Vol. 900 No. 1
6. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Education and Skills the measures she is taking to address the ongoing lack of secondary school places in Wexford town, which is forcing many parents to send their children 25 kilometres each way to schools in Enniscorthy in County Wexford; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [43783/15]
There are not enough places for children in and around Wexford town for children to attend school close to their homes. The waiting list has reached crisis level. What does the Minister plan to do about it? The national programme is not really tackling the severe problem in Wexford town. Are there any further plans on the cards to deal with it?
As the Deputy will be aware, I announced in November last the need for the establishment of four new primary schools and nine post-primary schools to cater for increased demographics across a number of locations in 2017 and 2018. The demographic projections for the Wexford town area do not indicate that a new post primary school is required.
As part of the Department's school capital investment programme, a number of building projects in Wexford schools are being progressed, including Loreto secondary school and Wexford CBS, that will provide for increased capacity in the area. In addition, an application for additional accommodation was received last week from Selskar College, which is being considered.
My Department is also monitoring the position in the area taking into account the latest pupil enrolment data and the impact of planned expansion of school capacity. My colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, last week met representatives of the five second level schools in Wexford town to discuss the pressures they face. It was agreed that the principals will share with the Department of Education and Skills the details of those who are enrolled for next year in order that we can identify whether these are cases where the same children are enrolled in multiple schools or if there are other factors which are creating unanticipated pressure on Wexford schools.
At present, four of the five schools in Wexford town have a waiting list of between 160 and 180 students. This is projected to get worse in the coming years. Loreto has capacity for 720 and that will increase with the new school to 900, an extra 180 places, but it alone has a waiting list of approximately 320 places. That will take six years to complete. We are not even close to addressing the problem.
It is beyond me how Wexford fares so poorly in so many areas. Many issues start with education. It is not without reason that unemployment in Wexford is over 22%, that we have one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the country, that we have high rates of problems with literacy and that we have one of the highest suicide rates. Education must be a vital factor in this but right now, Wexford is being poorly served in educational terms.
As I stated at the outset, building projects have been approved for Loreto secondary school and Wexford CBS, which will provide increased capacity. As a result of the information that came to us last week through that meeting attended by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, my Department is making contact with each post-primary school to request details of their enrolment lists for September 2016. That will allow us find out if there is an accommodation shortfall and we will then work with schools to address that. All over the country, people may be on waiting lists for two or three different schools.
There are five secondary schools in Wexford town. These include the Education and Training Board school of Selskar College, St. Peter's College, Loreto Presentation and the Christian Brothers. We will collate the information on the pressures that all those schools are under to see if there is an issue to be addressed. The projection for the Wexford area indicates there will be an increase in pupil numbers between 2015 and 2021 within the school feeder area of approximately 200 students, with numbers going from 3,298 to 3,495. If we get any further information, that will be factored into any intervention required.
It appears the figures on the ground are different. I am surprised the Minister, Deputy Howlin, did not bring back a starker picture because of what we hear from parents in the area.
He gave us a full picture.
It is good that work on Loreto is starting. It is interesting that one cannot open a regional newspaper now without seeing somebody from the Government parties turning a sod. What was the Government at for five years?
What does the Deputy want?
All of a sudden there is a surge to do something.
It is called a recovery. There are more jobs and money about.
I do not understand how for five years-----
Schools were being built in the past five years.
-----the Government did so little in this area.
That is not right.
It is a bit like the idea that people should vote for the Labour Party and it will repeal the eighth amendment to the Constitution. What has the party done in the past five years and why did it not repeal the amendment then?
We did a lot. We had the marriage equality referendum, for example.
It is beyond me how the party operates.
