Vol. 484 No. 2
4 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education and Science the Government's commitment, if any, to give primary education a clear priority in the allocation of resources; and the indicators, if any, of the progress in this strategy which he will publish. [21726/97]
The Government's commitment to give primary education a clear priority in the allocation of resources is set out in An Action Programme for the Millennium. This commitment is clearly reflected in the 1998 Estimates where I have provided for an overall increase of 9 per cent in expenditure on primary education for 1998.
In particular, I have provided a total of £32,630,000 for capitation grants towards the operating costs of primary schools. This represents an 8 per cent increase over the projected outturn for capitation for 1997 and a 9.6 per cent increase over the £29,773,000 allocated for capitation in the 1997 Estimates. These figures represent a substantial increase in the level of funding being provided for capitation, especially when viewed against a background of declining enrolments.
The action programme also makes special reference to one-teacher schools. In this regard, following my appointment as Minister for Education and Science, I made special arrangements in the case of 24 two-teacher schools which, because of reduced enrolments, were due to become one-teacher units in September 1997, to permit them to retain their second teacher. I am at present examining a range of options with a view to identifying the most appropriate way to fulfil the Government's commitments to one-teacher schools with ten or more pupils from next September onwards. The programme also gives a commitment to the provision of remedial teachers and resources for special learning difficulties. I assure Members that I am committed to honouring this commitment in the months and years ahead. As part of that process, I am at present reviewing provision across the entire special needs area to ensure that all resources which become available are utilised to maximum effect.
In relation to the programme's commitment to renew sub-standard accommodation, the Government has agreed to provide capital funding in excess of £39 million for primary schools in 1998. This represents a 42 per cent increase over the £27.5 million allocated for capital funding in the 1997 Estimates. This significant increase in the allocation will enable my Department to make further progress in eliminating sub-standard school buildings.
A further indication of the Government's intent to deliver on its commitment to primary education is evident in the substantial additional resources made available to primary schools under the IT 2000 initiative I launched recently. Furthermore, arising from the mid-term review of European Union funding, significant resources have been made available for the years 1998 and 1999 to focus on children in the eight to 15 year old age group who are at risk of early school leaving or who are already outside the mainstream school system. I intend to announce an initiative in this regard shortly.
I shall be making available an extra £0.5 million for the provision of primary school books in 1998 in addition to the existing provision for school and library books announced in the Estimates. I will be making a detailed announcement on this matter very shortly. As Members will be aware, also contained in the Minister's Budget Statement yesterday was a specific tax relief programme being introduced in the forthcoming Finance Bill to facilitate private or company donations to disadvantaged primary schools and designated disadvantaged post-primary schools which will be of significant benefit to many such schools in the years ahead.
I am satisfied that the introduction of these measures at such an early stage in the Government's term in office is indicative of the high priority it attaches to primary education, clearly demonstrating its intent to honour its commitments to that sector.
Does the Minister agree that yesterday's announcement to the effect that the only measure being taken to support disadvantaged schools was to inform them that they could raise their own funding, is indicative of the sort of thinking on the other side of the House? Would he agree also that the commitment in the programme for Government to give priority to primary education is not consistent with Estimates that provide an increase of 22 per cent at third level and just 9 per cent at primary level? Furthermore, would he agree that a commitment he entered into to end the differentiation between capitation grants at primary and second level is hardly being significantly addressed by an increase of £5 in the capitation grant when that grant is £45 as against the £177 target the Minister set himself? Is it not a major disappointment that the Minister, in informing the House of the indicators by which he would judge progress in this area, made no reference to key initiatives addressing disadvantage, such as breaking the cycle, early-start or other key programmes at present reaching 3 per cent only of the disadvantaged population which we know to be five or six times that amount?
