Ceist:
24 Mr. Hayes asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his plans to expand the schools meals scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5694/01]
Priority Questions. - School Meals Scheme.
I have felt for some time that the current school meals scheme falls a long way short of what is required. Some 33 local authorities participate in this scheme with a current spend of about £650,000. I do not consider that the simple expansion of that scheme would meet the needs of today's school children in an efficient or effective manner.
A major reform of policy is required in this area and a new and innovative approach is necessary. Accordingly, I established some time ago an interdepartmental working group, chaired by my Department, to review the existing scheme with a view to developing proposals for the future of the school meals provision.
The group has engaged in an extensive consultation process as part of the review. All of the issues and difficulties with the current scheme and suggestions for a reformed scheme which have emerged during the consultation process will inform the group's consideration of the future policy direction for the scheme.
I expect to receive the working group's report in the summer of this year, following which I hope to be in a position to bring proposals to Government regarding a reformed school meals scheme. Pending completion of the report, I provided £300,000 interim funding for this pilot scheme towards the food costs for the voluntary and community groups and schools currently providing school meals outside of the existing scheme to which I referred earlier. This funding has been allocated initially to nine groups working in this area and will benefit approximately 2,200 children. The Department currently has 37 applications on hand and decisions in relation to these will be made shortly. A further 14 schools and groups have made inquiries about the scheme.
My officials have been working with officials from the Department of Education and Science, both on the review and the targeting of the interim funding. In this context, details of the funding arrangements were recently circulated to all schools, included in the stay in school retention initiative of the Department of Education and Science. It is expected that this will generate a considerable number of additional applications.
I recently visited two of the groups funded by my Department – a breakfast club in the Dublin 17 area and an all day food service operating in Drogheda. The value of their work cannot be over estimated.
Additional informationI fully acknowledge that the overall allocation of £300,000 is a modest sum in the context of what needs to be done in the area, but as I said it is interim funding pending completion of the review.
Mr. Hayes:
I thank the Minister for his reply. After four years in the Department, I am glad to see he is hitting the ground running on this issue.
Late last year the Minister told my colleague, Deputy Deenihan, that he expected the working group report early in 2001. He now tells the House that the report is not expected until the summer of this year and he will then bring for ward proposals. Could he give a commitment to the House that he wants to put this scheme on a statutory footing? Will he further indicate to the House the total number of children who are affected beneficially as a result of this scheme?
I cannot second guess what the working group will come up with. The issue of whether the scheme will be put on a statutory footing must obviously wait until the report is on my desk, but I already indicated that as an interim measure I provided £300,000 in this year's Estimate for the current pilot scheme under the existing scheme, which has been in place since 1914. There had been no review of that scheme and I was the first Minister to bring forward such review.
As I said, 33 local authorities availed of the scheme. The spend has been decreasing over the past decade or so; it is currently £650,000.
This other scheme, which is based on participation by voluntary and community groups, is the way in which we will proceed. I am aware of the excellent work being carried out in partnership by schools, the teachers, the staff, the parents who are an important force in this regard, and the pupils. The analysis resulting from the examination of these pilot schemes has been positive in that there is a strong suggestion, particularly from the teachers, that children availing of these pilot schemes are coming to, and remaining in, school and are much more fulfilled because they have proper meals. There are fewer incidents of them bringing crisps and Coke, etc., into schools.
I am a great supporter of this scheme. I would like to think that once the report is submitted in the summer, it will feed into the budgetary process which will take place thereafter.
Mr. Hayes:
I accept what the Minister said about dealing with the issue of child poverty. This is a direct provision which can help reduce instances of child poverty. Could the Minister explain to the House why local authorities are still involved in administering this scheme? Why should urban councils have any role in respect of administering this scheme? We have one of the worst records in Europe in respect of providing schemes like this to primary school children and the current level of provision is hopelessly inadequate to meet the existing demand. Will the Minister further outline to the House the expenditure for this scheme in 1998, 1999 and 2000?
I do not have the figures to hand on the latter question but I can get them for the Deputy. The figures would not have reduced that much.
I requested my Department to review the existing scheme in September 1998 because it had outlived its day.
We must proceed to Question No. 25.