Vol. 647 No. 4
95 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science if she is satisfied with the budget allocation she received for her Department for 2008 in terms of meeting the commitments made in the programme for Government in respect of education; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6866/08]
Overall, education expenditure will rise by 8%, or €690 million, to €9.3 billion in 2008. This will enable us to consolidate the major service improvements that have been put in place in recent years and make further progress in a wide range of areas.
On the 2008 budget, the Deputy will be aware of the importance the Government placed on carefully managing the public finances in the context of more moderate economic growth so that improvements can be sustained in the future. In this context, the provision of an additional €690 million for education services in the 2008 budget over the amount allocated in budget 2007 is significant.
The €9.3 billion being allocated in respect of education in 2008 includes provision for further progress in the following areas: almost €600 million will be invested in school buildings; funding for approximately 1,700 extra teachers and special needs assistants will be provided; expenditure on special education will increase to twice the 2004 amount; €800 million will be spent on tackling educational disadvantage; schools will receive increased funding to meet their day-to-day running costs; capital investment in our higher education colleges will increase by more than 20%; and an additional €12 million will be provided for research to ensure that Ireland is well placed to develop the technologies, processes and products that will be central to our future social and economic success.
While I would like to have been in a position to make greater progress this year on some of the specific commitments in the five-year programme for Government, particularly those relating to school funding and primary class sizes, I am nonetheless satisfied that the 2008 budget allocation of over €9.3 billion will enable me to progress the key overall objectives contained in the programme.
The Minister is aware that clear commitments were given in the programme for Government in respect of an increase of €350 million per year for educational services. She failed to make this increase available in the context of this year's Estimates. The Minister also alluded to the fact that there will be no reduction in primary class sizes this year. In addition, she failed to admit the fact that in her manifesto she promised a reduction in class sizes at post-primary level in respect of the core subjects of Irish, English and mathematics. Of these three broken promises, which is the one that most disappoints the Minister?
The third commitment to which the Deputy refers is due to be delivered upon over the lifetime of the Government and it will be met during that period. On the first two commitments, no one in the House anticipated the slowdown that occurred in the economy. Everything in the programme for Government is predicated on strong economic growth. The Tánaiste and Minister for Finance had an obligation to ensure that, via the budget, improvements could be maintained into the future and a similar obligation rests with Ministers in other Departments. It would not be sufficient for people to congratulate the Tánaiste on keeping a tight rein on expenditure and ensuring that it is well focused, as is the case in the area of education, while stating that all other Departments should spend money willy-nilly.
It is our intention to meet all our commitments under the programme for Government. I would like to have done more in respect of school funding, particularly in light of the time-specific aspect, and on class sizes. However, an additional 1,100 teachers will be employed next year. We made a specific commitment in the programme for Government that an extra 4,000 teachers would be employed during the term of office of this Administration. When one takes into account the number of new teachers employed last September and the number that will be taken on in September of this year, we will already be half way towards reaching our goal in this regard. While we may not reach the specific target for this year, we will reach the target as regards the number of additional teachers to be employed this year.
I have highlighted the two commitments in respect of which I would like to have done more. However, it is our intention to meet these commitments during the lifetime of the programme for Government. The additional €690 million is a significant amount of money.
Does the Minister not accept that any independent commentator would come to the conclusion that she has a real problem with the allocation of funding she received from the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance? One need not be the smartest cookie in the class to realise that if one seeks €315 million, the amount referred to in the programme, and one receives less than one third of that amount in respect of educational services, it is not a good day at the office.
Deputy Hanafin is the first Minister for Education and Science in ten years to introduce swingeing cutbacks in the education budget. I refer specifically to the summer works scheme, which has effectively been abolished this year. Will the Minister provide a clear commitment to the House in respect of the devolved grant, about which her Department has been extremely quiet to date this year? Will the grant be in place for this year and when will schools be in a position to draw down funding under it?
There are no cutbacks in education. There is an increase of 8%, €690 million, in our budget. The education system is extensive and I was concerned to ensure that all levels within it would receive an increase. Previous Ministers might have determined not to provide increases in respect of third or fourth level education, but I see such behaviour as having a significant impact, not only on our society as it stands, but also on the future of our economy.
