Vol. 692 No. 2
109 Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Education and Science the percentage of primary schools which have access to a modern European language other than English and Irish; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37010/09]
In the 2008-09 year, modern European languages were taught in 505, or 15%, of our primary schools as part of an initiative that was introduced by my Department in September 1998. The aims of this initiative include the development of communication skills in a modern European language, the fostering of positive attitudes to language learning and the diversification of the languages taught in our schools. In the participating schools, the pupils in fifth and sixth classes are taught one of four languages – French, German, Italian or Spanish. The dedicated support structure for the teachers in the schools concerned has been in place since the initiative was implemented. Teachers in the initiative schools implement a language competence model, based on draft curriculum guidelines that were provided by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA.
The NCCA has recommended against a further expansion of the language competence model at this time, citing issues of curriculum overload and difficulties relating to the ability to replicate the model across the system. It has recommended instead, in the short to medium term, that a strategy of language awareness should be promoted, with pupils continuing to begin their formal learning of a modern language at the start of second level. Such an approach involves engaging the child in reflecting on how language is learned, on similarities and differences between known and unknown languages and the conventions of language. However, the NCCA report approach does not preclude the use by schools of a competence model where this is feasible.
The NCCA advice is set out in the context of the changing landscape in Irish primary schools since the primary modern languages initiative was first introduced in 1998. The key factors relate to the feedback on curriculum overload which is a strong feature of the evaluation of phases 1 and 2 of implementation of the revised primary curriculum, the challenges highlighted in reports on language learning in Irish and English, the particular issues relating to literacy in disadvantaged schools, and the new needs which have emerged in providing additional English language support for newcomer children. Given the difficult budgetary position, and particularly in the context of the advice from the NCCA, there will be no expansion of the modern languages initiative at primary level in the near term.
If the Minister of State is informing the House that 15% of schools have access to this programme, it means 85% of schools have no access to it. Is it still the intention of the Government to put into effect an agreement signed under the Barcelona agreement whereby the Government gave a firm commitment that by 2010 all primary school students would have access to the opportunity to learn a modern language in fifth or sixth class? Does the Minister of State stand over that commitment?
The Barcelona conclusions are non-binding——
The Minister of State can sing that.
——and express the views and intentions of the European Council. Individual member states are invited to adopt the approaches set out in the conclusions in so far as is appropriate for their particular national priorities, circumstances and resources. My Department fully accepts the desirability of this approach as an EU policy direction. This does not mean, however, that it is necessarily practicable in every member state.
The modern language initiative was introduced to expand modern language teaching into a selected range of primary schools for fifth and sixth class pupils. It has grown from 270 participating schools when it began to 505 schools during the 2008-09 school year. In Ireland, where two national languages, Irish and English, are given recognition under the Constitution, both of these languages are taught at primary level.
I am disappointed with the Minister of State's reply and also with the complacency associated with it. There are many other European countries which have two languages, for example, Catalan and Spanish in Catalonia, Spain, and there are two languages in Belgium. We are woefully behind most continental countries in regard to having a second language as part and parcel of our integrated curriculum. Can the Minister of State given any indication of when the Government will revert to the spirt of the Barcelona agreement as distinct from the letter of the law?
As I said initially, I must be very conscious of the advice given by the NCCA. I must also be conscious of the budgetary situation as it is estimated that to extend this initiative nationwide could cost up to €28 million. It is also worth noting that English is the most widely studied language in upper second level education across the EU other than the mother tongue. The fact that all Irish people speak English can be a disincentive to the learning of other languages, just as it is often difficult to promote the learning of languages other than English in other European member states. When English is omitted, a dramatically different picture emerges of language learning across Europe.
The Minister of State has explained to the Dáil that the Barcelona agreement is non-binding, although the Government stated that by 2010 we would move to a system whereby all primary school children would have access to another modern European language. Is he prepared to put on record a new date upon which all children can be expected to have such a service in our primary schools?
