Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 11 Dec 1987

Vol. 376 No. 8

Supplementary and Additional Estimates, 1987. - Vote 32: Post-Primary Education.

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £1,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1987, for Post-Primary Education.

This token Supplementary Estimate is needed to allow for the payment of an additional sum of £12.707 million out of subhead A2 of the Vote — Grants to Vocational Education Committees — arising from the deferral by the European Social Fund from 1986 to 1987 of the payment of aid which has been approved for courses run by VECs.

It will be easier for Deputies to understand the need for this Supplementary Estimate if I give some background information. European Social Fund aid towards the cost of certain programmes offered by schools and colleges administered by vocational education committees is now an important source of funding. This is brought to account as appropriations-in-aid of the Post-Primary Vote and is shown in the Estimates volume under Part III of the Post-Primary Vote as subsection (4) of subhead L.

Application for aid is made annually in advance on the basis of the estimated cost of the programmes concerned. Normally, an advance payment of 50 per cent is received from the ESF following approval of applications and the balance is received after final accounts have been submitted and approved. As a result, the aid which is received in any one financial year comprises advance payments in respect of the current year and final payments in respect of previous years.

When the Estimates for 1986 were formulated, it was expected that ESF aid would amount to £44.5 million. The actual receipts in 1986 amounted to £31.294 million only. Some of this shortfall arose because the take-up of places on ESF-aided courses was less than anticipated but the main reason was that final payments in respect of 1985, which normally have been brought to account in 1986, were not received, even though they had been approved for payment. This deferral was mentioned in the House on 5 December last by my predecessor, Deputy Cooney, when moving Supplementary Estimates for 1986. It was expected at that time that aid relating to 1984 as well as 1985 and amounting to £13.489 million in all would be deferred. However, the aid relating to 1984 was received later in December 1986.

I would like to stress that this deferral was not, of course, a loss of aid and the reason for the deferral was quite outside the control of my Department. It was due, I understand, to cash constraints on the ESF budget resulting from the impact of the extended ESF-aided operations following the 1983-84 review of the fund.

This shortfall could have been met by a Supplementary Estimate in 1986. However, this would have transferred the charge from the ESF funding to the Exchequer. As the aid had been approved and constituted a good debt, it was considered more appropriate to avail of the facility provided by the Vocational Education Act, 1930, which provides for short-term borrowing by VECs for the purposes of their schemes, and to reduce the total amount of the Department's grant out of subhead A2 accordingly. The reduction in the grants paid out of subhead A2 amounted to £12.6 million.

The deferred aid was received in 1987. Indeed, Deputies will be glad to know that we now expect ESF aid in 1987 to come to almost £53 million in all, some £18 million more than provided for, and some £8 million extra over and above the deferred payment. The short-term borrowing incurred at the end of 1986 has been repaid in 1987 out of the grants issued to date and the additional amount now sought is to make up for the reduction in the grant in 1986 and for interest on the borrowing. As this is more than offset by the additional receipts, no additional Exchequer funding is required.

ESF aid is received for a large number of individual programmes but most of the aid is accounted for by just two programmes. These are the vocational preparation and training programme and the middle level technician programme. These two programmes currently cater for 19,129 and 11,856 participants respectively. These figures represent a decrease of 4 per cent over last year's total of participants in the case of the vocational preparation and training programme but an increase of 6.5 per cent in the case of the middle level technician programme.

I commend the Supplementary Estimate to the House.

Mrs. Hussey

I am astonished the Minister has come to the House with an Estimate dealing with post-primary education without making reference to what is going on around her in terms of the confusion being caused by her actions in the area of vocational education. Is she aware that confusion arises daily? For example, we have discovered quite by accident — or perhaps it was not an accident — that, as the Minister for Finance announced in the Dáil, £12 million has been miraculously discovered in the Department this year. We understand that there has been a £12 million saving on the pay portion of the Vote. I do not know what portion of that sum will come from vocational education and I hope the Minister, when replying, will tell us how much arises from savings in the vocational education sector, the primary education sector, the voluntary secondary sector and third level. It is important that we are given that information.