The summer works scheme did not proceed this year, but last year 1,500 projects were completed under the scheme. An amount of work and effort was invested in the smaller projects. I have an obligation to ensure that the larger projects proceed this year. Such projects are particularly relevant to areas with growing communities. One obviously expends a significant amount of money in the first year following the commencement of projects of this nature. This is particularly the case in view of the fact that we are seeking to ensure that schools are put in place in the various new communities.
I made a policy decision in respect of this matter. Smaller projects were completed in the past couple of years and larger projects will commence this year. We will return, as soon as possible, to the summer works scheme, which is extremely important.
What is the position regarding the devolved grant?
The devolved grant will certainly not be allocated on as large a scale as last year or the year before.
That is a new cut. This is an extremely important point.
The Deputy should be brief because the time for this question is exhausted.
There was no mention of this in the press conference which followed the budget. Will the Minister outline, in unequivocal terms, the position in respect of the devolved grant for this year?
I previously stated in many different fora that the priority for this year rests with larger projects.
Will the grant be provided?
Any other projects will not be catered for to the same extent as in previous years.
So it will not be provided.
In the past couple of years works were carried out at over 350 schools under the small projects scheme.
So it is being axed this year.
It will certainly not be carried out on such a large scale this year. I am not yet in a position to indicate the number of schools in respect of which projects will be carried out.
When will the Minister make a statement on that matter?
96 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in view of recent newspaper reports regarding draft procedures to deal with primary school teachers who are not meeting or adhering to required or satisfactory standards being prepared within her Department, she will formally consult the Irish Primary Principals Network, IPPN, before finalising her Department’s recommendations on this issue; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6034/08]
The reputation of the education system, both nationally and internationally, attests to the dedication, skill and competence of Irish teachers generally. It is recognised that while the majority of teachers fulfil their teaching function and professional duties adequately and well, there are, as in all professions, a small number of underperforming personnel in schools. As part of the modernisation agenda for teachers under the social partnership agreement Towards 2016, it was agreed to address the issue of difficulties in relation to teacher performance.
Teachers are employed by the board of management of each individual school or in the case of the vocational education sector by the individual vocational education committee. Section 24(3) of the Education Act 1998 provides that a board of management of a school may suspend or dismiss teachers in accordance with procedures agreed from time to time between the Minister, the patron of the school, recognised school management organisations and any recognised trade union representing teachers. In that context and as one element of addressing issues of underperformance, discussions under the auspices of the Teachers Conciliation Council have commenced to review and revise existing procedures for the suspension and dismissal of teachers.
The Teachers Conciliation Council is the recognised forum for dealing with matters relating to pay and conditions of service for teachers. The parties to the forum include representatives of the managerial authorities of schools, the teacher unions and the Departments of Education and Science and Finance. The forum is, therefore, representative of employers and employees, as is usual in industrial relations matters. The procedures, when agreed, will provide fair and effective mechanisms in respect of the small number of cases where serious underperformance arises.
The representative body for school principals on industrial relations matters is the Irish National Teachers Organisation, INTO. While it remains open to principals to make their views known to the INTO, the Deputy will appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me, as Minister, to open up an alternative process of negotiation to that already agreed and in place under the Teachers Conciliation Council.
I thank the Minister for her reply. The preamble was perhaps unnecessary, particularly in view of the time constraints. I put it to the Minister that the tone of her reply is in complete contrast to that of the eulogistic address she delivered at the IPPN conference in Killarney, which I attended, when she stated that principals are the leaders of the schools. The Minister is now saying the leaders of the schools have no role to play in the definition, design and structures that would deal with the problem. It may be a problem for the minority but it is very big for parents whose child happens to be in a class or for the principal of a small school where for personal, family or external reasons, a teacher is not performing.
Is the Minister stating the INTO rules the roost on these matters and when it comes to the formal involvement in negotiations or discussions, the IPPN has no place whatever?
As Deputy Quinn correctly stated, I spoke to the principals at the conference and rightly stated the principals are the leaders of the schools. The IPPN is a professional association of school leaders and a body I have much time for. It does a significant amount of networking around the country in supporting principals and working with them but it is not the recognised body for industrial relations.
Principals are recognised and are working through the INTO in this process. On a formal basis, which is the question the Deputy asked, there is no role for the IPPN. There is of course a role for the views of principals, which are being taken on board as they come from principals and professionals. The INTO acts on their behalf as the recognised trade union in all these talks.
If the INTO represents the teachers and the boards of management represent the patrons, who represents the children and parents? All I am asking is whether the Minister will either formally or informally consult with the IPPN before signing off the new and welcome procedures. I use the word "informally" to get around the structure inherited by the Minister which she did not design. She may be a prisoner of it.