Of course, yesterday's budget was not the only response to educational provisions for 1998. Prior to the budget, there were significant announcements made in relation to education, not least of which was the historic £250 million Education Technology Investment Fund which will involve huge, unprecedented investment in primary education in terms of information and communications technology, an area which had been totally ignored and left without any funding over the preceding four years. Clearly, our commitment to transform primary schools under the schools IT 2000 programme is a major commitment to the primary schools system. This will permit children attending primary schools today and those who will attend them in the future, who deserve to have available to them the equipment, facilities and teachers trained in those new technologies to enable them become computer literate on leaving primary school, to be at the cutting edge of new technological change and to participate in the information society and the Europe of knowledge now emerging which will continue throughout the forthcoming millennium. Since assuming office, that is one of the most significant contributions on the part of this Government to primary education and, in my view, will represent its lasting legacy in terms of our primary education system.
However, we have done much more than that. For example, our commitment to eliminate sub-standard school buildings, in terms of the capital provision in the 1998 Estimates, is very significant, way ahead of what was provided last year for primary school building. The provision in the 1998 Estimates is 42 per cent more than the 1997 Estimate provided by our immediate predecessors, who opted for a £27.5 million provision whereas we have allocated close to £40 million this year. We had to introduce a Supplementary Estimate the week before last to ensure the continuation of some projects that had run out of funds prior to the end of this calendar year. Our record speaks for itself in that, within six months, we have achieved an enormous amount.
In addition, the initiative being funded by Europe in relation to eight to 15 year olds, the first of its kind, is a significant one in terms of disadvantage. It endeavours to intervene earlier in children's life cycle than the Youthreach programme. The recent Clondalkin partnership report was interesting in that it suggested that children in fifth class primary level and those in first year at second level were at a critical stage of their development and were most likely to leave school. I assure the Deputy that we have not finished on the matter of disadvantage: the Estimates include a provision for measures which will be announced following consultation with the INTO and the other partners in education in terms of the staffing schedule for 1998. Indeed, the scheme announced by our immediate predecessors dealt with the preceding year's allocation of demographic dividends granted by previous Ministers in terms of breaking the cycle and early-start.
There are 3,000 primary schools, with much disadvantage, much of it not yet included in schemes such as breaking the cycle or early-start. Therefore, we need a more comprehensive programme in that respect.
Would the Minister agree that the figures show in Clondalkin where a quarter of the students do not turn up for school indicate a deep problem in the area of disadvantage? While I applaud the Minister's decision to initiate IT 2000 and upgrade school buildings, would he agree that we are actually talking about basic support for children at present seriously alienated from the education system? Moreover, does he agree that he cannot allow that to be provided perhaps from demographic windfalls but must seriously resource it? Furthermore, would he not agree that the additional £6 million non-pay element being allocated to the primary schools system this year is not the basis from which to mount a serious assault on the problem of educational disadvantage which begins in primary schools?
We must be careful how we interpret the figures contained in the Clondalkin report. It would be wrong to suggest that a quarter of the children in that area are not turning up for school. What would be more accurate would be to deduce that a percentage of those surveyed were absent from school. We have to be extremely careful how we present those figures. I am not in any way under-estimating the reality that there is very serious educational disadvantage out there, particularly in the partnership areas defined under the various national programmes. There is also very serious disadvantage in rural areas, identified in the report prepared jointly about two years ago by the Combat Poverty Agency and my Department.
The difference between this and the last Government is that part of the funds provided for in the Supplementary Estimate introduced the week before last were necessary to pay for the retention of 300 teachers under last year's demographic dividend, not provided for in the 1997 Estimate. It appears that the philosophy over the past four to five years has been one which Deputy Bruton now condemns. While not ruling out what he says, I must place on the record that the philosophy has been that the demographic dividend arising from falling enrolments has been redistributed within the education system; that has been the way it has been since 1987 under the various national programmes for partnership. Last year there was an attempt by my predecessor to stop that, when in the 1997 Estimates provision was made for 100 teachers only.
It took the onset of a general election and the teacher conferences to force a climb down on that. The result was that a Supplementary Estimate had to be introduced two weeks ago to pay for those extra 300 teachers.
