Deputy Michael D. Higgins was in possession. I should like to advise the Deputy that he has some 12 minutes left of the time allotted to him.
Estimates, 1988. - Vote 27: Office of the Minister for Education (Revised Estimate) (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £50,295,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1988, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education, for certain services administered by that office, and for payment of certain grants and grants-in-aid.
Just before Question Time I was addressing the general nature of the Minister's speech, saying that its methodology was far less than one would have hoped for from a Minister for Education. I have no need to repeat myself, except to say, as summarised for me, that I have seen matters that did not need 17 pages put more succinctly in the footnote to a table in my day. I also referred — and I repeat it now again in English — to the fact that there is not a single word of Irish in the speech and not a single reference to the teaching of Irish, or to the Irish language. This does not surprise me, although it does give me great disappointment.
I now want to turn to what we can glean from this extraordinary excursion into internal departmental accounting confusion which has been presented as a ministerial speech. Will the Minister or the Minister of State, whoever will reply, explain exactly what are the implications of the following:
The total gross provision in these four Votes is £1,176 million. This includes appropriation-in-aid amounting to £82.7 million, giving a net Exchequer provision of £1,093 million. In addition, a further £30.3 million is being provided from the proceeds of the national lottery. Since 1982, funds have been provided for the education services from the employment and training levy through the Vote for Labour. A total of £30 million is being provided in 1988 from the employment and training levy but it is being included in the Education votes — £22.239 million in the vote for second level and further education and £7.761 million in the vote for third level and further education.
How will the above fit in with previous expenditure and so forth? I do not mean to fall into the trap set by those who wrote the Minister's speech, which is to enter into accepting the invitation to wrestle with a ghost about the way the figures have been done. I shall make this comment on the matter. I referred to one speech which is already meaningless, but I must say that from an accountancy perspective the Minister cannot be claiming, in her revision of the 1988 Votes, benefits that will hide the effects of cuts and at the same time want to have claimed them in 1987. I invite commerce students all over the country, preparing for next year, to take the 1987 Estimate speech and compare it with the 1988 Estimate speech. They will find, like the commerce paper recently, that the figures do not balance.
This has been an extraordinary year in Irish education. I have only so many minutes and want to use them as wisely as I can. I would just contrast two papers that I have before me, the Minister's speech delivered today and the speech of Professor John Coolahan which has given at the INTO Conference in Bundoran on 27 November 1987 titled In the Shadow of the Guillotine — the Development of Irish Education. The paper by Professor Coolahan, Professor of Education in Maynooth College, has been printed and is available, I presume, from the INTO, with whom the Minister has a better relationship perhaps than she has with others. Professor Coolahan drew our attention—those of us interested in education—to the difference between quantitative and qualitative provisions in education. He spoke of Irish education being a kind of skeletal service in relation to many crucial aspects of education. He asked if we were at a crossroads, would the demographic trends not provide us with a wonderful opportunity of doing those things in which we had been lacking in the past. There are many such things. For example, comparing the amount of money spent per pupil in certain kinds of activities, we are near the bottom of the league by comparison with Europe in some specific activities. Could we not now hope to address these issues? In other words, could we not allow the new conditions to enable teachers to teach better, to allow pupils to have a better experience in the classroom, to allow greater participation and a better kind of curriculum? Instead of that, in a totally suppliant attitude towards this appalling brand of ignorance coming from the new Right by which you attack the poor in the name of making, sustaining and reproducing the riches of the rich, there is a decision to abandon all the educational arguments.
Lest I should not be here again, I should like to list the educational principles which have not been addressed by the Minister for Education. There is not a word in her speech about access to education. If you comb through this strange document, you will not find anything as to whether access to education by different socio-economic groups will be made more easy. You can take that at all levels in terms of, for example, the motivation of better learning at primary level, at second level, where there is the question of the transport system and in the vocational, comprehensive and community sector where there is the question of materials. At third level there have been increases in student fees which are three and four times the rate of inflation. The capital programme in relation to third level has been abandoned. Standing over all this, like a great figure with a sickle, are the Minister's proposals for pupil-teacher ratio change. Her proposals in that regard in Circular 20/87 brought out people, who never thought they would have to do so in the eighties, to defend class sizes at primary level.
At second level, there are proposals to demolish over 700 posts in the vocational sector which will in reality amount to far more; 200 teachers are to be taken from community and comprehensive schools with a destruction, in turn, of subjects. There has been a forcing of classes into rooms which were not built to accommodate them and there is an imperilment of the extension in the vocational schools of education to groups in the wider community. People are even wondering if the schools will be adequately heated and they write to me about the absence of materials and so on. In the new conditions, there has been no defence of education and the public have been forced to defend it. As I announced before Question Time, the Labour Party oppose this Estimate for more or less the same reasons as they opposed them last year. We object to the cuts in education because of their general and specific effect. Let me list these neglected issues.
Would one not expect from a Minister for Education the word "access" even once in her speech instead of a long mumbo-jumbo about shifting money from one vote to another like a bad apprentice for the three card trick? The neglect of access means that we are moving back from an adequately funded public education system and drifting inexorably to a privately purchased narrow educational system. We are being pushed more and more into the question of provision.