A very important factor is that the views of principals are taken on board.
How?
It does not matter which body represents those views, as long as the view is put across. The body principals have chosen to represent them is the INTO, the officially recognised trade union. At a meeting with the IPPN, representatives gave their views on an informal basis. There is absolutely no possibility of setting up a parallel structure when the INTO is the formal group representing principals and teachers.
On the broader issue of who represents the children, the best way of doing this is to get agreement on this issue very quickly. We all know it concerns a few people but they can have a serious impact in class. We can reach agreement on this over the next couple of months.
The Minister did not answer the question. How can she say, when nobody is representing the children, that the best way to get representation for children is to get agreement by the players around the table, none of whom ostensibly represents the children?
There are a number of ways of supporting teachers who have difficulty. There is the teacher welfare service——
Will the Minister just answer the question?
I am answering the question. The best way of supporting the children is to ensure they have professional teachers in the classroom. By supporting those teachers professionally, through in-service and the welfare service available to them, as well as by having this process in place, we have the best way of ensuring the underperforming teacher is removed from the classroom and the teaching of children.
There have been ways over the past number of years that still exist where teachers can go out on permanent leave, effectively, through strands 1, 2 and 3. Approximately 700 teachers took that last year.
Does the Minister not accept the first role of the INTO is to defend those teachers' interests rather than that of the children?
The INTO is a recognised trade union.
I know.
It is the body representing principals and teachers. I understand and hope that agreement can be reached on this very quickly. It is very important in the interests of the children——
Will the Minister speak to the IPPN?
I have already heard the views of the IPPN but it cannot be part of the formal structure because it is not the recognised union.
97 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science her views on the appropriateness, or otherwise of poetry (details supplied) remaining on the leaving certificate syllabus in view of the controversy surrounding the case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6867/08]
Advice on prescribed material for the junior and leaving cert exams is submitted to the Department of Education and Science by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Prescribed texts are notified to schools a number of years in advance and must be notified in time to ensure that educational publishers are in a position to provide an adequate supply of texts.
Poems belonging to the person referred to by the Deputy are on the prescribed list for the 2008 and 2009 leaving certificate examinations. As students may already have done considerable work on them, it would be unfair to change the list at this stage. This poet's work has been included in the prescribed texts as it is nationally and internationally recognised. The NCCA has looked at the poetry and considers it suitable and appropriate for its intended audience. It will, however, be advising on a new list of prescribed texts for future years.
The primary criterion for inclusion of texts as part of the prescribed literature is literary merit. Texts must also be accessible, interesting and challenging for students, and be suitable for assessment in accordance with the learning objectives of the curriculum.
I am aware of the controversy surrounding the poet referred to in the question and I am conscious that I should not make any statements in this House that could be deemed to be prejudicial in the event of any proceedings arising in this matter. I accept the social, personal and health education course in particular aims to equip students with an awareness of their rights and responsibilities, and the values, knowledge and skills for ethical decision making. I am also conscious of the need for positive role models for our young people.
The issue is complex and must be considered carefully and in a measured way. I look forward to receiving advice from the NCCA shortly on the texts which should be prescribed for leaving certificate Irish in future years.
In response to the circumstances which arose in this case, the Minister last week said she was shocked and appalled. She speaks on everyone's behalf in that regard. Is the Minister aware the film will be put out on RTE in March and come into the public domain? It is fair to say it could cause a fair degree of controversy in classrooms up and down the country.
In her reply, the Minister stated she has asked the NCCA to furnish her with a report, which she is absolutely entitled to do. Has she considered speaking directly to teachers, parents and students about this? What advice would she give to teachers who must teach the subject matter when this issue comes into the public domain in March, given there is a fair degree of controversy surrounding this case?
It would be the wrong interpretation to say I have asked the NCCA for a report, as it does that every time new prescribed texts must be provided. The course is due to change anyway, to be given to schools for September of next year, for inclusion in the leaving certificate course for the next batch of fifth years and sixth years. It is part of the body's regular work.
As the Deputy said, I am quite shocked and appalled at what I have read in newspapers. I have not yet seen the film. The inclusion of any literature on a paper as part of a course must be looked at on its literary merit, as has been stated. As a former teacher who taught these poems, I can understand the case could prove difficult for teachers. The students are 17 or 18 years old, who equally have been trained to evaluate and discuss such issues.