This means that in 1987 the Minister will not be spending £12 million of the amount allocated. As a result, for 1988 the Minister will be starting £12 million better off because her starting figure will be lower. The Minister will be aware that Estimates are based on what the Minister in the previous year expects to spend. The Minister's starting point for 1988 will be £12 million less and it seems to me that that obviates any necessity for the cuts that have taken place, particularly in the vocational and primary school sectors. I hope the Minister will answer that. Her starting point will be £12 million better than it was when the Department were preparing the Estimate during the summer. The Minister should tell us if she needs that money in 1988. Perhaps the Department have decided that they want to save a further £12 million in 1988? The parents who will be attending meetings throughout the country tomorrow will be astonished to learn that £12 million has been saved on their children's education in 1987 and I have no doubt they will be anxious to know why those children will be asked to suffer more in 1988.

The Supplementary Estimate concerns the European Social Fund. The Minister will forgive me if I say I am pleased to hear that the amount of money expected in 1987 will be £53 million. She will be aware that I started that scheme, went to Europe and obtained the aid for our RTC students. She will also be aware that I started the vocational preparation and training courses. I am sorry to hear that the figures represent a decrease of 4 per cent over last year's total of participants in those courses. Will the Minister explain how that occurred and if it is expected that more young people will be embarking on those courses next year. In my view those courses represent a vital bridging of the gap for young people between school and the world outside. I am proud of the middle level technician programme and the VPTP courses which I initiated. I know the Minister praised them generously when she was in Opposition. That does not mean that she praises them still because things change quickly between Opposition and Government.

I would like to stress one point arising from the European Social Fund. I am aware that there have been difficulties between the Department of Education and the Department of Finance. A quarrel has been going on for some considerable time about whether the VECs can have staff to pay the grants to the students. That bedevilled me when I was in the Department and I understand from deputations I have had from students all over the country that it is still bedevilling the Department. Can the Minister tell us if that problem, particularly with the City of Dublin VEC, the one I have most recently had contact with, has been solved? The youngsters who came to me recently were in distress. They had had no money at all under the ESF this session from moneys they are entitled to. They were told that the young lady who was supposed to pay them out in the City of Dublin VEC has been instructed by her union that she was to pay nobody because she was being required to do double the work she had done previously.

As I have said many times on different subjects, that kind of conflict between adults while young people suffer is intolerable. I hope that this Government will find a way to solve that problem. It does not make sense. The obduracy of the Department of Finance, coupled with certain difficulties caused by the unions, put the Minister for Education in an appalling situation where she could not publicly blame her colleague, the Minister for Finance, as I am sure she often wishes to, on this and other subjects.

We have an Estimate before us which refers to paying money to VECs who in turn pay their teachers. This year we have been told again that in the Estimate for pay there was a saving of £12 million. I notice there is nobody in the box beside the Minister. I hope she will be able to answer all these questions.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I will be well able.

Mrs. Hussey

Estimates for 1987 proved to be wrong. The Estimates for 1988 envisage a £4.4 million saving on staff in community, vocational and comprehensive schools. It is quite clear now that it is not necessary to make those changes next year. There is no educational justification whatsoever for them. They have thrown vocational schools into a panic. Wicklow VEC are due to lose 19 posts in all their schools. This comes on top of the desperately bad news that the building plans are indefinitely shelved for several schools which are in a very bad situation. One is in such a bad way that the classes are to be moved out into temporary premises. I speak of Rathdrum. Blessington vocational school which was ready to move to tender has now been indefinitely shelved, we are told.

