Vol. 459 No. 7
3 Mr. Martin asked the Minister for Education the steps, if any, she will take to ensure publication of the cost framework undertaken by the Department of Finance in relation to the costs of the proposals contained in the White Paper on Education. [17799/95]
The Government decision on the funding of initiatives in the White Paper, Charting Our Education Future, is as set out in my foreword to the White Paper. It states:
The Government will aim to provide, during its period of office, the resources for the development needs identified in this White Paper, within the framework of the budgetary parameters set out in the Government of Renewal policy document, including the acceptance of the Maastricht Treaty convergence conditions. The amount which can be made available in any given year will have to be decided by the Government in the context of its financial position and its other public expenditure priorities at that time.
In making observations on the resource aspects of the White Paper, the Department of Finance did not produce detailed, comprehensive multi-annual cost projections, which would take account of all the variables on which future costs will depend. To attempt to do so would have been a very difficult, if not impossible, task and indeed would be of questionable value. Government approval of the White Paper was contingent upon adherence to the Maastricht Treaty criteria, in accordance with the Government's fiscal policy objectives. The allocation for education would have to be settled each year.
As I pointed out in my reply to Deputy Martin on 28 September 1995, I do not intend to publish a cost framework or series of cost projections for the White Paper. Any such exercises would not be very meaningful, and would not contribute to the implementation of a White Paper which is setting the agenda for planning our education system into the next century. As I indicated previously, it is important to point out that many key changes in the White Paper will not involve additional resources. Rather, they involve the establishment of rights, responsibilities, roles and functions to create a modern framework for the management of the education system. In this regard, I am giving priority attention to the tabling and enactment of legislation.
In his reply to Deputy Michael McDowell on 19 October 1995, my colleague the Minister for Finance, Deputy Quinn, confirmed that he participated in the process of consideration by the Government of the White Paper and that this process included consideration of its cost implications. The Minister correctly pointed out that proposals to implement specific aspects of the White Paper reform programme must be accompanied by detailed costings as and when they come before the Government for approval. Costing exercises for proposals that might have resource implications in the future are contingent on a range of variable factors, such as the timescale within which proposals are implemented, the outcome of discussions or negotiations with concerned interests and expert advice on the detailed implementation strategies. As the Minister for Finance pointed out, the cost of education measures are determined to a large extent by pay costs, which in turn reflect numbers employed in the sector and pay rates at any given time. In this context he indicated it would be neither useful nor appropriate to comment on what the cost elements might be into the future and I agree.
It is extraordinary that on the third occasion on which the Opposition has sought basic information prepared by the Government in relation to the costings of the White Paper it has been met with another refusal. Is the Minister aware that her colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald, has circulated the heads of a Bill for the freedom of information legislation which will provide individuals with the right to examine official Government documents and that it has been approved by the Government? This morning the Taoiseach confirmed that it would come before a committee of the House.
In such circumstances how can the Minister justify withholding this important information which would be useful to the conduct of the debate on education? How can she justify this secrecy and the deliberate withholding of this information? It is not a question of its being appropriate or useful but whether the Opposition and the public have a right of access to this information. I reject the Minister's proposition that we do not have that right.
It is not a matter of secrecy. It is a matter of fact about what was done. This is the third time I have had to deal with the costing proposals for the White Paper which the Deputy imagines were done page by page. In itself, that would be an unusual practice associated with any White Paper. The Minister for Education and the Government agreed to the publication of the White Paper and the costing constraints were those listed in the foreword to it.
The costings of the White Paper, which seeks to chart the future of education into the next century, were not done on a page by page or issue by issue basis. It might have been easier for me or future Ministers if funding had been secured into the next century but that is not the practice. The White Paper sets out the framework for the annual budget and future budgets, and all the other areas of rights and responsibilities which do not include a Department of Finance input but include input from many other Departments, none of which would feature or have featured in the publication of Government documents.
It was confirmed to the House that cost implications were considered and a cost framework was produced by the Department of Finance in relation to the White Paper's proposals. In the context of the freedom of information legislation the Ombudsman will be the person to whom the public will be entitled to appeal. He called recently for an end to the culture of secrecy that pervades our public service.
I had to table five parliamentary questions requesting the publication of various reports dealing with education matters, including this issue. Does the Minister agree she is now in charge of the most secretive Department in Government and that she is one of the most secretive Ministers in the history of the State? She seems to have to be forced into publishing information which is vital for the public.
Given that the National Education Convention produced costings for the proposals which came within its remit — they came to around £470 million — why is the Minister not in a position to give an approximate costing for the proposals in the White Paper? Why are we not in a position to have an implementation strategy for the next five years?
I am not a secretive Minister. I have been accused by the Deputy of publishing and making available too much information.
The Minister is an open book.
I have never accused the Minister of that. There are three questions tabled today seeking the publication of reports. Will she publish those reports?
This is the third time I have had to tell Deputy Martin there is not a step by step proposal or finance framework to the White Paper.
I challenge the Deputy to bring to my attention White Papers prepared by this or previous Governments where this information is detailed. It may have been easier for me and other Ministers for Education if a White Paper agreed by the Government was published and in which the future budget was negotiated. However, there are five reasons why this is not done in White Papers. First, the Government reviews annually the resources required for each Department, including the Department of Education. Second, the Government, through the White Paper, established a systematic and comprehensive framework to annually review the needs and priorities of Departments, including my Department. Third, part of the White Paper evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of policy implementation. In the case of education, I suggest it has strengthened the case for the Department of Education budgeting its funding year by year. Fourth, consideration must be given to the overall context of the economy in which one negotiates an annual budget for each Department. Fifth, it is important to remember that within the White Paper key changes to create a modern framework for the management of the education system will not involve resources but rather rights, responsibilities, roles and functions.
One brief question——
The Deputy knows full well that a rigid time limit applies to questions nominated for priority and I cannot dwell an unduly long time on any one question.