Did any part of the Minister's speech deal with conditions? Did she have the courage to justify the pupil-teacher ratio at any level or sector? No. Was there any reference to buildings? Was there even regret expressed about the abandonment of the capital programme? Was there an expression of regret about the shortages being experienced? Was there even the jaded bit of wry optimism thrown in now in Government speeches that there would be a better day for somebody, somewhere? Was there a reference to emigration? It is now acknowledged that 30,000 people will emigrate every year up to 1992 and that 25,000 people will emigrate annually from then to the year 2,000. They will not only leave the country that has failed to make any provision for them in terms of employment, but will be forced to leave because the educational system has been cut back. They will go away, like the Minister's problems, and she will be left skittishly repeating her figures to herself.
The Minister's speech left me in a state of anger. There was a reference to the curriculum but if education is not about quantity, is it about the qualitative experience? The Minister established the primary school curriculum review body in October 1987 and she is setting up more advisory mechanisms. Let us be clear about what this Minister has done. A sub-committee of the curriculum review body that worked for years produced a draft syllabus for political and social studies for the curriculum. They completed their work, submitted it to her Department and, in an action perfectly consistent with the attack on the Ombudsman's Office, the Department decided to drop political and social studies in the curriculum. It is an attack on citizenship, on political literacy and on the capacity and the right to participate in society.
Dealing with the question of the curriculum, the Minister has abolished the statutory basis for which we had hoped. If they produce documents such as her speech, I am afraid to think of the consequences. What has happened to the notion, for example, of creativity and educational experience? What is the status of all those documents about moving provision for the arts and music and other things — which had all been prepared — from private purchase provision by parents into the classroom so that we might have some kind of adequate, full, personal development for our children, even if they did have to leave this country? They do not even merit a reference. It is as if we were at some kind of a wake without the body. There is no reference to a single, educational principle in the speech.
At the end of an 18 page document, three pages are grandiloquently titled "Some General Issues". Modern languages, technology and initiatives are mentioned. There is a specific implication, as well as a general one, of the cuts in education. It affects the lower socio-economic groups and it is they, primarily, who will emigrate without certification because there is a nine to one difference, at least, between the top two groups and the lowest two groups if you divide the country into seven socio-economic groups. The Minister is moving resources out of the control of the Department of Education and shifting them to other Departments. Anyone caring even a little for education should consider all these matters that I said were not mentioned once in the Minister's speech and contrast that with the number of times the national lottery was mentioned. References to the national lottery occurred throughout her speech again and again, as resources were moved from regular, accountable expenditure by a Department of Education, being replaced by certainly very far from accountable national lottery expenditure.
My final comment is that I would like to see a restoration even of the argument for education. At every level in every sector there is the anxiety mentioned earlier. Even as I say this I know the degree of concern there is all over the country in relation to certification of the qualification for points. There is a tension and anxiety being created that could wreak havoc on people's expectations of education. There is not a single educational issue addressed by the Minister. Instead, there is a badly-drafted internal memorandum for the Department of Education masquerading as a ministerial speech.
We will be opposing the Estimate.
The Worker's Party will be opposing this Estimate, as we opposed the education cuts in the course of the past year. They have had the most traumatic effect on education, on parents and on society as a whole. Indeed they have revealed many things to many people, particularly the basic class nature of our society.
I am aware that there have been some honourable compromises — as they have been described — arrived at. Certainly I do not contest the right of the relevant unions, the INTO or the TUI, to conclude agreements on the industrial relations aspects of the cutbacks. The fact remains that those cutbacks are still being enforced on a somewhat lesser scale than was originally intended. However, despite the concessions made by the Government, those cutbacks will still lead to an unacceptable deterioration in the standard of education available in our primary and post-primary schools.
It is appalling that, as a time when we have the highest pupil/teacher ratio in Europe, the Government should have set out deliberately to effect a further deterioration of that ratio. Judging from experiences in my constituency I would contend that these cutbacks are having a particularly severe impact in working-class areas. The pupil/teacher ratio in these areas is already bad and any worsening will severely affect children already disadvantaged in very many ways, as I will point out in a few moments.
The public clearly demonstrated their opposition to the cutbacks in primary education in a series of huge demonstrations involving teachers and, predominantly, parents. Parents became more involved in education over the past year than ever before. In fact, if there is one good point to be made about all of this it is that parents have taken a greater, very definite interest in what is happening in schools and have learned a tremendous amount of what is going on there. They are now more than ever aware of the importance of education and of their need to fight for the proper education of their children. The potential of education as an equalising force in Irish society has been destroyed by these cutbacks. I do not know if the importance of education has been seen by any Government in any political context as an equalising force in our society. I do not know if any Government have ever tackled the whole ideological concept of equality in education. Certainly this Government have tackled it in the reverse way, by creating more inequality in our society, in education. Clearly there is now developing a two-tier educational system, just as there is developing a two-tier health system, indeed a two-tier system in society overall. Yet, we are told that there are no class differences in our society. There are very clear class issues involved in the educational system which have been clearly demonstrated.