For practical classes rooms are fitted for a maximum of 24 pupils in vocational schools. They cannot take any more than that. The whole thing makes no sense and I ask the Minister to tell me exactly the number of voluntary secondary schools which offer these kinds of practical classes. She seemed to try to justify the vocational cuts on the basis that secondary schools were now offering all these practical classes and so everybody should be the same. The Minister knows as well as I do that a tiny fraction of voluntary secondary schools offer the kind of technical courses the vocational schools offer. How many schools in that sector offer those courses and what is the proportion there? I am talking about technical subjects that require major equipment and which the vocational schools have been charged to carry out.

I am very pleased that the vocational schools have got more and more students in their system to take the leaving certificate. That is admirable. They have overcome to a great extent many of the disadvantages that young people coming to them were suffering from, but in this latest round of cuts we see the Minister telling them that they are going to be penalised for their success, that they are winning the battle over disadvantage but that we are going to say, "thus far and no further".

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has one minute left of the time allotted to her.

Mrs. Hussey

Therefore, very important questions arise from a Supplementary Estimate which is put before us today and which, if it is as reliable as the other Estimate on pay we have seen disbanded or thrown up in confusion last week, we cannot pay much attention to.

On this Friday before all these parents take to the streets again tomorrow and while the vocational sector are gathering their forces for a major battle against what they feel is a grave injustice, it is important that the Minister deals with the realities of what is going on in education and does not avoid these questions, as I am sure she will not. I hope to hear a considerable answer from her on each of these areas.

Miss Quill

The consideration of this Supplementary Estimate, which is largely non-contentious, ought to give us time to consider calmly and cooly where we stand where education is concerned from the point of view of accounting, of communicating our policies to the general public and of having a general discussion, even though minor, on what our policy on education really is.

It would be difficult to address any Estimate without expressing some concern about the nature of the accounting that seems to be carried out in the Department of Education and branches thereof at this moment. Last week this House was told, as Deputy Hussey said, that the budget for the teachers' wage bill for 1987 was overestimated to the tune of £12 million, a great deal of money. We keep going back to the taxpayer year after year for more and more money. The least we can do if we are to continue to claim the confidence of the taxpayer is ensure that every penny of taxpayers' money is accurately and competently accounted for. At that level alone, apart altogether from the implications it has for education, it is extremely serious that that kind of accounting can be tolerated by this House. I would welcome a very clear statement from the Minister for Education as to how that error arose in the first instance, what steps she intends to take to ensure that that sort of error is not repeated in future financial years and, more important from the point of view of education, how that money will now be spent in the education year that is upcoming because £12 million would pay for a great number of teachers indeed.

Equally worrying is the revelation that came through the Committee of Public Accounts, the details of which were revealed in this House yesterday. I read about them for the first time in newspapers this morning. It emerges that this country has lost £382,500 in the context of the Social Fund between 1979 and 1983. That is more than one third of £1 million of very scarce money, and that amount has been lost to this country, the committee were told, because of the failure of certain persons to estimate correctly and accurately the cost of certain courses in the VEC sector. The courses mentioned were CERT, craft and management. It is serious that that happened. It is worrying to parents and their children and to taxpayers generally that people charged with carrying out accounting competently, accurately and well could be so out of line in their judgments and because of that this country has lost that much money in this much time. That does little if anything to instil confidence among people, especially young people, in our system of accounting. That sort of thing will have to be explained and steps must be taken to ensure that it does not continue. The least we can expect from people in administration, be it at central education level or local level, is that they estimate accurately the proposed cost of courses. They can then submit an accurate claim for funding to the ESF. We need assurances on those two matters.

I want to talk about communication. It is extremely worrying that, despite a number of assurances given by the Minister in this House, we still can have the level and scale of public protest that we had outside the gates of this House two days ago. Despite the fact that we were told by the Minister that a certain infamous circular has been suspended, the degree of anxiety among teachers, parents and pupils is such that they still protest in very large numbers, as they did outside this House and at certain other points throughout the country all the week. I am told there are similar protests being planned for next week.

Mrs. O'Rourke

And there was a fine protest in Cork.

Miss Quill

Yes, and this shows how the public feel about certain issues.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I hope the Deputy does not approve of that?

