Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 22 Nov 1995

Vol. 458 No. 6

Adjournment Debate. - Mountmellick (Laois) School Project.

I am grateful to you for allowing me to raise this matter. I appreciate that the Minister of State at the Department of Education, Deputy Allen, has come with what I hope is a satisfactory reply.

I want to impress on the Minister the sense of frustration, anxiety and anger among teachers, parents and pupils in Mountmellick with the ongoing saga of the refurbishment of the community school in the town. I acknowledge the difficulties involved, as a contractor in the project went out of business and there was also the subsequent legal and technical difficulties that attached to the bonding and the position of the bondsman. I hope every possible effort will be made to resolve the matter at the earliest opportunity.

I received correspondence from the Minister for Education last Friday to the effect that work would commence on Monday, 20 November. It seems unsustainable that work on basketball courts could go on while rainwater seeped into classrooms. I saw at first hand the frustration and anger of parents when that work seemed to be given higher priority than work on the classrooms.

What is the position regarding a number of subcontractors and when may they be expected to commence work on the building? I refer especially to electrical and roof work and window and heating maintenance. What about the future of the building? This is a big project welcomed by the people of Mountmellick when it was first announced. The overall cost of the work was estimated to be approximately £2 million. However, much of that welcome has worn thin because of the huge delays in dealing with these matters.

These renovations were designed for a community school of 350 pupils. However, there are currently 415 pupils enrolled in the school. This is a good school which has always had a good name and I hope it will continue to cater for the educational needs of the children of north Laois well into the next century. What plans does the Department of Education have for the two upper floors in the building and for what was the convent building? What extra work outside the original contract has been arranged and how much will this cost?

Work began last Monday. Has the Minister placed a target date for completion of it? I ask this because of the most unsatisfactory situation for arts and home economics students. These pupils are not in a position to avail of facilities other leaving certificate students have. There has been a huge disruption of examination classes in both of these subjects and I ask the Minister to ensure the contractor completes this work at the earliest opportunity and to take a personal interest in this matter. It has gone on for too long. It has been said that the legal and technical difficulties have been resolved. It is now nearly Christmas and the situation has still not been clarified to the satisfaction of those involved. It is totally unjustifiable to have the school facilities in turmoil while the school year proceeds. I hope the Minister will see fit to reply to letters issued to her by the parents council on both 10 November and 21 November. It is important that the widespread disillusionment throughout the town is dispelled, which is why I have requested permission to raise these concerns in this House. It is a serious matter. The school has a good name in north Laois. The Government is committed to funding the school and I ask the Minister to take an interest in the case to ensure the sub-contracting work will proceed at full steam in December and January with as little time off as possible for Christmas festivities. The students cannot be denied access to art and home economic facilities. They are due to sit the leaving certificate examination next June and it would be unfair to place them in such a disadvantaged position having regard to the high level of stress and trauma experienced in sitting examinations. I look forward to action being taken at an early stage.

I thank Deputy Flanagan for raising this important issue. I understand the frustration of the pupils in that area and if I am unable to answer any question he raised tonight I will give him the information tomorrow if he calls to my office.

The contract for major refurbishment works to Mountmellick Community School was placed in July 1994 and the builder commenced on site in August that year. It was intended that work would be completed by 21 April 1995. On 11 April 1995 the Department received written notification from the project design team that the main contractor had not made payments due to the sub-contractors. Two days later the Department called an urgent meeting with the design team at which it became clear there were serious difficulties with the project. The main contractor has not been on site for some weeks and, because of non-payment, the sub-contractors had ceased work. It would have taken ten weeks to complete the project.

Following consultation with the Chief State Solicitor's office and numerous written and oral communications between the design team and the contractor requesting a resumption of work, the Department formally notified the contractor on 22 June 1995 that his contract had been terminated.

As the House will appreciate, this is a serious course of action and one not taken lightly by the Department. Despite the inevitable delays that would result the Department was left with no alternative particularly when it transpired that the contractor's company had gone into voluntary liquidation.

Before signing a contract it is the normal practice of the Department of Education to require the building contractor to become party to a performance bond indemnifying the Department against financial loss because of non-compliance with the terms of the contract. Under Government contract procedures performance bonds are an absolute requirement for contracts above a certain value. If for some reason, as in the case of Mountmellick, the original contractor is unable to complete the contract or adhere full to its provisions the bond becomes operative and it is then the responsibility of the bondsman to finance and arrange for completion of the work.

Such a bond was taken out in the case of the Mountmellick school project and following termination of the contract the bondsman was instructed to make the appropriate arrangements to complete the outstanding works. The Department's intention was to ensure the building would be ready for the beginning of the school year in September. Unfortunately, due to a complex series of legal and other difficulties that arose as a result of termination of the contract it proved impossible to adhere to this timetable. These difficulties have been resolved and the replacement contractor is on site. Nominated sub-contractors have also been appointed and will be on site within a matter of days when the replacement contractor and the design team have agreed a programme of works.

I assure the Deputy that since the problem with the contract arose the Department has made every effort to minimise disruption at the school. The Department's main objective continues to be the speedy completion of the work and I am confident this can be achieved in the near future.

I thank Deputy Flanagan for raising this important issue and hope his frustration and worries and those of the pupils, teachers and parents will be dealt with as soon as possible.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 23 November 1995.

Barr
Roinn