I want to dispel a myth that has been developed over the past year or so by the media and others about how marvellous it is that our young emigrants are such a highly educated group of people. The fact is that the vast majority of them are not highly educated. No more than 20 per cent are highly skilled or highly educated. Anybody in London will tell you that that is the case. In America there is being developed the theory that they are a whole new yuppie class of society, highly educated young people who will make a great breakthrough all over America whereas in New York and Boston it is precisely the same, no more than 20 per cent are highly skilled or have high educational qualifications. At least 80 per cent or more — certainly those in the London area — are badly educated, in very many cases leaving school with little ability to read or write. That bubble should be burst and that myth dispelled before people get the impression that all pupils in our schools are receiving a marvellous education, all being highly educated when they leave.
My constituency stretches right from the inner city, in James's Street, out to the Meath border within which there are two growing towns, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown. They are rapidly expanding areas with young parents and many young children where both the primary and post-primary populations will be increasing for many years to come. Yet, we are being told that the number of school-going children or population is falling. Certainly it is not falling in those areas. Those areas were classified as disadvantaged with unemployment among parents ranging between 60 and 80 per cent. There has now been devised a new definition of "disadvantaged". A school is regarded as being disadvantaged now only if it has an ex-quota remedial teacher. In the Clondalkin area there is a primary school, the junior level of which is not regarded as being disadvantaged while the senior level is — there are two separate categories of schools there because there are so many pupils. I contend that all of the schools in that area would be disadvantaged, requiring a high level of remedial teaching and a schools psychological service which I understand the Minister will initiate. I understand it is her intention to introduce that service in two pilot areas. I would request that one of those be Clondalkin or Blanchardstown.
The position is precisely the same in the post-primary sector. The Programme for National Recovery speaks about ensuring that the disadvantaged are not affected, whereas every single cutback has affected the disadvantaged more than any others. For example, Collinstown Park College, the senior college in Ballyfermot, Riversdale, a new community school in the Corduff area, the VECs, the Palmerstown Community School, Pobailscoil Isolde, all are losing remedial teachers on account of the cutbacks being implemented in the post-primary level under the new unacceptable scheme put to the TUI.
I want to raise a specific point in relation to disadvantaged second-level schools. The £30 allowance for the VPTP programme has been abolished. Without that £30 allowance there will not be very many pupils in the VPTP area. It is no wonder the Minister is so liberal in allowing 200 teachers for this area. She knows that the abolition of the £30 allowance for disadvantaged pupils for whom the programme was designed, will mean that they will not continue the courses. The Minister is well aware that this rapidly growing area which has over 30,000 students will rapidly diminish without the £30 grant and that they will not need the teachers. The Minister can come along and say to the TUI without any fear that she will allow an extra 200 teachers for the VPTP programme knowing they will not be needed. Unless the £30 allowance is kept, disadvantaged people will become even more disadvantaged. They will leave school early and will continue to be disadvantaged without the benefit of these programmes, despite what the Government says about the disadvantaged not being put at risk. I know my time is limited——
Tá trí noiméad fágtha agat.
Chomh maith leis an Teachta Higgins, tá an-díomá orm nach raibh faic le rá ag an Aire faoi mhúineadh na Gaeilge sna scoileanna. Bhí mé ag caint le déanaí le Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge agus tá go leor moltaí acu siúd faoi mhúineadh na Gaeilge agus go mór mhór ta siad ag moladh go mbunódh an Roinn bun-aonad pleanála agus monatóireachta a bheadh freagrach do Runaí na Roinne. Tá an Chomhdháil ag caint ar son gach eagraíocht beagnach atá ag seasamh ar son na Gaeilge agus d'fhéadfadh leo siúd bheith ag labhairt don bhun-aonad seo faoin sórt syllabus a ba chóir a bheith ag an Roinn faoi mhúineadh na Gaeilge agus módhanna múinte na Gaeilge.
De réir mar a chloisim uathu múintear an Ghaeilge sna Gaeltachtaí díreach mar a mhúintear í sa Ghalltacht anseo i mBaile Átha Cliath. Ba chóir an Ghaeilge a mhúineadh sna Gaeltachtaí díreach mar a mhúintear an Béarla sa Ghalltacht, mar is í an Ghaeilge an teanga a labhartar sa bhaile, cosúil leis an mBéarla anseo. Ba chóir na módhanna múinte a bheith mar an gcéanna leis an mBéarla. Tá an syllabus céanna ann le 30 bliain anuas gan athrú dá laghad. Tá sé tábhachtach go mbeadh slí éigin ag an Chomhdháil agus ag Comhchoiste na Gaeilge anseo san Oireachtas labhairt leis an Roinn faoin syllabus, faoi na módhanna múinte agus chuile rud mar sin. Seasaim leis an Chomhdháil san mholadh sin go mbunófaí bun-aonad pleanála agus monatóireachta chun caint le Rúnaí na Roinne faoin pholasaí atá ag an Roinn agus ag an Aire faoin Ghaeilge.
I have listened, like a number of Deputies, to the Minister's speech. I agree with the comments made by a number of my colleagues here that it certainly does not reflect the chaos in education throughout the country. The Minister has dealt with global figures and has given a round figure of £1,200 million being available for education this year, and £5 million extra being made available to primary education. What the Minister said is at variance with what is going on in the country. I, and I am sure other Deputies and Ministers and Ministers of State, have had the experience of attending more meetings to do with education, the difficulties in education and the concern and anxiety of educationists, parents and everyone concerned about what is going on at the moment, than we have attended in the previous five years.