Miss Quill

I do not, as a matter of fact I was embarrassed by it. In any event, it puts an obligation on the Minister and on all of us to communicate clearly to the public the present status of Circular 20/87 because as long as it remains, and is not officially withdrawn, we will continue to have that level of protest. There is only one way to ensure that that does not continue and that is for the Minister to state it officially——

An Ceann Comhairle

I want to point out that this morning's Supplementary Estimate in respect of Education deals primarily, if not essentially, with vocational education. I am allowing a lot of latitude, but there is a limit.

Miss Quill

That is true but I want the Minister to tell the public what her intention is as regards this circular because that is the only way to ensure that these protests will not continue and also that similar protests will not be carried out in relation to cutbacks in the vocational sector.

I want to deal now with vocational education. This sector has traditionally had to deal with the most disadvantaged in our community. There is a great deal of evidence to hand as to the value of education. We have reports from the National Council of Adult Literacy and very worrying reports from the Youth Employment Agency indicating that large numbers of young people leave our schools every year without being prepared to live a decent normal life, to meet the demands of ordinary living in the world after school and to be in a position to earn a living.

The phrase "unemployable" has been used by the Youth Employment Agency in relation to large numbers of young school leavers who have not attained a minimun standard of education. Unfortunately for vocational schools, it seems to fall to their lot to provide education for many children who have learning difficulties. For that reason, the Minister must look very carefully at the vocational education sector when it comes to utilising resources in the years ahead. An educational system geared to working towards equality of opportunity for all our citizens should not allow that practice to continue year after year.

I ask the Minister to please have a look at the vocational sector, to see what can be done there and also what should be done in the primary sector to ensure that the problems early school leavers have been experiencing in recent years will not continue. If the Minister does not act in this way the social and economic consequences for the country will be very serious. The time has come when we must examine the amount of money spent on administration and that going directly into the classrooms.

The Minister has proposals to rationalise vocational education committees. The time has come when we must critically examine how effectively these committees are improving for the educational needs of our young people. We must look at parallel schools and see how they are organised. A number of schools seem to be organised very well, given a board of management, a principal, a secretary and a caretaker. They seem to be able to organise their educational activities extremely well and to be able to deliver the aims and objectives of educational policy. The time has come when we must sit down and ask ourselves if all schools can deliver accordingly, with the same resources. I am not saying it is possible for any Minister to dismantle overnight structures that have been there since 1930, but in any review of the vocational education sector that question must be submitted to critical scrutiny.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy might bring her speech to a close.

Miss Quill

The essential point is that at a time when money is scarce — and it is extremely scarce now — it is incumbent on us to ensure that we get the best value for every penny spent. We must communicate this fact very clearly to the public. Again, I ask the Minister to look at accounting, and the proper balance between the money going into the classroom and the money spent on administration.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I am delighted to hear Deputy Hussey's great defence of the vocational education schools.

Mrs. Hussey

I always did.

Tomás Mac Giolla

When she was Minister her proposals would have practically wiped out the VEC system. She would have changed over to a regional system which would be a negation of the democracy in the VEC system and would have been virtually an abolition of the 1930 Act. That is the only education Act we have had and it is a very progressive Act.

I am glad the problem in regard to ESF grants has finally been resolved. The Minister's proposals for the current year could damage the ability of the vocational education committees to take up ESF grants because of the difficulties that would be created for them in running the vocational preparation and training programmes due to the cutbacks, lack of teachers and so on. The Minister should examine the effect the changes in teacher numbers may have on the vocational preparation and training programmes for our vocational education schools. To my knowledge, there are a number of schools which will have great difficulty continuing last year's programme, let alone developing or expanding that programme.