I have dealt with that question. There is a policy in regard to modern European languages and I could outline what is taking place at post-primary level as well. At the end of the day, we have studied this initiative and the NCCA has undertaken an assessment of it. In its view, due to the whole issue of curriculum overload in particular, it does not recommend an extension of this initiative. I cannot accede to the Deputy's request.
110 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Science the extent to which it is intended to improve the pupil-teacher ratio in the classroom over the next three years; the extent to which special needs, psychological assessments and speech therapy requests are expected to be met over this period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37044/09]
The revised programme for Government commits the Government to no further increase in the pupil-teacher ratio in primary and second level schools for the lifetime of the Government. Under the revised programme, we will provide 500 teaching posts between primary and second levels over the next three years. These posts will be allocated to the schools that are most seriously affected by the recent increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, using objective criteria which will be agreed in advance in consultation with the education partners.
I wish to assure the Deputy that the provision of appropriate educational intervention and supports for children with special educational needs continues to be a key Government priority. The Deputy will be aware of my commitment to ensuring that all pupils, including those with special educational needs, can have access to an education appropriate to their needs, preferably in school settings through the primary and post-primary school network.
The Deputy will also be aware that there has been unprecedented investment in providing supports for pupils with special needs in recent years. There are now approximately 19,000 adults in our schools working solely with pupils with special needs. This includes over 10,000 special needs assistants, SNAs, compared to just 300 in 1997. There are over 8,000 resource and learning support teachers in our schools compared to just 2,000 in 1998. Over 1,000 other teachers support pupils in our special schools. Significant investment has also taken place for pupils with special needs in the provision of transport, specialist school accommodation, home tuition, assistive technology and equipment. Additional teaching and SNA supports will continue to be allocated as necessary by the National Council for Special Education in line with my Department's policy to support children with special educational needs.
In the 2009 budget, additional funding of €10 million was allocated to the Health Service Executive for 125 additional therapy posts in disability and mental health services. Some €7.2 million of this funding will provide for 90 additional therapy posts in the disability services area. These posts will be targeted at children of school-going age and will include speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and psychologists.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House:
The HSE will continue to work with funded specialist providers and in co-operation with the education sector to address the health-related needs of children with special educational needs in the context of the resources available.
The Deputy will also be cognisant of the Government's commitment to continue the expansion in the number of psychologists employed directly by NEPS, most recently reiterated in the revised programme for Government. This will allow for the assignment of a NEPS psychologist to every primary and post-primary school in the country and for the deepening of support therein with particular emphasis on special needs units, classes and special schools.
In the context of the revised programme for Government, what is the breakdown, for each of the three years involved, between primary and second level in regard to the allocation of the proposed 500 extra teachers?
With regard to the pupil-teacher ratio, every national school I know of in east Galway has an increased ratio and larger class sizes, some as large as 35 which had just 24 pupils last year, due to the loss of teachers. This can be merely because they were one student under the required number, which is totally unfair to the schools involved.
With regard to the psychological service, I wish to refer to the comments of a teaching principal who wrote to me in recent weeks. He stated:
The NEPS service is terrible. Last week I tried to get through to the Galway office. There was no one there to answer the phone and it would not be manned until 12 October. I was told to phone the Dublin office. There was no answer there and the phone message box was full.
The letter ended by stating the process was a frustrating waste of time. Will the Minister of State comment?
I am pleased to offer good news in this regard by way of the revised programme of Government which clearly sets out increased funding in the region of €30 million for an additional 500 teaching posts. However, we must remember that the revised programme was agreed less than two weeks ago. Nobody could expect the precise details regarding the division of teachers as between primary and secondary level and so on to be already agreed.
The Deputy's criticism of NEPS is not reflective of the feedback we are receiving throughout the State. If the Deputy has concerns regarding a particular case, I will be more than glad to discuss it with him. However, it is not representative of what I am hearing in general.
To clarify, my understanding is that there is to be an equal division of the 500 additional posts between the primary and post-primary sectors. In other words, if 150 posts are created each year for the next three years, 75 will be at primary level and 75 at secondary level. Is the Minister of State saying there has been no such agreement as yet?