The Minister's speech did not mention the primary schools where the pupil-teacher ratio is being adversely changed again. Many teachers throughout the country in national schools, large and small, do not know whether they will be employed next year. As Deputy Quill said, pupils are getting their holidays and are leaving school at the moment, and because of the uncertainty as to what staff will be available, they do not know what subjects they will be taught next year, who their teachers will be and they have not been given a book list. We can all envisage the consternation and the queues and difficulties there will be in September. Over the years it has been the practice that pupils knew what subjects they would be taught during the coming academic year and what books they should get, so that everything was arranged when the school year started in September. Regrettably, that is not the case this year and parents and others are very concerned.
Another problem not mentioned in the Minister's speech is the almost complete abandonment of the school building programme. Few schools are being built in any part of the country now and that is in sad contrast to the record of the previous Government. When they were in office fine new schools for primary and post-primary education were built all over the country, including my constituency. The only activity in this area now that I see are Ministers and Ministers of State opening schools that were allocated and built by the previous Administration. I wonder when they will be in a position to open schools they have sanctioned?
An aspect of education for which I have responsibility relates to youth and sport. While there are significant funds available in these areas this year, it is a retrograde step that for the first time since I came into this House there is no mention in the 1988 Estimates of youth activities. There is no subhead for youth under the Education Estimate. That is a backward step and is a failure to recognise the educational input of the youth services. I know they are getting money out of the national lottery but we are getting near to the time when we will debate the Estimate for 1989 and I hope the Minister and the Department will consider giving back to the youth services the recognition they have had, and that they will have a place in the Book of Estimates.
The Minister and the Minister of State can say that moneys are available from other channels, namely the national lottery. That has its difficulties as well, as we have experienced last week or the week before. I have in mind certain minority interests and churches in this country who have a difficulty in accepting lottery funds. They do not agree with the concept of the lottery, they do not agree with gambling. Their principles are strong enough to refuse to accept this money. If the Minister was to have a subhead for youth funding in the Estimates this year it would relieve this difficulty. I hope that careful consideration will be given to that suggestion.
It is a source of dismay that the national youth policy which was being implemented by the previous Government has been abandoned and put back on the shelf. It will be remembered that in 1983 or 1984 the National Youth Policy Committee was established under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice Costello. It deliberated for a year and consulted all shades of opinion, and the report was welcomed when published and eventually it was adopted as Government policy. It was welcomed by all youth organisations and people interested in youth activities. Now we find that that programme is on the shelf and that very little is being done. Certainly, money has been given but there is an absolute necessity to have a policy. There is no use in giving out money here and there unless there is a policy to be implemented. Local youth service boards were established in about 15 counties and other local authorities were in the process of setting them up. Now they are being discontinued and the youth are suffering as a result.
I should like now to refer to the area of sport. This week there is no necessity whatsoever to mention the importance of sport to the people of Ireland. It would not be proper to let the occasion pass without congratulating our own Irish team on their efforts in Germany since last Sunday. We all hope their success will continue during the remainder of this tournament.
At present we have the opportunity of revolutionising sport in Ireland because we have more funds available than ever before through the national lottery. It is not sufficient to hand out money here and there to facilities, to football fields and to clubs throughout the country. We must have a more organised approach to the entire matter. In view of the available funds, and the importance of sport, it is about time we had a five or a ten year plan. It is not sufficient to pour these resources into facilities, football fields and so on. We must also have the personnel to organise these activities, to look after the facilities and to ensure that the money is economically and well spent and that there is no duplication. One of the difficulties we have at present is that four or five activities may be grant-aided in one area. We must rationalise our approach, develop a centre in each area and have no duplication.
In referring to the matter of lottery funds there is concern throughout the country at present at the manner in which these funds are being allocated. It is the concern of all political parties, even some people on the Government side, that it is not good enough that Ministers look into their own hearts and say that £100,000 should go here and £50,000 there. We should have some more constructive way of making these allocations. We have witnessed in the past few weeks projects receiving funds for which they did not even apply. We, on this side of the House, would be in favour of having some authority, body or monitoring board that would monitor and assess applications very carefully and would give out this money on the basis of need rather than any other consideration. We have all read and heard of Ministers going out and handing over cheques. I do not think we can tolerate that sort of activity. It is not good for the lottery and it is not good for sport. It devalues the entire concept and the sooner it is brought to an end the better. I hope the Minister and the Government would think of this and devise some better way of organising the distribution of national lottery funds.
Mar a dúirt an Teachta Higgins agus daoine eile, tá díomá orm nár labhair an tAire in a hóráid aon fhocal Gaeilge. Tá a fhios againn go léir na deacrachtaí atá ag an Ghaeilge faoi láthair sna scoileanna. Tá an Ghaeilge faoi ionsaí agus is beag atá á dhéanamh ag an Rialtas nó ag an Taoiseach, atá mar Aire na Gaeltachtá, faoi choinne í a chur chun cinn. Sílim go bhfuil géarghá rud éigin a dhéanamh faoi théacs leabhair. Tá áthas orm go bhfuil an Teachta Higgins anseo sa Teach a bhfuil an oiread sin suime aige sa Ghaeilge agus go bhfuil sé mar chathaoirleach ar fhochoiste a bhunaíomar inné chun breathnú isteach sa cheist iomlán seo, an Ghaeilge sna cúrsaí oideachais, téacsleabhair agus mar sin. Guím rath agus bláth ar a shaothar agus más féidir le héinne sa Teach gaisce a dhéanamh is féidir leis an Teachta Higgins é sin a dhéanamh. Tugaim buíochas agus focal molta do mo chomhghuaillí féin, an Teachta Gemma Hussey, a chuir páipéar ar fáil seachtain nó coicís ó shin ag moladh go gcuirfí feabhas ar mhúineadh na Gaeilge agus ag moladh breis airgid a chur ar fáil maidir le múineadh na Gaeilge.