Much work was done in the school building area over the past five years, despite the state of the economy. There should be fair credit given to my predecessor, Deputy Quinn, and the Government for ensuring that we did not leave children without school places and that we made projections and built schools. I am using the figures that we have for the Wexford area but, by all means, the Deputy should tell us if we find there has been a surge of which we have not been aware. We use the likes of child benefit figures to find out how many children are being born in an area in order to plan ahead. I assure the Deputy that the Minister, Deputy Howlin, made it very clear that these waiting lists exist but we want to collate the figures to get the exact number of young people who will seek places in post-primary schools in Wexford. We will address the issue in co-ordination with the schools.
7. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Education and Skills her views on the construction of an additional secondary school in south Wexford, given the long waiting lists for schools in the region; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [43784/15]
This question is related to the previous question. Rather than repeating what I have said, I will discuss another dimension of the issue, although I realise it is not raised directly in the question. Many of these projects are operated under the public private partnership, PPP, system. I have put questions to the different Departments, including the Department of Education and Skills, asking for information on value for money with regard to the use of PPPs for school projects. It is nearly impossible to get information about this. The European Union does not allow us to borrow money on the markets to invest in infrastructure like schools so we are driven into the hands of PPPs. Does the Minister agree that the European Union should address this and the Government should challenge it on the issue?
As I advised the Deputy earlier, on 17 November I announced that four primary schools and nine post-primary schools will open in 2017 and 2018 as a result of the outcome of the latest demographic exercises conducted by my Department. My officials use a geographical information system to identify where the pressure for additional school places will arise. The system uses data from the Central Statistics Office, Ordnance Survey Ireland and the Department of Social Protection in addition to information from the Department's own databases.
The demographic exercise does not indicate a requirement at this point for a new post-primary school for the south Wexford region but my officials are monitoring the position and will keep the demographic data for the area under ongoing review, taking into account updated enrolment data and the impact of planned expansion of capacity in schools in the region. My colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, last week met representatives of the five second level schools in Wexford town to discuss the pressures they currently face. It was agreed that the principals will share the details of those who are enrolled for next year with the Department so we can identify whether these are cases where the same children are enrolled in multiple schools or if there are other factors which are creating unanticipated pressure on Wexford schools.
With regard to the Deputy's opening remarks, PPPs have been used in a relatively small number of cases and the outcome has been very satisfactory from the perspective of the schools involved. That is certainly the case in what is reported to me. By and large, the vast majority of schools built in Ireland are funded through the public purse. Even in the worst of times we have been able to make provision for schools and extensions where they were needed.
Will the Minister indicate if any of the four projects currently planned for Wexford are PPPs? I wrote to at least six Departments seeking information on PPPs, including the Minister's Department. The stock answer is: "In making the decision, I have considered the public interest and, on balance, I am satisfied that the public interest would not be better served in this instance by the release of information." In other words, it is in the public interest to give people the mushroom treatment; that is plenty of darkness and loads of manure. I do not understand the idea of a freedom of information request if the public cannot access the information.
The Minister mentioned primary schools and it is interesting that the Irish National Teachers' Organisation recently stated "90% of children in Wexford primary schools are being educated in classes larger than the EU average". My God, how frightening a figure is that? Another statistic indicates that three from ten pupils in primary schools in Wexford are in classes of 30 or more. Is that not a crisis level?
I understand that the Minister might not have the information on PPPs now but it would be great if she could revert to me on the projects planned in Wexford. It would be great to know how many of them are likely to be PPPs, if any. What is the overall cost to the State?
In general, the percentage of schools built through PPPs is very low but we can get the Deputy the specific information for Wexford. These are generally done in bundles and the projects are put out to tender. It is a tendering process like any other, so the information is available.
We managed to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio in the most recent budget. We have very large classes and that is something I wanted to address but we did not have the money to do it up to this year. We have reduced the pupil-teacher ratio in primary schools by one point and we have also reduced it in post-primary schools by a percentage of a point. I have indicated that part of this process should be used to improve the offering of guidance in post-primary schools and to address some of the middle management issues identified by schools. Schools would have lost some people below the principal level who take responsibility in schools, and the indication is there is a real problem in that respect. We will use some of the funding to address that issue. We all want to see class sizes reduced as soon as the finance permits. We have brought it to a point in primary schools this year.