Absolutely.
On a recent television programme, the chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science, Deputy Gogarty, claimed that in the course of the final day of his party's exhaustive negotiations with the Minister of State's party, the latter was offering 300 additional teaching posts at 1 p.m. before increasing that offer at 5 p.m., when the pressure was on, to 500 posts. Will the Minister of State comment on that?
I was not one of the senior Ministers who took part in those negotiations. All I can say is that all successful negotiations take considerable time to conclude. It will take senior departmental officials some time to analyse the situation in schools throughout the State in order to meet the requirements regarding pupil-teacher ratios. However, Deputy Hayes can rest assured that the figure remains at 500.
111 Deputy Simon Coveney asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason €396 million of capital expenditure within his Department has yet to be spent; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36973/09]
117 Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Science when and how he will spend the remainder of the budget for school buildings; and if it will be spent before the end of 2009. [37105/09]
154 Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason almost half the 2009 budget for school buildings has not been spent; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37104/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 111, 117 and 154 together.
My Department's total budget in 2009 for primary, post-primary and third level capital is €841 million. Of this, just under €614 million is in respect of primary and post-primary schools and just under €200 million is in respect of the third level sector. In respect of third level sector capital, at the end of September a total of almost €115 million had been expended from a total allocation of just under €200 million. I am confident the entire remaining sum of €67 million will be fully expended between now and the end of the year. On the schools' capital side, expenditure to the end of September was €321.3 million, almost €92 million below the anticipated figure.
The main area in which expenditure is less than anticipated is that of primary and post-primary major capital projects. These projects comprise new schools and major extension and refurbishment projects. The main reason that expenditure is less than originally anticipated on the major schools' capital projects is that my announced programme of 78 projects to commence construction in 2009 has been slower to get started on site than initially expected. Another significant factor is that tenders obtained for this programme are yielding a reduction of up to 30% as compared with prices at the height of the construction boom. I have always put a high priority on the achievement of value for money in capital projects and I welcome this reduction in tender prices.
It should be noted that any saving in 2009 relating to the later than expected commencement on site of any major project is a deferred or delayed commitment. This commitment will now arise in 2010. The rolling multi-annual capital envelope framework allows for the carry-forward into the following year of up to 10% of the annual capital budget and my Department will engage with the Department of Finance in this regard.
These projects are the first batch of school projects to be tendered under the new form of public works contract now in operation throughout the public sector. The introduction of this new type of contract and associated documentation for public construction projects, the use of which became mandatory in February 2008, has proved to be a significant culture change in the external construction consultancy industry. A bedding down period has ensued while the external construction consultancy industry builds up expertise and familiarity with the new requirements. It has taken an average of three months longer than originally expected to ensure the updated tender documentation is fully compliant with the new contractual requirements.
The large number of relatively small projects involved in the schools capital programme has meant these delays have had a significant cumulative effect on anticipated capital expenditure. There is a significant amount of capital expenditure planned for the remainder of the year. I will continue to monitor the overall position carefully and will consider, in consultation with the Minister for Finance, the options regarding any capital savings. These options include the option to carry forward to 2010 deferred expenditure commitments.
Will the Minister confirm that, between primary and post-primary, there are some 1,200 existing applications under the schools building programme, some of which have been lodged for a considerable period? Will he also confirm whether it was his suggestion or that of one of his officials that some of the capital allocation which may not be expended this year may instead be used for information and communications technology roll-out such as, for example, the purchase of laptops for schools?
Before responding to Deputy Hayes, I apologise to Deputy Quinn for providing him with an incorrect figure. To clarify, there are 151, not 159, additional classrooms.
I understand the number of existing applications to the schools building programme is in the region of 1,200. I will get the precise figure for Deputy Hayes in due course. Regarding the diversion of funding, it should be noted that information and communications technology provision is part of the capital programme. An allocation of €10 million was set aside for ICT this year and it is my intention to spend that money before the end of the year.