I do not want to become too parochial but I would like to mention one particular school in my own constituency which was promised more than two years ago on the island of Arranmore, oileáin fíor Gaeltachta. There are 80 pupils leaving that island every Sunday evening and returning to the island every Friday evening having to go to the mainland to avail of secondary education. It is bordering on the disgraceful that little or no progress has been made in the past two years in providing a school on that island. There have been talks about sites and so on. I appeal to the Minister and the Minister of State present to cut through the red tape, get on with the provision of that school and provide that much needed facility for the children of Arranmore island who have to cross the channel twice a week to get to and from school.
First, I should like to deal with one of the points raised by Deputy McGinley regarding the inclusion of youth and sport in the Estimates. The fact is that youth and sport is probably the one lucky area in the finances of the State that it is not included in the Estimate because then it would have to suffer the same public expenditure cutbacks that every other area has had to endure. I was pleased that at my request the Government included youth affairs as well as sport in lottery funding. The result has been this year a massive increase up to £27.14 million available for youth affairs and sport. Broken down this means an increase from £3.7 million for youth affairs last year to £10 million this year. The allocation of this money means we can now introduce initiatives which will allow the development of a comprehensive youth service targeted in the first instance at those young people most in need.
I am delighted that this year we have been able to allocate some £4.86 million for the provision of special services for disadvantaged young people. For the first time we are going into the deprived areas, particularly the city areas where young people simply have not got a chance because of the level of deprivation and underprivilege they have had to endure. We have tackled the cause of that deprivation and underprivilege. This is one of the most innovative schemes ever introduced in this country and I am confident it will give a major return in investment to the State because for the first time those deprived young kids are getting the money they sorely need to give them some kind of basic, reasonable lifestyle.
I am quite satisfied that this money is being used in a preventive way in tackling the problems of homelessness, substance abuse, lack of education, training and job opportunity and lack of leisure and sporting opportunities. We are giving a new lease of life to those young people and I am confident that this expenditure will keep them out of trouble and save this country millions of pounds which would have to be spent in trying to cure the problems now being generated to an alarming extent by such young people who are socially deprived and disadvantaged. Since I got this job I feel that had I come from the background they come from I would be worse probably than they are. For the first time a Government have given a considerable amount of money to help the have nots. That has proved possible because of the national lottery, and what better way to spend the money?
Contrary to accusations about money being spent by Ministers, I set up an interdepartmental committee of five Departments, Education, Health, Social Welfare, the Environment and Justice, to ensure we had a co-ordinated approach to those young people and their difficulties. Rather than abandoning the previous Government's youth policy, we are implementing it in full. I have used the Costello report as my Bible since I got this job. That was the basis of the previous Government's youth policy and I am carrying out in full the proposals in that report and the proposals in the policy document of my predecessor, Deputy George Birmingham. It is totally incorrect for Deputy McGinley to allege that that policy has been abandoned. It has not. It is being implemented efficiently.
What about local youth services and sport?
I will deal with that in a moment. I am providing an extra £1 million to develop mainline youth services for voluntary youth organisations. I am not proceeding with local youth boards because I do not believe we need yet another structure, another bureaucracy. We need an innovative approach to youth work which was started by you, Sir, on the basis that you develop voluntary effort on a base of good professional back-up. In that context we are setting up local youth service councils who will simply integrate properly at voluntary and statutory levels all the people who are operating on the ground in local areas. We do not need another structure. We need funding to be made available to the people on the ground doing the work, particularly volunteers who are doing such a fine job in the provision of mainline youth services at present. Considerable extra money is now being made available to those organisations without the necessity of further bureaucratic structures.
We are developing a youth information service right across the country. We are developing youth international exchanges and I am developing further the Irish-Franco cultural agreement on youth affairs. This week in Germany I reached agreement with my German counterpart on significant developments in German-Irish youth exchanges and a considerable increase in the German-Irish cultural exchange agreements which have been on the shelf since 1983 and are now to be moved forward with the exchange of young people in youth affairs and sport, coming from Germany to this country and going from Ireland to Germany. We propose to make available through the youth exchange bureau, now in the process of being finally put on a statutory basis, youth exchange opportunities to other countries throughout Europe and further afield.