May I ask the Minister to look at the point Deputy Hussey raised? She mentioned the difference between vocational schools and voluntary secondary schools. The Minister should remember that vocational schools are non-selective. That means they take everybody, whereas voluntary secondary schools are selective. The vocational schools will take the most difficult pupils, not only those who have remedial problems — which will increase if the famous circular goes ahead at primary level because there will be increasing remedial problems for pupils coming from primary to second level — but also pupils who have very great difficulties. I am talking about pupils who are violent and who come from problem backgrounds. There are hundreds of these pupils who have great problems in classes. The VECs do not refuse to take them but they pose enormous difficulties. The Minister should look into the problems caused by even one or two difficult students because pupil-teacher ratios go out the window when you talk about difficult pupils, boys in particular, from problem homes. They can be quite violent with other pupils and teachers and they must be watched all the time.

The Department seem to have the idea — and the Minister should not take their word in this — that all second level schools are the same as far as pupilteacher ratios are concerned but there is no comparison whatsoever between voluntary second level and VEC schools. As Deputy Hussey said, the VEC schools have to deal with practical subjects and you cannot have large classes. By their nature, they must be small if the teacher is to give any training in practical subjects and to watch them to make sure they do not chop off their fingers with the machinery with which they are dealing. The teacher must have a small number to be able to control them. You cannot have a 20 to one ratio in practical classes or, indeed, anything approaching that ratio.

The Minister should consider what I have already said in regard to the difficulties which VEC schools have in regard to pupils who need remedial care. The VEC schools also teach travellers and those in prison and you cannot apply a 20 to one ratio in a prison or an itinerant camp with three or four caravans. The VEC schools are in a totally different situation from, say, the Belvedere College-type voluntary second level school where you have children who not alone can read and write but are also very bright. These colleges are selective about children they take and they have no problems about remedial teaching or special categories of pupils. Yet the Minister seems to have accepted that she can cut the number of teachers in VEC schools by 10 per cent increasing the pupilteacher ratio to 20 to one without damaging teaching. Not alone will it damage teaching, it will also damage children. The standard of education will be worse and there will also be dangers in classrooms. If the Minister does not understand the types of pupils and the difficulties teachers have in VEC schools, she should go along to any of them on any one day — even the best day — which would soon make her appreciate the differences between Belvedere College and North Strand technical school which are in the same area. Yet these schools seem to be treated the same as far as allocations and cuts are concerned.

The Government in their Programme for National Recovery devoted five paragraphs to education, one consisting of two lines. The comments on education deal specifically with the disadvantaged, nothing else. The opening paragraph says that the Government will ensure that the burden of adjustment in regard to financial difficulties will not fall on the disadvantaged. The document then goes on to speak about handicapped people, travellers, people requiring special measures, etc. It said the Government will continue to encourage and foster the participation of the disadvantaged at all levels of education. A particular area of focus will be to encourage more second level pupils to complete the senior cycle. The possibility of more second level pupils completing the senior cycle will be discarded if the proposals for the coming year are put into effect, specifically in regard to the elimination of 700 teachers in the VEC system and 200 in the community and comprehensive schools.

The final paragraph said it is considered that this will be a key factor in encouraging more working-class children to advance to third level education. The Programme for National Recovery, signed by the Government, trade unions, FUE and the IFA, all of whom the Government expect to agree to their terms, is already being broken by the Government in the manner in which they are dealing with the VEC system which is the only second level education system open to disadvantaged and working-class children.

With regard to moving on to third level education, the capital programme indicates that third level education will also be out of the question for working-class children because — as it says in the document — in the regional technical colleges programme the £11.5 million allocation for this year is being cut to £3.49 million, that is by one-third, by far the biggest cut in capital spending in the whole of RTCs——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy's time is exhausted. He must conclude.

Tomás Mac Giolla

It is the only education open to working-class children.

Mr. Desmond

We should ask the Minister for a breakdown of the £12 million in pay and pensions which has become apparent at the year end forecast for the overall education Vote. It would be particularly interesting to find out the extent to which this has accrued at primary level and in Vote 32 on postprimary education.