I hope and believe the NCCA will take all these issues on board, including the merit of the literature, the teaching of it and the circumstances that would arise in a classroom. When it decides on courses and literature to be included in a course, there is a committee made up of teachers which advises on each of the subject areas. All those issues would be taken into account.
My understanding is the Minister ultimately has power over the curriculum. She takes advice from the NCCA but what is on the curriculum is ultimately a departmental decision. Does the Minister believe it appropriate that this poet's work remains on the curriculum, given the circumstances alluded to in the national press?
I put to her a comment made to me by a teacher recently. She stated that if similar circumstances involving a teacher, a principal or school manager came to public attention, that person would not be left in a school setting. Why should we have one yardstick for teaching professionals and another for poets?
This concerns the age old question of literature. There might be questions about the character of many people whose literature has been on courses for the past 100 years. This is different, however, because it is a current case involving a person living in this country. Students must answer one question about the poet, which could cause difficulty. The merit of the poetry is not at issue because it is recognised nationally and internationally.
The Minister has ultimate power in this matter and must take advice from the NCCA. Is her position that this poet's work will remain on the curriculum and that there could well be a question about it over the next two years? Does the Minister have any intention of changing that?
It is not open to me to change something that is on the course. This is February and leaving certificate students are finalising or revising their course so the work remains part of that course until next June. It is also part of the fifth year course. That syllabus was established a couple of years ago. When I say that the NCCA advises me on it, I do not know of any situation, nor would any be desirable, in which a Minister for Education and Science would determine what should be on the course. If that was the case, we could all interfere with the syllabus.
The Minister put de Valera's book on the course.
The Minister circulated de Valera's book.
That was recommended by the history——
The Minister did not have to accept that.
It should have been put on the course years ago.
Not only that but it fitted in perfectly with the leaving certificate history course which is made up of documents. It would not be appropriate for any Minister to say he or she would like this poem or that play on the course. I am satisfied that the NCCA will take into account not just the literary merit of the poetry, but also its suitability for the age group being taught and for the teachers in the classroom, bearing in mind that the literature and the life of the poet must be understood.
98 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary schools using prefab class rooms; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6075/08]
The information sought by the Deputy is not readily available.
While comprehensive information is held on individual school files, the Department does not yet have these details available in a format that provides readily accessible cumulative information on the overall position. It is, however, intended to address this issue as part of a general review of rental policy currently being undertaken.
I assure the Deputy that every effort is made by the Department to keep expenditure on prefabricated accommodation as low as possible.
If the Minister does not mind, I do not need to hear the rest of the answer.
If the Deputy does not mind, I am entitled to answer.
The Minister is also taking up time.
I am entitled to give my answer.
If the Deputy and Minister do not mind, I will decide. The Minister has two minutes allocated under Standing Orders in which to make her reply.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Where accommodation is needed at very short notice, however, a temporary solution can be the only option. Such accommodation may also be used where the need is short term, such as when a school requires a temporary building while it is awaiting the completion of construction of permanent facilities. Last year, only 5% of the total investment in school buildings went on the rental of temporary accommodation.
This year, almost €600 million will be invested in school buildings and construction work will take place which is expected to provide permanent accommodation for about 20,000 pupils when complete. In the past, newly-recognised schools have generally had to open in temporary accommodation. I have been anxious to move away from this approach in developing areas and this year we are working hard to open as many new schools as possible in permanent accommodation.
Department officials have been working in partnership with local authority staff to acquire sites needed for new schools next September. Considerable effort has also been invested in pre-planning discussions with a view to ironing out any difficulties that might otherwise have been experienced at planning permission stage. I also held productive meetings with several county managers and their senior planners and appreciate the effort that they have put into working with us on this matter.
Sites for each of the September 2008 projects have been identified and site master-plans have been developed by the technical teams. Our aim, where possible, is to put permanent solutions in place on a phased basis to meet the immediate September 2008 needs with a second phase to follow as required.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Permanent solutions will be possible where a long-term site has been secured.
A significant amount of building work on the new schools is being done off-site. The successful tenderers for the construction of each individual project have been notified.
Project teams which were recruited from the private sector in October 2007 have been tasked with preparing the planning applications, undertaking the necessary surveys and overseeing the delivery of the schools on each site. To conclude, expenditure on temporary accommodation has tended to represent a very small proportion of the overall investment in school buildings in recent years. The use of prefabs is avoided where possible but sometimes they can be the only feasible option. We are now working to ensure that, where possible, new schools in developing areas will open in permanent accommodation from the start.