I concur with Deputy McGinley in connection with the development in sport. Again, as a result of the national lottery we have been able to provide significant moneys for the development of sport. A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, as probably the most eminent Minister for Sport you will appreciate, and this will serve to illustrate, that sport is probably the most important medium for the development of morale, not alone in this country but in the development of Ireland's image abroad. I join with Deputy McGinley in congratulating the Irish team who put up such a great performance. One would need to have been in Germany, as I had the opportunity to be, to understand fully what this game meant for Ireland, and not alone that but what the performance of our 15,000 Irish people meant for Ireland. Never have I seen such a wave of goodwill as I have seen for the past five or six days by the German people towards Ireland, because of the behaviour of our fans, so much so that last night the city of Hanover simply rose to the Irish fans who were celebrating in that city. It was interesting to see cars literally coming to a standstill so that their occupants could talk to the Irish because in five days they had made such an impression as people who are good-natured, happy and simply good. What better way to enhance the image of Ireland? The coverage on German TV of the fans and their behaviour has been significant and that is not in any way to take from the supreme effort of the team. Again, right across Europe the image of Ireland has been enhanced by their performance. If I may make a prediction, I am convinced we will get at least the one point we need on Saturday and we will be in the semi-finals of this competition. What a performance for a country on the edge of Europe. We were disappointed yesterday evening in Hanover that we only drew with the Russians but when one thinks of that, we are in a wonderful situation. Consider the performance of an Irish team with only a couple of hundred thousand people playing soccer playing against one of the super powers with a population of I do not know how many million. It was a great performance.
I emphasise that sport is probably the greatest medium for the development of morale at home and the development of the image of Ireland abroad. I want to thank the Minister for Education in particular and the Taoiseach for seeing fit to provide sufficient money through the national lottery for the development of sport. I do not doubt it will prove to be the best investment of any made in this country this year.
Much work is going on behind the scenes and I have paid particular attention this year to the development of a youth policy in sport right across the board. We are putting significant extra amounts of money into the development of sport among young people. We have selected a number of new sports in addition to the traditional sports such as athletics, swimming and boxing where individual performance can be enhanced. We are paying attention to the development of tennis, golf and yachting and we will, in association with the Irish Tennis Foundation and the ILTA, be putting significant resources into the development of tennis. Let me take that one game as an example. This week I reached agreement with the German Minister for Sport that Ireland can have a direct link into German tennis coaching and tennis education system. I had the pleasure of meeting the coach to Steffi Graf and Boris Becker when they were juniors, who agreed readily to take youngsters from Ireland to Germany and coach them free of charge and only at the cost of their stay while they are in Germany. I have reached agreement that the whole coaching system in tennis in this country will be examined by the German experts and that we will receive significant support from the German experts. This is geared towards children between the ages of 10 and 14. I have no doubt, and this relates to just one sport, that this will result in Ireland becoming a major force in tennis in the next ten years. We are not so naive as to think we can do so in a shorter period but unless we are prepared to develop a policy which is equal to the best in the world we cannot expect to succeed.
I am glad to say we have a significant coaching and development programme for youngsters with the FAI. We have given £120,000 to the GAA to bring down the cost of hurleys and ensure that the decline in popularity of our national game is halted. We want that game to grow in popularity. Cospóir, the national sports council, are involved in a series of programmes this year and I am glad to say that we are providing £313,000 for their development programmes. A "Sport for All" Day was held in primary schools on 24 May and the intention was to encourage more young people to get involved in sport. I have given funds to organisations such as Minisports who are promoting in national schools mini-tennis, mini-hockey and mini-basketball, with the emphasis on getting young children involved in sport. It is important that young people should enjoy and become more proficient in the sport of their choice.
My most important objective is the promotion of sport for all. The "Be Active Be Alive" Week, Cospóir's main promotion, was a great success. It encouraged many people who were not involved in sport to participate. We are anxious to continue with that type of programme. We want to get those over 40, housewives, the unemployed and people who up to now have not been involved in sport, to participate in some type of activity. The long-distance walking groups, promoted by Cospóir, have proved a great success. I am glad that Bord Fáilte have at long last produced a brochure for that activity.
The most significant development in sport this year was the commercial development. Sport can provide a very worthwhile spin-off for the country. The Government have agreed to provide £500,000 for the commercial development of sport. We want to develop facilities and a marketing programme so that sport will become an important aspect of our tourism industry. In Germany this week I visited several golf clubs in an effort to promote the facilities we have here. I have no doubt that tourism in the future will depend on our ability to sell leisure programmes based on sport.
This has been a great year for youth affairs and sport and it has been made possible by the national lottery. It is important to emphasise that. I should like to refute categorically allegations made in the House, and outside, that national lottery funds were being abused by me or my Department. We have £4 million to spend on local capital projects but applications submitted to us would cost £40 million. Those applications are worthwhile but we must make arbitrary decisions in regard to the allocation of the money. I will stand over every decision I have taken. We have allocated the money fairly geographically. It was given to deserving projects that complied with the scheme operated by the Department of Finance for many years. We have not done anything different from any Government since the scheme was established in 1980. I accept that the Minister has discretion but I have been careful to use that discretion properly and in the best interests of all. I must refute the allegations made here and outside by Opposition Members that we have used this as a slush fund. That is not the case and I stand over the decisions taken by the Minister and myself.