It now appears that at the end of the year in relation to the overall education allocation for 1987 there is a surplus in the Votes across the board generally of £18 million made up of £12 million on pay and pensions and £6 million in additional receipts. At yesterday's meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts we had the Accounting Officer before us and I gathered that some £18 million of additional ESF moneys accrued to the Department, over and above that which had been anticipated for 1987. In net terms that is worth about £6 million to the overall Education Vote. With the carry over effect of the £12 million and the buttressing effect of the £6 million of ESF moneys, it strikes me as extraordinary that the Minister for Education should not consider herself to be in an exceptionally strong position vis-à-vis the Minister for Finance and the draconian cuts proposed by the Government on a collective basis in respect of her Vote for 1988.

As the Minister knows — I presume the practice is still in operation — she and her colleagues get the two monthly budget trends. That was initiated sometime back by Deputy FitzGerald in a previous Government. I know that Fianna Fáil Cabinet meetings are extraordinarily attenuated affairs, about four hours a week at maximum and the Taoiseach more or less decides what is going on. I gather that in recent weeks he has decided to take over the Education Vote as well, particularly in the past week, and is now talking to some members of the INTO on a direct basis and telling the Minister, more or less, what the decision will be. On that basis the Minister needs to advise the House as to what the prospects are for 1988 because the outturn of the overall votes is of critical importance.

I welcome the fact there is to be a new format in the Education Vote for 1988. That will be welcomed and has been approved by the Committee of Public Accounts following consultation with the Department of Finance and the relevant Accounting Officers in the area. I hope the overall analysis of the Vote will be easier to get to grips with in the new format than in the more traditional form, as we have in the current Estimates. I will conclude my comments on this note. The figure of £12 million which has emerged at year end is quite exceptional. I admit that some primary and post-primary teachers during the year may have taken decisions to emigrate and their pay will be saved. This was alluded to this morning by the Minister for Finance who said that emigration by some teachers——

Miss Quill

Not £12 million that could go to teachers?

Mr. Desmond

No, £12 million would pay for 1,000 teachers. This was one of the explanations he gave, but overall it does not gel together and more particularly since the original Estimate was formulated in October 1986, carried through in November, December and January and revised by the present Government and then published in the revised Book of Estimates. Either something extraordinary has happened in terms of the pay unit within the Department or the Department of Finance have failed to get it together in an effective way. We are entitled to know that.

I must make the point to the Minister, and I must make it very adamantly, that the carry over saving of a further £12 million into 1988 is inevitable if one starts out with that sum and presumably there will be a revised Vote. The abridged version of the Estimates for 1988 will suffer revision and must be revised for 1988 on the outturn. The Minister should take her courage in her hands and go back to the Cabinet and say that for September 1988, Circular 20/87 is unnecessary even in terms of savings because the carry over moneys are truly there. There is no need for this kind of monumental confusion which has emerged.

I want to explain the background to the Minister lest she may not be aware of it. When the Department of Health sent over a memorandum on 20 June last year to the Minister for Finance stating they had acquired some moneys, £8 million or £10 million, for compensation for loss of office by health employees, the Minister for Finance looked at it and said: Great, let us apply this all over the place, education, local government, public service generally, Civil Service and, inevitably, education became embroiled. There was no need whatsoever for education to become embroiled. I am adamantly and vigorously opposed to giving any teacher, no matter what age they are, a lump sum payment of 18 weeks salary and an advance of a total lump sum on their pension and an accelerated advanced pensions payments. I am opposed to doing that.

Teachers can retire at their ordinary retirement age which is quite adequate at this stage. They should stay in their jobs, doing their work for which they are paid salaries and will be paid public service pay increases over the next three years. There is no need for redundancy and there is no need to incur an expenditure of £20 million next year on teachers' lump sum payments. The Minister could save herself all the odium and nonsense that has gone on because the Cabinet decided to go macho on reducing public service numbers. The Cabinet should have another look at the Estimates for 1988, because the outturn is now quite favourable to the Minister for Education in 1987. There is no need for the chaos which the Minister has landed herself in and she can be quite easily extricated from it within the current budget deficit figure.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister to reply.