The Minister has stated the Government did not have the money to do it until now. I know PPP payments are current expenditure rather than capital. The Government can borrow money at 1.7% and it could do so for school building rather than being pushed into the arms of the PPPs - their cost can be up to 15%. It is surely a no-brainer.
It will save a lot of money in the long term and is such a good investment for the country. Money has probably never been as cheap in our lifetime as the 1.7% rate at which the State can borrow. It is fantastic, except that the State is not allowed to borrow at 1.7% to invest in as serious a matter as infrastructure because of the EU rules. The truth is that, although we are not getting this information from freedom of information requests, PPPs spread over a 25 year period are costing up to 15%. Is this not something worth challenging the EU on? Investment in infrastructure is a winner all round and money has never been as cheap. It has never made so much sense to invest in infrastructure, if we could do it through a normal scheme rather than pushing it into the arms of the PPPs.
We will invest €2.8 billion by way of public funding In the school building capital programme for the next six years and a very small percentage by way of PPP after that. The Deputy is telling the story of how successful we have been in terms of restoring the economy in that we have got our borrowing rates down that low and we have restored the economy to health.
The Minister is misinterpreting me.
We are taking in a considerable amount more than we expected in terms of taxation of various kinds. The Government believes we should be investing in public infrastructure, particularly in schools but also in other areas of public infrastructure. As the economy recovers, there will be more public money to invest. We are funding the schools primarily through public investment, which is as it should be.
8. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Education and Skills if she is aware of the multiple extra costs placed on the parents of children with dyslexia in seeking to ensure their children have access to the same standard of education as other children; that, notwithstanding the State supports in place, additional costs include a diagnosis every two to three years, membership of the Dyslexia Association and room hire and teacher remuneration to provide extra out-of-hours instruction; if she will propose new measures to address these issues; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [43872/15]
I understand there is some funding under the general allocation model to the Dyslexia Association of Ireland, which provides workshops and special classes for children that are privately funded. It costs about €750 per year per child for those classes, and the bulk of that is the cost of renting classrooms from schools that are publicly funded.
All mainstream schools have been allocated additional teaching resources to cater for children with specific learning disabilities, including dyslexia, either under the general allocation model at primary school level or though high incidence and learning support allocations for post-primary schools.
Schools have access to psychological assessments through the National Educational Psychological Service or through the scheme for commissioning psychological assessments.
Funding is provided to schools for the purchase of specialised equipment and an information pack on dyslexia is available to schools. Provision for continuing professional development for teachers with additional training needs in the area of dyslexia is made through the Special Education Support Service.
Funding is provided to the Dyslexia Association of Ireland which supports its information service and workshops and programmes for some children from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Membership fees are a matter between the organisation and its membership.
I know all that. Let me describe one situation. In north Kildare for the past 15 years an excellent workshop has been run by the Dyslexia Association of Ireland. The principal in the school was very supportive and the classroom was rented at a nominal rate because the heating and security was provided for other things that were happening. A new principal came in and, instead of it being €500 a year, it became €5,000 a year to rent the classroom. This is a publicly funded school that increased the cost for children with dyslexia.
It is not just a question of support regarding dyslexia, where there is a benefit to the children, but also a question of self-esteem and all that goes with that. Parents already have expenses such as, for example, often having to get a diagnosis themselves. This is not a dancing class we are talking about or some sort of added extra. It is an educational support in a publicly funded school and the issue needs to be addressed. The schools themselves need to see some sort of value in this and not have a situation where almost a commercial rate is sought when an educational support is being provided. That is the point I am trying to make.
The Deputy is talking about a situation she is very well aware of in a particular school. In general, schools should, where they can, provide facilities at a cost that is not too prohibitive and they should certainly consider the kind of organisation to which they are providing the use of the school. However, I do not know the individual circumstances of the particular school.