I do not intend to delay the House on this Estimate. I note that details of expenditure on new schools and school extensions are not contained in the Estimate. For a long time I have been making representations to successive Governments regarding Gaelscoil Mhíde in my constituency. Due to an extreme accommodation crisis the very existence of Gaelscoil Mhíde is threatened. This growing all-Irish primary school is temporarily situated in the Baldoyle area. A small school, it is divided among four buildings with its 182 pupils housed in an old convent school, providing, two classes, an old community hall containing four classes and two prefabs in the convent school grounds. Worse again, the school is separated by a dangerous and busy main street and its junction with Willie Nolan Road, Baldoyle. If equipment has to be transferred from one section of the school persons must cross this busy and dangerous main street to gain access to the other section of Gaelscoil Mhíde. School children face danger daily crossing this hazardous junction.
Infant classes in the old convent school are using upstairs classrooms and teachers must accompany the pupils when using toilets which are situated downstairs. I understand, according to Department of Education rules, upstairs classrooms should not be used where infants are involved. An old hall, an old convent school, and two prefabs are just not good enough in this day and age to provide the proper environment for teachers and pupils to work together successfully for the full development of students. The board of management, staff and parents of Gaelscoil Mhíde are demanding that the school be housed under one roof in suitable accommodation not too far from its home base in Donaghmede until permanent accommodation becomes available for it in Donaghmede.
The Department of Education recognise the right of Gaelscoil Mhíde to be in one unit but they have thus far failed in their efforts to find a suitable building for the Gaelscoil for the new school year. There are only 12 weeks between now and September. The parents of the pupils of Gaelscoil Mhíde are very angry at the treatment they and their children have received and at the lack of positive planning for the Gaelscoil's future. A very telling example of this is the fact that the permanent location of the Gaelscoil has still not been clearly established seven years after the founding of the school. Another example is that the Gaelscoil will have five different buildings for its 200 pupils in September, if proper accommodation is not provided.
In 1986, during the term of office of the previous Government, negotiations were at an advanced stage to purchase 2.5 acres in the Donaghmede area from the Irish Christian Brothers. The parents helped negotiate a favourable price for the site — I understand a price of £17,500 per acre was agreed. However, after the election the Government imposed severe cutbacks and the purchase of this ideal site fell through. There are four schools in the Donaghmede area and there has been a decline in pupil numbers in them. The Department have indicated that space may be available in Scoil Caoibhín but I cannot see Scoil Caoibhín providing the space until 1992. Scoil Íosagáin in Kilbarrack could provide temporary accommodation from September until a permanent home is found. Will the Minister let me know the position in relation to this school? Has it been offered for sale by the Department? Surely the Gaelscoil Mhíde should be offered this school as a temporary measure? The parents are demanding that the Department provide free transport for the pupils of the Gaelscoil to wherever they may be temporarily accommodated until the problem is resolved. The parents are suggesting that a scheme similar to that operating in respect of Gaelscoil Inse Chór be introduced for their area. They are seeking funding so that the children can take a bus to school. There is a precedent for this in Gaelscoil Inse Chór for which the Department have provided that money. If it could be provided in this case it would be a great help. I would urge the Minister to resolve this problem and to find a permanent home for Gaelscoil Míde.
In the Minister's speech she mentioned that negotiations took place under the aegis of the Central Review Committee under the Programme for National Recovery and that settlement terms were agreed by the executive of both post-primary unions in relation to the implementation of revised staffing arrangements to be operational in the 1988-89 school year. The union has asked me to get the Minister to clarify that. They say that no arrangement has been made.
I want to thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate today on the Estimates for Education. All the Members in this House constantly show a very keen interest in educational matters and it is my duty to record my appreciation to those who contributed. Before I go into the general points raised by the various spokespersons I will just answer Deputy Cosgrave. The Deputy asked me specific questions which I cannot possibly answer because I was not aware that he was going to raise them in an Estimates speech. Had he raised the questions on an Adjournment debate I would of course have been able to answer them. I can tell him that I have followed the case of Gaelscoil Mhíde and my Department officials are at present very busy in negotiations on various matters concerning it. Deputy Liam Fitzgerald, my colleague in the Dáil, is very interested in this matter and has arranged with me in meeting with the interested parties within the next ten days. I have conveyed to him that I would be agreeable to meet with the interested parties——
And perhaps the public representatives.
I am just explaining that Deputy Liam Fitzgerald approached me and asked me to meet with the interested parties with regard to Gaelscoil Míde. I was glad to accede to his request on this matter, and——
Perhaps the other public representatives could be included also.
——my Department are very busy on the issue. Very great interest was expressed in the debate by the Deputies who contributed to it. Deputy Gemma Hussey wondered about the changes in the education provision. Any changes which have been made were brought about subject to very reasoned debate to which all parties in the House contributed. Quite clearly, a climate of consensus is one that is very conducive, and so some of the Dáil debates have proven. As well as discussing the Estimates, an hour and a quarter of Question Time was also allocated to education. Many of the points which arose in the earlier debate on the Estimates were duplicated at Question Time. I have explained quite clearly that the lateness in notification and issue of the post-primary allocation of teachers was because the Programme for National Recovery led to protracted talks. Deputy Hussey said that the voters would hold us in very poor esteem. I am not trying to be cantankerous but at present, thank God — God is still with us — Fianna Fáil are standing very high in the poll estimation and I think that will continue.