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

I would like to reply but I understand there is no provision.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister will have upwards of ten minutes to reply if she wishes to avail of that time.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I thank the speakers for their contributions. Deputy Hussey wondered why I was presenting this Estimate. I must present it in the terms of the Estimate for the Department of Education. It is necessary and, indeed, as Deputy Hussey is aware it is only a tidying up of a deferral of payments of ESF. It is a technical matter which had to be presented to the House. I wish to reiterate the acclaim and praise which I then gave to the securing of funds from Europe for both VPTPs, the regional colleges and the middle level technician programme. I think they are excellent. I hope that, whilst we have this huge growth of numbers at second and third level, the funding will continue to come from Europe. Like the previous Minister I have taken a particular interest in that matter.

Deputy Hussey asked why the VPTP was 4 per cent down and the middle level technician programme 6 per cent up? I believe the reason is non take up of courses as offered. However one more than offsets the other. I know they are in different spheres but there is no accounting from time to time for non take up of courses. There certainly was no lack of encourgement and I would hope the numbers will increase. The Deputy also asked about the numbers for next year. It is early yet to indicate the likely numbers but we will be giving every encouragement to people to take up these places.

The Deputy also raised the question of ESF payments and generously acknowledged that she had had those difficulties for four years. They are still there but they are in hand as they were this time last year and in previous years to be settled in December at the end of the first term. As the Deputy said, they are compounded by union, finance and various difficulties. I am working on it daily and I hope we will reach a settlement.

Deputies Hussey, Mac Giolla, Desmond and Quill asked for the various VEC figures. I will give the answer to that globally and if all four Deputies would take it that I am answering each of them in turn rather than individually it would be helpful. The first point is that the Estimates for 1987 on salaries were the Estimates as provided by the outgoing Fine Gael Government in the period 20 January to March. With regard to salaries in all Departments, as I understand it, they were the Estimates as adopted. That is my first point.

Mrs. Hussey

The Minister revised them.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I did not interrupt the Deputy. I will now deal with the revisions. They were the Estimates as provided by the previous Government. The various breakdowns led to considerable misinterpretation. The Minister, Deputy MacSharry, gave his answer and it is a pity that questions were not asked. The figure is £11.49, not £12 million. In 1987 pay savings for the training colleges were £180,000. It is interesting to note that in 1986 the pay savings were £209,000 in the previous Coalition Government's time on that Estimate. Pay savings on the salaries of primary teachers in 1987 were £1.279 million. It is interesting to note that in 1986 under the previous Coalition Government the savings were £2.647 million on the same sector. The pay savings on the superannuation of national teachers in 1987 were £824,000. It is interesting to note that under previous Coalition Governments pay savings under the same heading were £2.355 million. The saving for secondary teachers ——

Mrs. Hussey

Can the Minister give the superannuation figures again?

Mrs. O'Rourke

Savings on the superannuation of national teachers was £824,000 in 1987 and in 1986 it was £2.355 million. The saving on community and comprehensive schools was £274,000, VECs paid £493,000, RTCs paid £3.400 million, HEA institutions paid £1.015 million and others £27,000 totalling £11.49 million. The two largest items are the following: extra youth employment levies of £1.6 million and £2.9 million, amounting to £4.5 million. Out of the £11.49 million a sum of £4.5 million is extra youth employment levies of £2.9 million respectively. That accounts for £4.5 million out of the £11.49 million. The other measures arise as follows. I gave the training colleges £180,000, primary teachers' salaries £1.279 million, superannuation of national teachers £824,000. I will go through them and explain how they came about.

Two came about by way of policy decisions. This was post-budget and this brings out Deputy Hussey's point. In the post 1987 budget policy measures, there was a 1 per cent cut in pay amounting to £0.6 million and a pay element of additional youth employment levy — that came about in the RTC pay — pay totaling £3.4 million. Pay savings for the HEA institutions of £1.015 million came about by a 1 per cent cut in pay; a post-1987 budget measure of £1 million. I can circulate these figures if necessary.

