Vol. 395 No. 1
13 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for Education if her attention has been drawn to the growing practice of many schools of using money raised through fund raising activities to employ teaching staff; and if she approves of such a practice.
I am confident that the allocation of teaching staff authorised to national and post-primary schools is adequate to provide an acceptable curriculum in these schools.
Is the Minister not aware that schools in certain areas in the country can afford to take on teachers in excess of what the Minister regards as adequate and that, therefore, they have an advantage over the less well off communities and the more deprived areas? It also creates a disadvantage as regards leaving certificate results, the possibilities of further education and so on. Is this matter not causing her any concern whatsoever?
Yes, it is and it is not a practice of which I approve. The Deputy must remember that, particularly at post-primary level, schools can use their capitation grant at their own discretion. Naturally, they pay their heating and insurance bills and so on but they have a freedom of manoeuvre as regards the use of the grant. We cannot tell them what to do with the money. I am not very happy with the development as outlined by Deputy Kavanagh but there are areas where there are active parents' councils who want to do things like that. Do you just tell boards of management or principals they cannot do that or do you allow a certain freedom of manoeuvrability in that respect?
The Minister seems to accept that the number of teachers in schools is adequate but I do not accept that. The question of the pupil-teacher ratio is one that has been discussed over a long period. I think all schools would prefer to have more teachers if that was possible and that there is a demand for more teachers in most second-level schools. As I have said, people in the areas of more affluence can afford, through fund raising — I am not talking about the grant — to make up the shortfall they perceive in their schools whereas other areas cannot do so.
Brevity, please.
I fully accept there is a need for more and more teachers. We are making an effort in relation to reducing the pupil-teacher ratio at primary level. Under the Central Review Committee there are talks going on with the Departments of Education and Finance with regard to improving the position at post-primary level for the coming academic year.
The Minister in her reply seems to indicate that this may have been done out of the capitation grant. Would the Minister agree that the capitation grant of £26 per pupil is inadequate, that a figure of £42 per pupil has been given as the cost per pupil and that this would mean that the parents are contributing approximately 30 per cent of the cost of primary education and that the Minister is contributing approximately 60 per cent?
Watch the budget.
Deputy Deenihan has been called.
Would the Minister agree that £26 per pupil is totally inadequate to run a school?
I have sought to facilitate the Deputy. Deputy Deenihan has been called.
I accept Deputy Mac Giolla's is sincere in putting forward his point. Last year we increased the capitation at primary level by 11 per cent.
Is the Minister aware of the large number of primary schools forced to employ specialist teachers for games, and has she any intention to introduce a proper PE policy in our schools?
The teacher training colleges have facilities for games training for teachers and such training is required as part of the training programme.
Yes, but the Minister——
I want to call another question. Let us have a reply to Question No. 14, please.