Unlike previous Ministers for Education, I have met constantly with all of the interests in education. There is never an occasion on which I do not agree to meet with somebody who wishes to see me on a genuine matter, be that an individual or a person representing a group. I find that enormously beneficial and it has eased my path on many occasions, in that as I go around I meet with these people again and they are appreciative of the fact that I am open to discussion and to recommendation.
The CIE trade unions would have appreciated it.
Yes. I had a very interesting and informative meeting with the CIE trade unions for about an hour and a half.
Recently?
Yes, last week. They never asked to see me before and what a pity they did not because they came forward ——
They did.
Excuse me, Deputy Higgins, I am stating quite clearly that they did not approach me about a meeting.
I am stating very clearly that they did.
We had a very interesting discussion and very worthwhile points were raised. I commend them for what they have produced.
Deputy Hussey also raised the question of legislation for RTCs. She said that Deputy Cooney had left it in train when he left office. Of course he did. It was quite horrible legislation, legislation with which I will not be proceeding. I will be proceeding with my own legislation which is entirely different and does not involve the total abolition of the VECs but the merging of VECs. Deputy Hussey spoke about sexism. I am in total agreement with her on this. We found ourselves en rapport across the floor of the House, as I am sure other Deputies did. Since I came into office, I have had the elimination of sexism very high on the educational agenda. The issue of third level grants was also raised by Deputy Hussey. I am quite startled that the Fine Gael Party would object to any measures which sought not to give grants to people who are not eligible. It would be an extraordinary statement which I know would not find favour in any other parties.
Deputy Quill, spokesperson for the Progressive Democrats, referred to the general provision of education. She said she did not understand that there was an increase of 2½ per cent over the 1987 budget in the 1988 budget. I fail to see why she did not understand. They are the figures and I have quoted them. I will be referring to them again when replying to Deputy Higgins. The figures are as stated in the budget. This country is spending over £1,200 million this year on education. That is the second highest percentage of GNP spent on education within all EC countries. Bearing in mind the relative affluence of some of those countries, it is an amazing achievement that this country can do so in spite of the economic difficulties.
Deputy Quill, like Deputy Hussey, quite rightly asked for the post-primary allocation of teachers as quickly as possible. She recorded generously the appreciation of the work of computerisation which will now go ahead. She spoke of the need for planning in the educational process. I am glad to inform her — this factor was not in my speech — that within the Department of Education we have set up a five person planning group, in the light of demographic trends, changes and needs, who will target in particular the planning process for education in the next decade. There is no doubt that this is needed. Were all the money in the world to be available to education one would still need to plan realistically and correctly and we are setting about doing that. The Deputy spoke very feelingly — one would know she had been in the education system — of the pressure on young people sitting the current examinations and the pressure of the path for third level entry. She spoke about grinds and her abhorrence of the grind system.
As we are speaking about examinations, even at this late stage I wish good luck to the students in the remaining subjects in the State examination. All the young people in particular seem pleased with the type of examination questions on the papers, the curricula reflects the various changes which have occurred in the various subjects. The Deputy put particular emphasis on in-service courses for teachers and I agree they are necessary. There is not enough money for in-service courses for teachers. More money should be made available and I will endeavour to see that this is done. If changes are to be made in education there would have to be changes in the needs of teachers who will have to adapt themselves to the changing environment.
Deputy O'Higgins for the Labour Party——
Higgins.
Deputy Michael D. O'Higgins.
No "O".
I am sorry, Deputy Michael Higgins. "By Mac and O you'll surely know true Irishmen are they." Deputy Higgins for the Labour Party spoke of how he found the speech — I hasten to add not my spoken words but the written words — to be illiterate. I find that extraordinary. I cannot alter the figures. They are as set out in the Estimates and they are there to be read. He took particular pages as examples of where he perceived this to so be. Irrespective of whether figures are dry, it is the allocation which decides what services will be given to the Department. At Estimates time, it is incumbent on the Minister to give what are dry figures. I do not particularly like reading figures, but it is a matter of necessity in the production and delivery of an Estimates speech.
I must correct Deputy Higgins who said we are forcing teachers out of the system. I have to put this on the record. The scheme is one of voluntary redundancy and is over-subscribed three times. I am beset by teachers who cannot get voluntary redundancy and wish to get it. Far from forcing teachers out of the system, they seek voluntary redundancy. I want to put that on the record.
I should have said the destruction of the process.
Deputy Higgins and Deputy Mac Giolla said they were alarmed at the lack of Irish in my script. Again, Deputy Higgins went on to talk about the Estimate for the Department of the Gaeltacht, a point he has raised in this House frequently. However, that is for another debate.
By your deeds you shall know them. Since I came into office I have authorised a considerable number of scoileanna lán-Ghaelacha, primary schools. That has been recognised publicly by the umbrella group for such schools. I hope Deputies would not fall into the élitist trap of thinking that one must always speak Irish to be seen as having a commitment to the cause. My commitment to the cause of the Irish language is absolute and untarnished.
Deputy Mac Giolla mentioned the use of lottery funds and the overall level of funding for education as well as the pupil-teacher ratio. Deputy McGinley spoke about the youth and sport element of the Department, and my Minister of State responded accordingly.
May I thank the House. As Minister for Education may I, on behalf of my Department, wish the Republic of Ireland soccer team every good luck next Saturday.
Aontaímid to léir leis an ghuí sin.