I should like to explain that the percentages overall are very small in the total allocation of moneys — over 80 per cent of which is for salaries — in the Department of Education. Bearing in mind the facts I have outlined, the pay savings amount to £7 million on a pay bill of over £954 million; that is savings of approximately 0.7 per cent. To go through the reasons, and I fully understand——

Mr. Desmond

Very substantially.

Mrs. O'Rourke

——that some Deputies would want to know, for instance, why there were savings of £4 million on the salaries of secondary teachers. I will quote the facts. Substantial savings had been anticipated for some time but could not be qualified or confirmed until the final staffing position for 1987-88 had become clear following allocations and appeals. Many factors were involved. There were fewer pupils than projected when the previous Government's Estimates were formulated. There was greater success than anticipated in bringing the VPs within the quota, again this was a Fine Gael measure. There was a more conservative approach to appeals in the light of Government decisions on the 1988 Estimates, and an enormous take-up of the career break scheme which, as Deputies know, gives rise to very substantial offsetting payments and of part time teachers and so on. I make that point because I understand why alarm might have been caused by it.

Deputy Quill referred to the shortfall of £0.3 million for CERT from Europe in the period 1979-83. I will find out what that was about. It was before my time but I will have it looked at for the Deputy. I make the point that if CERT was an element of it, it would relate to the Department of Labour. They are responsible and they are the parent body for getting the moneys from Europe. I fully accept that.

Miss Quill

The details are with the Committee of Public Accounts.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I am making the point that it goes back to 1979. I was not a Member of either House at that time but I certainly will take responsibility for getting the facts for the Deputy. The Deputy referred to the need for communications and wondered whether the public protests will go ahead. I do not know whether they will go ahead. That is a matter for the people concerned and I thank the Deputy for her concern regarding the incident in Cork. The Deputy's third point related to the vocational sector. The Deputy quite rightly referred to administration of the VEC sector vis-à-vis administration of other types of second level schools. She also referred to the greater question of rationalisation, proposals on which I hope to bring to the House early in the New Year.

Deputy Mac Giolla referred to the regionalisation of VECs but I think that was by way of an aside. He praised the vocational preparation and training programmes. I have already dealt with that in my first answer. He compared the running of VEC schools with the voluntary schools and said that VEC schools were non-selective. He made general points in relation to their efficiency and progress. He also brought up the point of provision of education for travellers and prisoners. I am glad to tell him that neither the provision for the travellers or their children or the provision for the education of prisoners will be affected in any way. We have made that very clear. The Deputy referred to the Government's development programme and said he doubted their ability to bring more second level pupils to complete the senior cycle. I hope that is what we will do.

Deputy Desmond asked me for the list of savings which I have given. He referred to attenuated Cabinet meetings. It was nothing in comparison with the Deputy's Government Cabinet meetings where they had great walk-outs from time to time. I agree with the Deputy that the subject mater of education is very lively at Cabinet and I note the Deputy's point——

Mr. Desmond

We never walked out.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I note the Deputy's point but we do not accept that redundancy payments should not be given to teachers.

An Ceann Comhairle

Perhaps the Minister would draw her remarks to a close.

Mrs. Hussey

I wish to ask one short question as I understand that is sometimes allowed.

An Ceann Comhairle

One short question.

Mrs. Hussey

I thank the Minister for her elucidation of the £11.49 million. In view of the fact that there is a reduction of £7 million in the pay requirements for 1988, which amounts to more than the savings from the primary and vocational cuts, will she now rescind both of those cuts?

Mrs. O'Rourke

Deputy Hussey is well aware that savings such as those are not carried over. She should also be aware, as should the House, that the base for the estimate on pay and salaries for 1988 was made much more stringently, and having much more regard to good housekeeping than was the case of any Estimate prepared by the previous administration.

Mrs. Hussey

That pay was always carried over.

Vote put and agreed to.