Is the Minister aware that 97 schools in my constituency are either renting or have purchased prefabricated accommodation? Of those, four are paying out more than €500,000 per annum in rent. This is wasted money. The Department must take action without delay to progress the schools building programme. Would it be helpful in this regard if there were more Ministers of State? Is that the difficulty? There are currently three attached to the Department.
There are four.
Are more Ministers of State required or is the problem to do with productivity within the Department and a lack of political leadership? Apart from the education benefit, the economy in general badly needs a stimulus of some type. The Minister will do a great service to the country by ensuring this money is spent.
The current capital programme is the second largest ever to be rolled out in the State. The money that has been set aside will be spent on capital projects throughout the country. As I outlined in my reply, a new form of public works contract is now in place which places an onus on the builder to assume a greater degree of the risk associated with particular projects. As they familiarise themselves with this new system, it has been taking consultancy firms an additional three months to put together their plans. A workshop was held in Tullamore at which contractors were told precisely what is required under the new formal contract. There have been teething problems but all the money set aside for major capital projects will be spent on those projects. There will be a carryover of some of that money into 2010 but all the projects announced in 2009 will be covered by the Estimate given to me at the beginning of the year.
Has the Minister given renewed consideration to the idea of publishing the comprehensive waiting list so that every primary and post-primary school in the State has an indication of where it is on the list? All the emotional energy expended in seeking to find out that information, which soaks up so much time in Tullamore, in the Department and at Question Time, could be done away with. If the CAO system were run the way the Minister runs the schools building programme, there would be absolute chaos. No young student would know where he or she was with regard to points and student applications to universities. Has the Minister any moral sense of the duplicity of this system in its current format?
I understood that we put these projects on the website and that we had given them a band rating, so it was there for anybody to check them out. If that is not the case, I will check when I go back to my office.
Is the Minister aware that on the north side of Dublin, he is often referred to as the €396 million man, due to that amount of money at his disposal while many schools on the north side could do with assistance? Can the Minister use some of this money to resolve the problem at Belgrove national school in Clontarf?
I suggest the Deputy look it up on the web.
Is there an issue with architects' fees and money paid by the Department of Education and Science? Is there money owed to architects and other design professionals?
I take it the Deputy was referring to Gaelscoil Barra in his first question. That school has released a CD about the issue. I cannot build a school when its board has not acquired a site. Negotiations are ongoing with the GAA. I understand that a close affinity exists between the school and the GAA. If we can get agreement from the GAA, then I want to buy the site. Until such time as there is an agreement, the site is not legally in our ownership and I cannot build on a site that I do not own. It is a simple as that.
All of the money that I have been given this year will be spent on the projects that were outlined at the beginning of the year. I expanded the summer works scheme. I put in place an energy efficiency scheme, while a minor works scheme costing €30 million will be in place before the end of the year. All the money available to me will be spent wisely and well, but some of it may move into 2010.
What about the architects' fees?
I am not aware of any difficulty with architects' fees, but I will check it out for the Deputy.
The projects have been earmarked for places that have been designated as rapidly expanding areas. What is the justification for that? Areas like Athlone have seen less than 6% growth, yet communities in my constituency that have seen 30% growth are being excluded. Children are in buildings that are nearly 200 years old, while prefabs have been used for generations, yet nothing seems to happen. There are huge waiting lists, yet they are not being prioritised within the Department.
Given the value the Minister is getting on the capital programme this year — he said that the reduction would be about 30% from what he expected — is it fair to assume that next year we will see more schools built for the reduction in building costs? At this stage, is he able to give an indication to the House about the scope and the scale of the capital programme for next year?
There will be a major building programme next year. I expect that my capital programme will be very extensive, but I cannot say exactly how extensive because we have not completed the Estimates. I am satisfied that I will get very good value and that I will continue to build more and more schools and classrooms.
We have geophysical information on where there will be greatest need for additional classroom space. There are 42 locations identified, and I will publish those when we have completed our programme. Developing areas got about one third of the total provision in previous years, and as a representative, I would be very conscious that it cannot be concentrated in the one area.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
