Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 12 Mar 1996

Vol. 462 No. 8

Written Answers. - Moate (Westmeath) Schools.

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

180 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the reason £250,000 was spent on refurbishment at the Mercy College in Moate, County Westmeath, in 1992 in spite of her Department's policy that no expenditure on refurbishment be incurred while schools are in a transition period. [5631/96]

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

181 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the reason the issue of access for the disabled is not addressed for students entering the proposed Moate community school in County Westmeath as and from September 1996. [5632/96]

Minister for Education (Ms Bhreathnach)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 180 and 181 together.

The question of rationalisation of the three post-primary schools in Moate, when initially raised met with strong opposition from the local school authorities.

When a single school development in Moate did not seem in prospect, the management authorities of the vocational and convent schools pursued a policy of co-operation between the schools. In order to facilitate this co-operation an application for refurbishment and the provision of additional facilities was approved by my Department at a cost of £235,000.

Subsequently, as the Deputy is aware, agreement was reached between the three school authorities to a single school development in the town. Officials from my Department are currently addressing the needs of this new community school. The Deputy can be assured that access for the disabled is one of the issues being addressed and expected to be successfully resolved.

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

182 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the reason the Carmelite Order were asked to make available a further six acres over and above the 14 acres already offered for the proposed community school in Moate, County Westmeath; and the reason, on receiving a favourable response, the Department decided to select a site of 14/15 acres with fewer recreational facilities. [5633/96]

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

183 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the reason a decision was made in relation to the siting of the proposed community school in Moate, County Westmeath, prior to the anticipated arrival of an ordnance survey map relating to the Carmelite site which had been requested by her Department. [5634/96]

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

184 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education if she would agree to meet a deputation to discuss the decision made regarding the siting of the proposed community school in Moate, County Westmeath. [5635/96]

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

185 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the basis on which the decision on the site of the proposed community school in Moate, County Westmeath, was made in view of the fact that her Department have stated that the decision was a very close one and was a matter of where the balance of advantage lay. [5636/96]

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

186 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education her views on whether a site which already provides extensive sporting and recreational facilities and more extensive acreage is a better option for pupils of the community school in Moate, County Westmeath, in view of the fact that the overall cost margin between the two options concerning the siting of the school is not very significant. [5637/96]

Minister for Education (Ms Bhreathnach)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 182, 183, 184, 185 and 186 together.

A key consideration in the selection of a location for the new community school in Moate was the precise extent, configuration and cost of the sites on offer to my Department. Initially, my Department's approach was to ask the Mercy and Carmelite Orders for sites of similar size, so as to be able to make an accurate cost comparison. Further discussions were held to determine the precise layout of the Carmelite site because the configuration of the original site being offered was not ideal for the development of a community school and ancillary facilities. It was in the context of these discussions that the Carmelite Order decided to offer a site comprising approximately 20 acres.

An ordnance survey map of the overall site was also requested but was not critical to deciding which site was the best location for the community school. I should also mention that a decision on the location had to be taken urgently as it was imperative that the new school commence operation in September 1996 and temporary additional accommodation has to be provided in the meantime. The Carmelite Order was as anxious as any other party involved that there be an early decision and at no stage was my Department asked to defer the decision pending the production of a map.

I will arrange for officials from the planning section of my Department to meet with a deputation, to explain the decision, if such a meeting is required.

I would refer the Deputy to my reply to Questions Nos. 202, 203, 204, 205 and 235 on 20 February 1996, in which I set out the background to the matter and the factors taken into account in arriving at a decision. I wish to reiterate that all factors, including educational, logistical and cost were taken into account before I gave my decision that the community school should be provided on the Mercy and vocational education committee sites. I should also mention that the combined Mercy and vocational site provides adequate space for the needs of the new school.