will certainly aim to ensure we are adding to rather than taking from school accommodation.
On the issue of PPPs the reality is that the Comptroller and Auditor General said they were more expensive. However, the cost has to be ascertained over a 20 year period. The schools are built and the students are occupying them. If those schools were on a building programme they would still probably be waiting. By the time we would get to build them they would be much more expensive than when they were built last year or the year before. When one looks back in hindsight one will find they were good value for money. He is looking at the cost today whereas the cost has to be spread out over the whole period.
Given the issue of efficiency over a long period, and the fact that Jarvis has more or less gone bankrupt in a number of projects in the UK, will the Minister consider setting up a system of integrated public partnership where a school facility, incorporating community buildings and sports facilities as part of a partnership between the school, the local community and the local authority, could be set up in a parallel process to the public private partnership to gain efficiency in terms of opening hours and security? Perhaps it could be tried as a pilot scheme.
The issue of schools opening up their facilities is a matter for management. Where new schools are built they include PE halls but there are instances where local management are not making facilities available. Generally the facilities in PPP schools are available to the wider community.