Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 19 Feb 1976

Vol. 288 No. 3

Adjournment Debate. - School Transport Service.

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leat, a Cheann Comhairle, ligint dom an cheist seo an phlé. Ní rabhas sásta leis na freagraí a thug an tAire inné agus tá mé cinnte gur ábhar an-thábhachtach é seo do na daoine a bhaineann sé leo.

Yesterday I had occasion to ask the Minister for Education if he would give an assurance in regard to promises on school transport made to people in the Ballymount national school and the Clongorey national school catchment areas in County Kildare. The Minister's reply was that the general rule in regard to transport in the case of amalgamation is that children who reside in the district of the closed school get free transport to the new central school, and that this is what is happening in the two cases mentioned in the question.

I should like to say that the answer given by the Minister is incorrect because this is not what is happening in the two areas. I accept, because the Minister has told me so, that he is not aware of what is happening in his Department, that much of what went on in regard to the matters I have revealed to him was news to him. However, has not his Parliamentary Secretary a duty to make him aware of these things? As I see it, so much wrong is being done, so much pressure is being applied and there is such an outcry in this area, that it is my duty to expose these wrongs.

Ballymount national school is in Crookestown parish, probably better known as Narraghmore, in the diocese of Dublin, and Ballyshannon national school is in Suncroft parish in the diocese of Kildare and Leighlin. Some nine or ten years ago Ballymount school was amalgamated with Crookestown national school and parents and pupils in the area were promised that all pupils then attending the schools, and their successors, would be conveyed to Crookstown national school, and Very Reverend Fr. Brophy, P.P. of Crookstown, has two letters from the Department to this effect. Before amalgamation took place, at Ballymount at a public meeting a local parent, a Mrs. Doyle, asked a question and asked for a guarantee from the Department that pupils from new houses to be erected in the area would also be carried.

Is it necessary to give the names? There is a tradition about it.

Parents asked for and were given this guarantee. The guarantee is official from an official of the Department and this can be vouched for by many people if they are given the opportunity. I have a copy of the map drawn by the Department at that time which outlines the catchment area of Ballyshannon national school in 1968 and it indicates that all families living there at the time of the closure who would be sending their children to Ballymount national school would be transported freely to Crookestown national school.

The guarantee was given to a meeting of parents in Ballymount school that the children living in that area and those who would come to reside in the area, or children yet unborn— that was the expression used, still remembered by people in the area— would get free transport to Crookestown national school. Only three families—I refrain from giving their names—were excluded from that list because they were at that time attending Ballyshannon national school, and two families who lived in that area at the time I will refer to later.

As far as I can see an attempt is now being made to phase out this catchment area, and last year I raised the matter of a child attending the Ballymount school who sought free transport because the mother was ill and he was living with his grandmother in the Ballymount area. There was an investigation into that at the time and this appeared to delay a decision in regard to what should be done in this case. An official from the Department called to investigate and I have reason to believe he is the same official who met the deputation who recently called to the Department. This official told Mrs. Casserly that if the children were not taken off the bus he would give up his job. Is that not an unusual statement for a Department official to make? Was it not an example of his intent when he came to investigate the case? It convinces me that he had no intention of being impartial.

On 22nd December last CIE took up the tickets from the children concerned and in one case the children who were living in the old dispensary in the Ballymount catchment area had their tickets taken from them. They had enjoyed free travel to Crookestown national school during the last six years. One of these children suffers from asthma and was very sick. A doctor's letter and certificate will prove that she is incapable of walking to the Ballyshannon school, where the Department would have her attend.

Another family, whose children have enjoyed free transport for six years are also being denied free transport, though they are miles inside the Ballymount catchment area. There is no tradition in this family and tradition was mentioned very freely the other day when the deputation called. There is no tradition that children from this family should attend anywhere other than Ballymount, and since Ballymount is now closed, Crookestown. But the fact that the mother in this case drove the school bus and provided transport for children to Ballyshannon placed her in an awkward situation regarding transport and made her position very vulnerable to the undue pressure that was exerted on her to have her children attend Ballyshannon national school.