We are taking a comprehensive approach to disadvantage and tremendous progress has been made is the home-school links programme. When I visit schools in various counties I am heartened by the successful impact of that programme, which I will be looking to expand because of its effectiveness in many schools. Other issues such as remedial teachers, teacher-counsellors, etc., also need attention. I am conscious of the issue of disadvantage, as is the Government, and I take on board the points the Deputy made.
In relation to the demographic dividend at first level, what is the estimated number of teachers that will be released this summer and employed in other areas? Specifically, does the Minister intend to extend disadvantaged status to schools that do not have such status in the coming year, either in respect of funding or staffing?
We have not yet made definitive decisions on that matter. I do not have the exact figure that will be made available as a result of declining enrolments; it will obviously be similar to what was available last year. We will discuss that matter with the partners, the INTO and the parents and put forward our ideas on tackling disadvantage. This is not simply a question of allocating a set number of teachers to a school. That is not the only approach. Aspects such as psychological, remedial and home-school inputs should be considered in terms of tackling disadvantage. In addition, we are currently evaluating the Early Start programme and that report should be available before the end of the year; we are also evaluating the impact of Breaking the Cycle.
The whole school approach to disadvantage in terms of the school plan and so on has been identified by the Breaking the Cycle co-ordinator as an important dimension of the success of that initiative in given areas. Deputy Bruton referred to the 3 per cent these schemes include, but there are 3,000 primary schools and one cannot advance the viewpoint that there is not one school which does not have some cohort of pupils who are not disadvantaged, either socioeconomically or otherwise, to some degree or another. We will deal with this issue comprehensively in the context of the available resources and we will meet the social partners in that regard.
In terms of the demographic dividend and where a school is just one or two pupils short of the retention number, will the Minister indicate his view on whether schools can be seriously disadvantaged when a teacher leaves and the number of pupils is divided among fewer teachers?
I am concerned about that. This goes back to the policy that has been in place for some time — and I do not say that in a critical way — but comprehensive research must be carried out on the impact of demographic trends on education. If enrolments decline in rural areas, for example, particularly along the western sea-board, more multi-class type schools will develop. That has been the trend. On the other hand, population trends in areas of Dublin, Meath and Kildare are booming with enormous pressures on schools in those areas in terms of maximum class guidelines, etc. There are population explosions in certain areas of Limerick, Cork and Galway. We are initiating a demographic study of the impact of population decline and shift because the emphasis to date has been on population decline. The conventional wisdom is that population decline results in the freeing up of resources for redistribution, but we need to examine in a more sophisticated way the demographic shift from one part of the country to another to determine its impact on rural areas suffering population decline as well as urban areas where schools are overcrowded. New ways of resourcing rural primary schools, other than staffing, may have to be considered. The £500,000 announced yesterday, which is additional to the library scheme, will give resources directly to schools. That will be useful for schools in rural areas which can build up resource materials to assist them in multi-classes. This needs to be examined in a more profound way and I have set that in train in the Department. I received numerous letters from Deputies during the summer concerning a shortage of teachers.
The junior primary school in Clones does not have disadvantaged status despite the fact that the senior primary school does. Since then, a gaelscoil opened in the area which means that the junior primary school has lost a teacher. Will the Minister give a commitment to examine this matter? Clones has been adversely affected by the problems on the Border and it is a serious anomaly not to designate the junior primary school as disadvantaged when the senior primary school and the gaelscoil have a better status. Unfortunately, this case is not covered by the recent report because the teacher numbers are too high. The Minister's predecessor initiated a study which highlighted the fact that only schools with fewer than five teachers can be classified as disadvantaged. That is the case with the Clones school and I ask the Minister to examine it as a matter of urgency.