The Dyslexia Association of Ireland does excellent work in general, although I am not aware of its specific work in County Kildare. Our role in the Department of Education and Skills is to ensure children with dyslexia have the supports they need in the school system but we also support the Dyslexia Association of Ireland to some extent in terms of the very good work it does as a voluntary organisation. I will try to get more information with regard to the individual case the Deputy raises. In general, our job is to ensure children with special learning needs, such as dyslexia or otherwise, are appropriately supported in the school setting.
I am sure there is a more general point to this. When the Dyslexia Association of Ireland sought to replace that classroom, it had a job doing it but, in the end, it got somewhere for €2,500 a year. If the Minister is talking to the Dyslexia Association of Ireland about this, I ask her to get some sort of understanding about such situations in general and not specifically in regard to this school, which I am just using as an example. I am appalled that there would not be an instinctive response from educators that this is an educational plus and is not some sort of an added extra. There should be some sort of tiered arrangement. I would have thought the Department would have a role in terms of giving some sort of guidance to schools about that type of approach. This is an educational advantage in regard to dyslexia but also in terms of the children's self-esteem.
I would be happy to meet the Dyslexia Association of Ireland, although, to the best of my knowledge, I have not had a request for a meeting. I am not clear from what the Deputy has said whether the classroom is used during or after school hours.
After.
In general, we would encourage schools to ensure school premises are used for different kinds of appropriate uses, and I certainly think this is appropriate. I would be happy to find out more about exactly what the issue is and to see if we can help to resolve it.
I completely concur with Deputy Murphy on this issue. In Cork city, the annual fee for the workshops is €800 and, as it is €750 in north Kildare, I imagine that is an average price throughout the State. One of the reasons the price is so high is that schools are charging astronomical fees to cater for children with dyslexia, many of whom would be pupils of those very schools. This is something the Minister should take up with the Dyslexia Association of Ireland in order to see exactly what the position is State-wide.
The primary focus from the Department's perspective is to ensure we provide in-school supports for children with learning needs, and that would be my main driving force in terms of working on the new model. In addition, the issue of diagnosis should not be an obstacle to getting the supports children need. I would be happy to look at this issue. The Deputies have pointed to two different parts of the country and I would not like to think there is a prohibitive cost to what parents perceive to be supports they need.
9. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Education and Skills if she will address concerns regarding the new system of allocation of resource and learning supports that is being piloted in 2015; and if she will address the long waiting times for special needs assessment by the National Educational Psychological Service. [43884/15]
The National Council for Special Education identified that the current model for allocating resource teachers to schools is potentially inequitable because access to professional assessments is not always readily available to those who cannot afford to access them privately.
The council also advised that the current model leads to unnecessary labelling of children from a young age. For the first time, NEPS support is now available to every primary and second-level school in Ireland. NEPS does not maintain waiting lists for assessment but, in consultation with schools, prioritises children who have failed to make adequate progress despite an appropriate continuum of support being delivered for those children. The proposed new model, which is currently being piloted, will remove the formal requirement for such assessments. The pilot will test the new model and allow for any concerns to be fully addressed prior to its implementation. Significant guidance has been prepared and provided to the schools involved. During the pilot, all participating schools will complete an assessment questionnaire to gather information on their experiences. All participating schools attended a pilot information day on 15 September and a further information day took place on Friday last.
As the Minister knows, there is real concern in schools across the country as to what system will face them next September and what allocation model will be used to decide on the number of resource hours that individual schools will get. The schools will make their applications in February or March 2016 for the following September, yet there is a total lack of clarity as to the level of resources they will receive. In her reply, the Minister indicated that the current system is inequitable due to a lack of resources in NEPS to ensure that educational assessments can be provided. Given that the current system is very much predicated on the assessed needs of individual children, can the Minister explain how schools can be certain that children with a requirement for additional supports will get appropriate supports in the absence of NEPS assessments? Would it not be a better alternative approach to ensure that NEPS has sufficient resources so that schools can have assessments carried out on those children they feel require them and can then be assured that additional hours will be provided specifically for those children?
