Regarding funding for schools, I castigate the Minister for Education and Science for his illegal use of the Data Protection Act before Christmas in deducting salaries from ASTI members. That has now been found to be illegal and it is amazing that the Minister is not offering his resignation for that illegal act.
Adjournment Debate. - Schools Funding.
The Deputy is straying from the substance of the Adjournment debate.
I realise that and will move on to the funding of schools but it was necessary to put on the record the fact that the Minister was found to have broken the law.
I raise this issue because there is basic discrimination in the allocation of funds by the State for secondary and other second level schools. When I refer to secondary schools I refer to voluntary secondary schools run by lay people, priests, nuns, religious brothers and non-Catholic schools. They are the poor relations of the education system though it is not as if they form a minor part of the education system. There are 420 such schools and they provide education for 64% of our second level students, more than 200,000 pupils.
The Blackstock study was commissioned by former Deputy Niamh Bhreathnach when she was Minister for Education and a report was published in June 1999 entitled Funding for Second Level Schools. A technical group had examined the voluntary sector and the comprehensive-community schools sector. It found there was blatant discrimination against the voluntary sector and recommended in its report that the State pay grants equitably to all second level schools. The report stated that the State covers the bulk of insurance costs in comprehensive and community schools and, accordingly, as all schools are to be treated equally, the funding formula would have to be adjusted appropriately.
The voluntary sector demands no more or less than equitable treatment. It is looking for the payment of grants on an equitable basis for caretakers and secretaries. A school with 500 pupils in the voluntary sector receives 0.66 of the cost of a caretaker, while a comprehensive or community school gets funding for two caretakers. A voluntary school gets 0.8 of the cost of a secretary, while a comprehensive or community school is funded for the wages of one and a half secretaries. There are no cleaning grants for the voluntary sector while a comprehensive or community school with 500 pupils is given £16,320 towards cleaning. There is no allocation under the minor work programme for the voluntary sector and such schools must beg for every penny. St. Joseph's in Rush, which is in my constituency, eventually gave up trying to get the Department to pay to resurface its play area and had to engage in endless fundraising.
Life for the parents of the 200,000 pupils in the voluntary sector is an endless round of coffee mornings and race nights for fundraising, with the attendant insurance costs and so on. I ask the Minister of State to make sure the Blackstock report, as published by her Department, is implemented in full. Why has the Government not faced up to this unconstitutional behaviour? We are meant to treat all the children of the State equally.
At present one voluntary sector school has been challenged by the trade union representing its caretaker. The union is threatening to bring the school to the rights commissioner if the caretaker is not paid what caretakers in comprehensive and community schools get. The latter schools get a full grant for a caretaker while a voluntary school must raise funds for its caretaker. A school in Cork has seen its insurance costs rise from £5,000 to £9,000 in one year. I will not put up with the blatant discrimination against voluntary schools such as the four in my constituency, the Loretto schools, St. Joseph's and the Christian Brothers school. It is time the Department faced up to the recommendations in its own report and paid proper grants to these schools.
I intend only to deal with the matter legitimately raised on the Adjournment by Deputy Owen and I thank her for raising it.
I am aware of the demand by voluntary secondary schools for increased funding, including for the many reasons outlined by Deputy Owen. The funding arrangements for the different school types at second level have evolved in a manner that reflects the different traditions and structures of the voluntary secondary, comprehensive and community and VEC sectors. This evolution has, by its very nature, generated funding anomalies and structures that lack uniformity and cohesion.
At the core of funding arrangements at second level is reliance upon capitation as the principle determinant of funding. In the case of voluntary secondary schools in the free education scheme, which are privately managed institutions, the Department meets the cost of teacher salaries, excluding the first £400, and allowances and makes an annual per capita grant towards the recurrent cost of schools. In addition, these schools may also be eligible for assistance under a range of other grants available under the scheme, including grants for the employment of secretaries and caretakers and curricular support. Regarding insurance cover on school property and against public liability, this is a matter for the managerial authorities of the individual schools to arrange. Grant aid towards voluntary secondary school funding costs provided by my Department by way of per capita grants may be used for this purpose.
There is nothing left.
The financial allocations for vocational schools and community colleges are made to the vocational education committees as part of a block grant, which also covers the VEC overheads and other activities apart from the second level programme. The Department does not earmark allocations for individual schools or for the various activities of vocational education committees. Secretarial, caretaking and other maintenance staffing support is also allocated to vocational education committees on a scheme basis. The deployment of such staff is a matter for vocational education committees. In the case of vocational schools and colleges, insurance cover is arranged by the relevant vocational education committee.
The annual budgets for community and comprehensive colleges take into account factors that vary from school to school. All schools in this sector have been provided with secretarial and maintenance support services. Regarding insurance cover, the State provides a general indemnity to the authorities of these schools in lieu of their taking out insurance cover against liabilities that may arise. Budgets for vocational education committees and community and comprehensive schools are increased on a pro rata basis with increases in the per capita grant.
In this regard, I consider that the report of the steering group on the funding of second level schools represents a comprehensive review of the funding arrangements, including the matter of equity of funding between the different sectors at second level. While further work is required to bring greater uniformity and cohesion to this aspect of the funding of schools, the priority is to focus on the issue of adequacy of funding.
In this connection the Department has shown its commitment by the establishment of the school services support fund, which is a significant initiative in the funding of our schools. This funding initiative represents a new approach by the Department that supports the school development planning process. This process can only be enhanced if each school is given flexibility in the deployment of its resources. While provision for support services, including secretarial and caretaking services, is a particular focus of this fund, schools are being given discretion as to how this additional funding is best utilised in the interest of their pupils and for the operation of their schools. A school with 500 pupils will now receive additional annual funding of £20 per pupil or £10,000, with a minimum payment for smaller schools of £4,000 per school. This fund will channel an additional £4 million to voluntary secondary schools each year.
In addition, since 1997, notwithstanding many competing demands on budgetary resources, the funding allocated to secondary schools has been increased substantially. The standard per capita grant was increased to £184 from £177 in 1999. It was further increased by £8 from September last to £192 and will be significantly increased by £10 for the next school year. For a school with 500 pupils, this amounts to an extra £12,500 per annum, and a total capitation grant of £101,000 towards general expenses. An additional per capita grant of £30 per pupil is paid to disadvantaged schools, thereby bringing the total grant in the case of such a school with 500 pupils to £116,000.
Secondary schools have also benefited from increases in the grant scheme for school books for needy pupils, the national reading initiative, the library grant, the IT 2000 initiative, the science initiative and the increase in the grant for secretarial services.
While funding arrangements have evolved in an ad hoc manner and reflect the different traditions and structures of the various types of schools, the Department's approach to date has clearly shown commitment and determination to improve funding at second level. We intend to build further on progress made to date.