I cannot give the Deputy a specific commitment on that school today but he has articulated a difficulty that is replicated throughout the country. The report of the school accommodation committee is nearing completion. With a decline in population, new types of schools are emerging and that affects enrolments in existing schools. Unfortunately, that has occurred in an ad hoc way over the past ten to 15 years with the result that we now have a range of gaelscoileanna operating in poor accommodation, which is another difficulty. Approximately 39 gaelscoileanna are not in permanent buildings, and another 14 or 15 are due to open. Many of these schools have been in existence for a significant length of time and it is unfair to the children attending those schools that they are operating in such physically unacceptable conditions. On the other hand, we must look at the emergence of new schools in the context of the existing school provision. This problem is affecting staff morale in schools which lose teachers, and I must accept that. The school accommodation committee will put forward firm proposals in regard to this whole area.
I want to put two questions to the Minister, one specific and one more general. The first is in relation to a commitment given prior to the election that St. Teresa's national school in Balbriggan would be designated as a disadvantaged school. What progress has been made on that issue? More generally, will the Minister agree that the resourcing of in-service education will be critical to the initiative he announced in the IT and other areas? Will he agree also that teachers in many smaller schools are reluctant to go on in-service courses because the only remuneration they receive, if one can call it that, is a day off which they can ill afford because of the tight staffing levels in their schools. These teachers are expected to go on these courses without getting anything in return because what is offered to them is not workable.
I will have to come back to the Deputy on the matter of St. Teresa's national school in Balbriggan. In conjunction with St. Patrick's Research Centre in Drumcondra, we are considering the whole area of disadvantage. There will be a comprehensive in-service programme for IT. International experience shows that if proper in-service programmes do not accompany the provision of computers and so on, such programmes will fail. One cannot throw computers in boxes into classrooms without providing adequate inservice training on their use. A total of £3 million has been provided in the Estimates for in-service training in 1998.
Regarding smaller schools, the nature of in-service training is changing. It should not involve teachers travelling to Dublin by train or car to undertake courses in certain centres. The aim is to hold future in-service courses in the locality of schools. Regional education centres will play a specific and significant role in providing in-service courses and the ICT programme. In rural areas a number of small schools could combine to form arrangements which would facilitate group training programmes in given areas. The ideal position would be to design programmes to suit the customer, the teacher, which are regionally located and ultimately lead to accreditation in a given area.
The Minister advised that the Breaking the Cycle scheme is under review. Will he indicate when he will be in a position to give his views on that scheme and will he make any announcements on it before the conferences at Easter?
I would need to make a few announcements before the conferences, but I believe that matter will be resolved before then. The issue of the staffing schedule for 1998-9 will be resolved before the teacher conferences, but whether it is resolved to the satisfaction of everybody is another question. That matter will have to be resolved before then because the earlier the staffing schedules are issued to the schools the better that will be for future planning.
Will the Minister indicate precisely his policy on the demographic dividend? It was clear in his manifesto that he believed teachers should stay where they are but we hear he will conduct another study on this issue to add to his stable of studies. If 400 teachers were to become available what proportion of them would the Minister like assigned to programmes for the disadvantaged? Currently 650 teachers are providing such programmes. Would the Minister like the bulk or all of those extra teachers to be assigned to such programmes and added to the 650 teachers who provide such programmes? What is his opening position on this?
If the Deputy read my manifesto carefully he would know that my opening position is that there are a number of clear issues. Ultimately, we must tackle urban and rural disadvantage. To tackle it comprehensively we will require a range of targeted inputs ranging from educational, psychological and remedial inputs, a straight teaching input in terms of the PTR and teacher counsellors. Tackling that problem may require a combination of those inputs or the application of one or two of them in particular areas. The approach to this problem should be that of a comprehensive range of inputs rather than going in one direction and allocating so many teachers to a school. We have had preliminary discussions with the partners on this and we will engage in more substantive ones early in the new year, but this problem will not be resolved in year one. The demographic dividend will be an issue for a number of years and a programme will be required to deal with it. There are still 900 schools that do not have a remedial teacher and needs in that area are still very significant. The special needs area, which has significant demands, has not been mentioned to date. Since I took office in July we have endeavoured to make up for past omissions in the area of special needs education in the context of classroom assistance and special schools. Very little provision was made for that area in the past.