The Minister's reply is a total and utter disgrace and an insult to this House. Her insistence on reading it into the Official Report and taking up my scarce time to block any significant supplementary question is the kind of abuse that I brought to the attention of the Ceann Chomhairle when the Minister was in the House yesterday. I asked the Minister a simple question — if any of the Minister's previous pupils had given the reply that she has given in the junior or leaving certificate, they would have got an F for failure. Is the Minister seriously telling me that the entire Department of Education and Science cannot say how many prefabricated buildings there are in the primary school system, simpliciter? Is it 1,000 or 5,000? There are 3,300 schools — is the figure 10% or 20% and, if so, what age are the buildings? Is the Minister saying the information is not readily available?
I too am entitled to my time to answer questions and have two minutes in which to do so, and I am happy to take that two minutes.
How well we know it.
The situation is exactly as I have outlined to the Deputy. All the information is held on individual files in the Department and there are approximately 3,200 files on primary schools so I cannot give him a ready answer. I have given him the amount of money spent, which is only 5% of the overall budget. We are undertaking a review within the Department, as part of which we are examining each individual file to get the information necessary to consider issues such as the break-even point, introducing a buy-out, the most economical approach, and renting as opposed to purchasing.
This is incredible. If the Minister was running any kind of management organisation, she would be in serious trouble at this stage. To say that the information is not readily available is unbelievable, having regard to the fact that she established a building unit specifically to study this issue. If I put this question down for a written reply, over which I have no control, in a fortnight's time will the information be readily available then?
I assure the Deputy that as soon as the information is available, I will be happy to give it to him. We do not have a central knowledge of it because individual schools which have individual boards of management are responsible for acquiring the buildings. They seek permission from the Department, get three tenders, have to take the cheapest tender and then put up the building. In some cases, the school may no longer have use for the building as a classroom but opt to keep it to use as a store room, etc. As soon as the information is available, I will be happy to give it to the Deputy if he wishes to ask another question.
I ask the Minister please not to abuse her position by blaming the boards of management in individual schools.
I am giving the Deputy the factual situation.
We and the Minister's backbench are inundated by schools who cannot get any kind of answer on whether to go ahead with a proposal. Her Department has the information and she refuses to make it readily available. She will not even give me a commitment to go through the 3,200 odd files in two weeks. If the Minister could say four weeks, I could live with that, but she refuses to give the information. She is abusing her position of being accountable to this House.
I can only repeat that a centralised inventory is being developed. The information is being gleaned from the 3,200 files. There is a significant number of building projects this year. We are spending €600 million——
This is a diversion.
It is a mantra.
It is important that our building unit prioritise the work it must do. If the Deputy wants to ask another question, I will be happy to give it to him as soon as the information is available.
That reply is worthy of the Kremlin.
99 Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress in terms of extending opportunity to persons who avail of adult education, particularly in view of Government commitments in the Towards 2016 partnership programme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6868/08]
The Government has prioritised a major expansion of opportunities in adult and further education. Between 2002 and 2007, expenditure on these areas increased by over 50%, from €256 million to €392 million. This increased investment helped to improve opportunities by expanding the number of places on further education courses from 44,000 in 2002 to 49,000 in 2007.
These include more than 30,000 places on post-leaving certificate courses; 9,000 places on the back to education initiative; 5,000 on the vocational training opportunities scheme; almost 3,700 Youthreach places; and 1,100 places on training schemes for travellers. In addition, the adult literacy programme provided for 44,000 learners in 2007 compared to 28,000 in 2002.
Towards 2016 included specific commitments to increase the number of places in the adult literacy programmes, in Youthreach and in the back to education initiative over the period 2007 to 2009. A total of 3,000 extra adult literacy places were created in 2007 and provision has been made for an extra 500 in 2008. In addition, arising from the provision for family literacy in the delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, action plan funding was provided for seven family literacy projects in 2007. In Youthreach, an additional 400 places were approved in 2007 and there is provision for 100 more in 2008.
A total of 1,000 extra places also were provided on the back to education initiative, BTEI, last year and fees were abolished for all participants in the BTEI with less than an upper second level education. In 2008, the Department is providing for 500 more BTEI places.