Parents in the area, particularly people in the Calverstown area sending their children to Crookestown school were subjected to pressure. One parent was threathened that if his children did not attend Ballyshannon national school some friends of a certain teacher would call on the parent concerned and that he would have a nasty accident. This was reported to the gardaí in Kilcullen. It is not hearsay. I mention this to give the Minister an indication of the pressures being brought to bear on parents, and also to give the Mini-an idea of the calibre of the people whose cause he now champions.

I am aware of the exceptional interest of the INTO in this case. Their concern arises over the danger of falling averages in Ballyshannon, and the danger of the loss of a third teacher in that school. While I can sympathise with this view, I would not be a party to the downgrading of Crookestown national school to help to preserve Ballyshannon as a national school. I was asked to take the side of Ballyshannon in this case, and I refused, but the attitude of the Department convinces me that they are using every effort to promote Ballyshannon and in doing so, must do so at the expense of Crookestown.

Deputy Malone sent a letter to one of the parents concerned in the Calverstown area from Deputy Bruton, Parliamentary Secretary, stating that the reason for the removal of tickets from certain pupils was that the INTO brought pressure to bear. I am a staunch member of the INTO and I have been since I first taught in a national school, and I say that the INTO was never intended as an organisation to promote one national school at the expense of another. Why is it that the Department and the Parliamentary Secretary bow to such pressure? Not so very long ago Crookestown had an enrolment of 250 pupils. They now have 232 on the role. Figures were given to me quite recently by the local parish priest and manager, who is very concerned. He has a task facing him to build two new classrooms and a general purpose room. He now wonders will these be necessary at all, or what position will his school be in if the trend is allowed to continue. Quite recently to try to resolve this difficulty a deputation of the parish priest and other responsible people from the Crookestown and Ballymount areas called on the Department to discuss this matter. They were all unanimous that they might as well have stayed at home. The official that they met was not very anxious to listen to the case they were making and, in the words of one of the deputation had a cynical grin on his face. He dismissed the case. He was not prepared to pay much attention to the two documents that the parish priest had, promising transport to all the children in the area and to their successors.

Could I dissuade the Deputy from reflecting on officials? The Minister is responsible.

Right. The deputation wanted to show him the map but he did not want to hear about that. They wanted to tell him of the promise to carry children yet unborn and he denied any pressure from the INTO until the letter from Deputy Malone was read to him so it is quite clear to me that the officials of the Department were quite prepared to cover up information to make a case for themselves. In other words, this is an attempt by the Department to cover up intimidation, the abuse of free transport, undue pressure on parents and, to my mind, the Department stands condemned and in the eyes of the parents and the priests concerned in Crookestown parish and particularly in the eyes of those in the Ballymount catchment area.

One way out, as I see it, is for the Minister to allow a full public inquiry which will help to clear the name of the Minister and his party and his Department and his Parliamentary Secretary. I am confident the priests and the people concerned will welcome this now and I will attend personally, too, and I will prove and stand over anything I have said here and I can assure the Minister I do not intend to shelter under the privilege of the House in anything I said here today.

To prove special facilities have been granted to children to attend Ballyshannon national school I would like to read the two concluding paragraphs of the letter from the Minister's Parliamentary Secretary dated 27th January last.

The position is that (the particular child referred to) resides 3.0 miles from Crookestown NS, the nearest school and 3.7 miles from Ballyshannon NS. She is therefore eligible for free transport to Crookestown NS, to which a transport service operates from a point 0.5 miles from her home.

It would not, normally, be open to the Department to provide transport, whether free or on a fare-paying basis, for her to any other school. I understand however that older children in the King family have had free transport to Ballyshannon NS for some time. As Ballyshannon NS is not the nearest national school the facility was allowed for them contrary to the normal operations of the Free School Transport scheme. The Department has been authorised to continue the facility for them under the terms of an exceptional arrangement which allows children to keep concessions already granted. This exceptional arrangement also allows the younger children of the same family to be accommodated as fare-paying passengers to the same school, even though there is a service to their nearest school. In this way (this girl) may be allowed travel as a fare-paying passenger to Ballyshannon NS, provided that there is room on the bus to accommodate her.

