Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 12 Mar 1996

Vol. 462 No. 8

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - White Paper on Education.

Helen Keogh

Ceist:

17 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Finance the cost implications of the recently published White Paper on Education; and if he will disclose the tentative costings done by his Department on the White Paper. [5555/96]

Liz O'Donnell

Ceist:

32 Ms O'Donnell asked the Minister for Finance the cost implications of the recently published White Paper on Education; and if he will disclose the tentative costings done by his Department on the White Paper. [5555/96]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 17 and 32 together.

I indicated to Deputies on a number of occasions in the recent past that the White Paper on Education was published by the Minister for Education following consideration and approval by the Government. The process included consideration of costings prepared by my Department in so far as these could be assessed.

In reply to previous questions on this matter I also stated that these costings were, of necessity, very tentative. The decision taken by the Government in regard to funding is clearly set out by the Minister for Education in her foreword to the White Paper — essentially that the amount of funding which can be made available in any year will be a matter for determination by the Government in the context of the budgetary position.

There are two principal reasons the costs of proposals in the White Paper are tentative. First, as already indicated by the Minister for Education and me in reply to previous questions, the cost of implementing the White Paper is contingent on a number of factors, including the timescale in which proposals in the White Paper are to be introduced. All the initiatives in the White Paper will have to be considered by the Government within the framework of the budgetary parameters and the Maastricht Treaty convergence conditions. Second, because of the various imponderables in the implementation of initiatives outlined in the White Paper, including aspects subject to negotiation with concerned interests, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to say with any certainty what the cost of implementing the White Paper will be. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate for me to disclose the tentative costings arrived at by my Department as part of its function of providing observations for the Government's consideration of the White Paper.

As I indicated to the House, my colleague, the Minister for Education in accordance with normal practice will provide costings as appropriate on proposals to implement specific aspects of the White Paper as and when they are submitted to Government for approval.

I protest very strongly at the Minister's consistent attitude in this matter. I have heard that argument trotted out on several occasions in this House. That a costing is tentative does not mean it would not be of use to the public to know what it was. There were many occasions on which the Minister has furnished costings and stressed that they were tentative. Will the Minister agree that the Department of Finance would render a public service if on this occasion it would indicate to this House — and through it to the public — the broad cost implications of the different segments of the White Paper on Education to enable the public to reach its own conclusions on its priorities and as to what should and should not be done? Will the Minister agree that it is not satisfactory that the only circumstance in which any aspect of the White Paper can be costed is if the Minister for Education makes an immediate move to implement it? Surely, that strikes at the heart of parliamentary accountability. Is there any good reason this House should not now know the full cost of each component in the best tentative estimate of the Minister's Department?

It was not the intention of the Minister for Education or the Government to attempt to have the proposals in the White Paper — which is a policy blueprint for the future — implemented in any one year or in a short period. The White Paper, following a long consultative process, covered the entire spectrum of education. If the Government of the day proceeded to give the best possible estimates of the costs of the White Paper and presumed them to be the entire costs of the White Paper, without breaking down those costs or giving a detailed analysis of them, which would further make them tentative, the presumptions could be misleading and distort debate rather than focus on the quality of the proposals in the White Paper. However, I understand the Deputy's consistent concern in this regard and if he wishes to put down specific questions about particular components in it, I will attempt to have those questions answered.

I will not go away.

On many occasions we discussed the form of accounting in its widest sense in the Department of Finance. Will the Minister agree there has been a practice for many years, of which we all have been guilty, of publishing plans without indicating the cost implications? It would be far better if the public understood there was no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and we might have more respect from them when we are seriously trying to improve matters.

I can see the merit in what the Deputy and Deputy McDowell are saying. I will review the position to see if we can give some indication of what the cost might be, but I remind the House of a previous occasion where people felt they had an accurate costing for a particular item which was subsequently found to be incorrect. That would distort debate. I am not prepared to give costings of a tentative nature if we find as a consequence that those figures are grossly inaccurate. That would be a disservice to this House.

Barr
Roinn