Apart from progress on meeting the Towards 2016 commitments, other significant improvements have been made in the further education area in recent years. The adult guidance initiative has been expanded; funding for child care in further education has been increased, benefiting more than 1,700 students last year; it is estimated that the number of participants on community education programmes has increased from 20,000 in 2002 to 30,000 in 2007; and the number of places on post-leaving certificate courses, PLC, has also increased. The Government therefore has made substantial progress both in terms of the Towards 2016 commitments and across the further and adult education sector as a whole.
I am particularly conscious of the need to continue to improve second chance opportunities and help people to improve their skills and I assure the Deputy that further improvements in this regard are a priority for me.
In earlier replies to Deputies Brian Hayes and Quinn, the Minister clearly indicated the allocation of funds for sections within her Department. Nowhere however, did she indicate what additional funding was being provided for lifelong learning and adult education despite her commitments in the Towards 2016 partnership programme to put in place a targeted fund to alleviate the fees for part-time third level courses for those at work who have not previously benefitted from third level education. Her reply never mentioned a statement to the effect she will honour this commitment.
As for early school leavers, the Minister promised 1,000 places in 2008 for Youthreach. While she informed Members earlier that there are no cutbacks, her reply, which referred to a provision of less than half that commitment, clearly indicates a cutback provision.
Hear, hear.
The likelihood is that these will not be fulfilled either.
On the question of education in the workplace, it was clearly indicated there would be a commitment to subsidise employers to allow employees to participate in furthering their education. At present 400,000 members, or 28%, of the workforce have an educational level that is less than junior certificate level and nothing is being done for them. While the Minister can baffle Members with selective figures if she wishes, she has completely failed in 2008 to honour the commitments she had given.
Hear, hear.
I refer to the three points raised. The budget for adult education is €392 million, which is a highly significant amount and is targeted at a number of different areas because a flexible approach must be adopted to reach that particular cohort of people. The programme for Government has set out that it must be flexible to cover all the areas I have mentioned.
The Youthreach places will be expanded this year to meet the needs of that group of vulnerable young people. The Deputy asked about free fees for approved part-time courses, which is a commitment under Towards 2016. What has happened is that the Higher Education Authority has developed proposals for a modular accreditation programme that allows flexibility in the manner in which people are able to undertake the courses. Such individuals will receive a substantial fee subsidy as part of that initiative. Deputy Hayes might be interested to learn the third level institutions intend to start this process in October in Tallaght——
Another pilot scheme.
The Minister is trying to buy me off.
However, this is a commitment under Towards 2016 and this is 2008. It will reach out to a particular market.
The Deputy's third point pertained to workplace literacy. As he noted, this is an extremely important area. Because it is based in the workplace, it is being dealt with under the auspices of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and €3 million has been allocated for this initiative this year.
The Minister must accept that for most participants in adult education and lifelong learning, a series of obstacles exist to prevent access to such initiatives. I refer to the fees and the costs involved. In the area of child care, there is no indication that either the Minister for Education and Science or the Minister for Social and Family Affairs will help to support single parents to return to education in respect of fees and childminding costs while they are involved outside their workplace. As for the back to education allowance, it was withdrawn two years ago and was reinstated on foot of public outrage. However, the criteria by which this scheme is administered by the Department of Social and Family Affairs makes it almost impossible for many people to avail of it. Unless such people are out of work and proven to be in receipt of one, two or three special allowances, they cannot avail of the back to school allowance. Therefore, the very low-paid people who work every day cannot access this allowance if they wish to avail of back to education courses.
There should be clarity between the Departments of Education and Science and Social and Family Affairs in this regard. One or other Department should take up the issue and devise an allowance process that people can follow to gain access to third level education.
In respect of the back to education initiative, between last year and this year, an additional 1,500 people are benefitting from it. Consequently, I do not believe the Deputy is correct to state it is obviously too restrictive. It is a highly valuable source of support for many people. As for child care, the adult education child care service is available to those who participate in the vocational training opportunities scheme, VTOS, and it was expanded last year. It now caters for 1,700 student parents and their 2,300 children. This is a highly flexible approach and it deals with everyone, adults, early school leavers, travellers and groups in general that have under-participated in the various levels of education. I believe that between the different Departments, it is targeting all the different groups. Given the investment of €392 million in all the aforementioned areas, as well as the inclusion of the two critical elements of child care and education guidance, real results will be seen from this initiative.