I was glad to get that particular information because I am the person who sought that facility for her. My policy is, if I can get free transport for anyone, I will get it. I will not do anyone a bad turn. I was never the cause yet of taking free transport or fare-paying facilities from any pupil. I am beginning to doubt now whether the Minister's colleagues can say the same and I am confident that the Deputies with whom he was reluctantly forced to coalesce and their lackeys cannot say the same. I will now repeat that a cousin of the present Minister for Education, who lives miles into the Ballymount catchment area, is being carried to Ballyshannon and every local person is convinced that this is political patronage. The Minister informed me yesterday that he was not aware of this and I am quite prepared to believe him, but many others do not, and is it not extraordinary that when the Department decides, as they did in that particular matter, that they can give concessions already granted to Ballyshannon, exceptional concessions, why did they not continue the concessions already granted to Crookestown when there is room on the Crookestown bus? But CIE or the Department will not allow the children to travel on it even though there is room and they are prepared to pay.

Another aspect is that new houses will be built, if the money is available, during the present year in Calverstown. The map shows the particular site is in the Crookestown area and, if this matter is allowed to fester and cause dissension, the Minister will have much more trouble later on. It would appear to me that the present policy is a little bit different from what it was. There was a programme years ago on television, "Have Gun, Will Travel", and the present policy does seem to be "Have Political Influence, Will Travel".

I will come now to a matter nearer home. It concerns Clongorey national school which was amalgamated with Carragh national school some five years ago. I told the people that time, as I was very much involved being the principal teacher of Carragh national school, of the promise that had been made and honoured before and helped, I think the Department will agree, to ensure a very quiet amalgamation because the people did feel that the promises made would be kept, but now we have a situation where people living in new houses in the Barrettstown area, which is traditionally the catchment area of Clongorey national school, are being denied free transport to Carragh national school. I mentioned the case of one particular family before Christmas and, if we are so keen on tradition, tradition favours this particular family on both sides as the father's people all went to Clongorey national school and the mother's people all went to Carragh national school and they are direct descendants of the grand old lady who won the title of "Grandmother of the Year" on the Bunny Carr Show recently and still going strong. Everything is in these people's favour but I can tell you they will all need to be going very strong if the Minister does not soon provide the transport that was promised in their case.

No decision that I have heard of has been taken in this case yet. Certainly none was conveyed to me. They were told they would not get free transport. I wonder why there is such a delay in reaching a decision in this particular case? I am convinced that this is a very corrupt case. It is quite obvious from the examples I have given that what is considered sauce for one group is not sauce for the other. It is an example of dictation to and intimidation of parents and the fact that the Minister was not aware of this, despite many letters from me and despite the presence on the Order Paper of a parliamentary question, convinces me that someone in his Department is taking very serious decisions and not acquainting him of them. The fact that the Minister's own relations are getting priority treatment is surely good enough reason for a departmental inquiry to be held in public in Crookestown. It might help the Minister to clear the air now. To my mind this case, to use a phrase of Deputy Thornley's, stinks and many of those involved might be glad of the chance to salvage their good names. As far as I am concerned, silence on this matter will only be construed as an admission of guilt.

If the parish priest and responsible people in the area were prepared to lose their day and come to Dublin, there must be some merit in the case. They went home disheartened. I would ask the Minister to let the truth be known. If he has nothing to hide he has nothing to fear. If he denies our reasonable request, people in Crookestown and Ballymount and Calverstown and Clongorey will only draw their own conclusions.

As I indicated in reply to Deputy Power's question, the general rule in regard to transport in the case of amalgamation is that children who reside in the district of the closed school get free transport to the new central school. This is what is happening in the two cases the Deputy has raised. Ballymount national school was closed on 7th January, 1969, and was amalgamated with Crookestown national school. All the children who reside in the Ballymount closed school district have free transport to the central school in Crookestown. The children around whom the present dispute revolves never attended Ballymount national school and reside nearer to Ballyshannon national school than to the site of the closed school at Ballymount. Not only is it quite clear that these children reside in the Ballyshannon national school district but their homes are, in fact, less than two miles from Ballyshannon national school and they are not, therefore, eligible for free transport under the scheme. One of these families lives less than a mile from Ballyshannon national school and the distances from Ballyshannon in the case of the other two families mentioned are 1.8 miles and 1.1 mile respectively. One wonders if Deputy Power were principal in Ballyshannon if he would accept that children who resided such short distances from their school and were not entitled to free transport to that school should get free transport to the school five miles or more from their homes. Certainly, in these circumstances, it was not surprising that representations were made by the teachers in Ballyshannon and by the INTO that the Ballyshannon school district should not be eroded by the provision of free transport for children living in that district and having no connection with the closed school at Ballymount to the central school at Crookestown.

A large deputation led by the chairman of the board of management at Crookestown national school was received in my Department on the 10th February, 1976. I understand that there was a long discussion on the whole and the Department's position was explained at length. The situation is complicated by the fact that children from the two families in question were given transport in error to Crookestown national school. This came to light when representations were made by Deputy Power on behalf of the Cassidy child who lived beside these two families. Free transport had to be refused in respect of the Cassidy child because the family clearly live in the Ballyshannon school district and less than two miles from Ballyshannon national school. At the same time, facilities had to be withdrawn from the O'Connor and McDonald children as to continue transport for them and refusing the Cassidy child on whose behalf Deputy Power made representations would have been grossly inequitable and impossible to justify. If anybody had the impression that the Ballymount school district was coterminus with the parish boundaries they were mistaken as to the basis on which school districts are determined.

Deputy Power mentioned in the debate yesterday a cousin of mine. I quote from the verbatim account:

Will the Minister let me know why special facilities have been made available in Ballymount catchment area to get the pupils to attend Ballyshannon and whether it is a source of embarrassment to him that whether a person who is getting special treatment and is being carried to Ballyshannon is his own cousin?

This child, Sandra Hickey, according to CIE investigation, lives 2.4 miles from Ballyshannon national school, 2.6 miles from the closed Ballymount national school and 4.3 miles from Crookestown national school. She is in receipt of free transport to Ballyshannon national school, which is her nearest school, and being under ten years of age and over two miles from her nearest school, she gets free transport under the normal conditions of the scheme. I reject very much the implication in what Deputy Power has said that special facilities were provided to Ballyshannon national school because this child attended there. I accept the Deputy's indication here today that he accepts my word that this is not so. Indeed, it is interesting to note that the transport service which is now regarded as a special transport service to Ballyshannon was sanctioned in 1969 by the previous administration.

The case has been made that at the time of the amalgamation children in the traditional school at Ballymount were promised free transport to Crookestown and that children from the Calverstown/Davidstown area traditionally attended Ballymount national school. Investigations by my Department's inspectors have shown that the prepondrance of attendance from the Calverstown/Davidstown area has been to Ballyshannon and not to Ballymount. Moreover none of the children involved in the present dispute ever attend Ballymount national school nor did their fathers. It is therefore not possible to accept the plea on the grounds of tradition.

Clongorey national school was closed and amalgamated with Carragh national school on 4th September 1972. Children from the Clongorey closed school district had free transport to Carragh national school. Deputy Power has made representations on behalf of one family who reside less than two miles from Newbridge national school and are not, therefore, eligible for free transport under the terms of the scheme. This family's home is half a mile nearer to Newbridge national school than to the site of the closed Clongorey school and Carragh national school, to which they are seeking transport is about twice as far from them as Newbridge national school. The argument based on traditional attendance has been advanced in this case also but so far no evidence has been adduced that older members of this family ever attended Clongorey national school. I am, however, having the matter investigated.

The kernel of the whole matter is whether pupils reside in the district of the closed school. It cannot be accepted that children who reside closer to a third school and would not even be eligible for free transport to that school or in the district of the closed school are so entitled to claim free transport to the central school, something I would emphasise for which they would not be eligible if they were going to their nearest school. School transport must be organised on a rational and sensible basis, otherwise the cost, which is already very high, would become inordinately so and put the whole future of the scheme, which confers such great benefit on so many children, in jeopardy.

These children, the older and the younger children to whom the Deputy referred, are less than two miles from their nearest school and are not, therefore, eligible for free transport. The concession to which the Deputy refers applies to those who are basically eligible for free transport. These children are not eligible for free transport and the concession, cannot, therefore, be applied to them.

The map which the Deputy produced in the House has no standing in the Department of Education. I would deprecate very much aspersions cast on the officials of my Department as to their impartiality in regard to these matters. I assure the House, and I am sure the Deputy will accept my word, that there is no question of any criteria other than the usual ones set down for the Department of Education over the years in conjunction with the Department of Finance. The Deputy must accept my word of honour on this. There is no question of anything other than ordinary regulations being carried out. I want to emphasise that most strongly.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 24th February, 1976.

Barr
Roinn