The new model was proposed because the system was perceived to be unfair in so far as people felt they had to pay for private diagnoses. The National Educational Psychological Service was not designed to spend all its time on diagnosis. It is meant to be a support service. Nevertheless, a huge amount of time is being taken up on the process of diagnosis. One can certainly question the labelling of children at a young age in order to provide them with the supports they need. That is why the new model was proposed. The pilot scheme that is under way this year is designed to find out about the kind of questions Deputy McConalogue has just asked with regard to ensuring schools get the level of support they need and that the model will work for schools. I will not comment on it at this stage as I have not yet received any reports as to how the model is working. We will have to consider it carefully in terms of what will be put in place for the future.
Can the Minister give any indication as to what the planned model for the allocation of resources will be this coming September? There are only two or three months left before schools start applying for resource hours for next September and time is running short in terms of providing clarity. It is important that the Minister provide some indication this morning as to whether it is her plan that the new model will be adopted this coming September. The importance of assessment is not only with regard to diagnosis; it also guides schools in terms of the supports a child may need and ensures, where a diagnosis is made, that resources are put in place. There is real concern that in the absence of that, schools will not get a fair allocation based on the number of students they have with particular needs. Can the Minister comment, as I asked her to in my previous question, on how, under the new model that is being piloted, schools with students with particular needs can be assured that they will get proportionate teaching resources to support those children?
I will ensure that information is provided to schools in time. I realise there is a time issue in this case but, as of now, I have not had an opportunity to engage with the pilot programme in any meaningful way and, as such, I do not want to pre-empt what information might emerge. In terms of the issue with regard to the needs of individual children, the concept of an individual learning plan exists in the system and each child should have his or her own particular learning plan in the school. That is part of the system. We will have to ensure that schools have the appropriate support they need. That is the whole purpose of the new model. We have evidence that where parents cannot afford to get assessments currently, their children are not being provided with the supports they need. That is something that we want to address in the new model.
10. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if she will provide improved funding for third level education. [43782/15]
One of the characteristics of the outgoing Government is that in real terms and per capita it has seriously cut funding for third level education. That is one of its legacies. The Government has also increased third level fees significantly. Does the Minister expect the expert group on future funding to report shortly? Will its report include recommendations on student loans and is that something the Minister supports, given the dire constraints that seem to be operating in our third level sector financially?
I thank the Deputy. The Government recognises the importance of the higher education sector to Ireland's future economic and social development. It also acknowledges that the sector must be resourced sufficiently and in a sustainable manner to ensure it can deliver on our national ambitions. The reality of the economic situation and the public expenditure corrections that had to be made in recent years presented challenges across all areas of public expenditure, including higher education. The sector has responded well to these challenges and has continued to provide opportunities for increasing numbers of students to undertake a higher education qualification. However, in recognition of funding pressures, an expert group chaired by Peter Cassells has been established to examine funding arrangements for higher education and to identify a range of approaches which, combined, will achieve a sustainable funding base. I understand the group is in the final stages of its deliberations and I expect to receive its report shortly.
If the report recommends income-contingent student loans on the Australian model or another model, is that something the Minister would support in the context of the next few weeks, the general election and so on? The Minister's budget for the sector for 2016 is €1.45 billion for current expenditure, with a miserable €20 million on the capital side. Is it not the case that funding has been deliberately constrained and that this sector has done the most badly among all economic and social sectors in terms of funding from the Government? We have seen the rankings of Irish universities tumbling down the QS and Times Educational Supplement lists. Our highest-ranking university is Trinity College, Dublin, at No. 78. UCD, my own alma mater, is heading down to the 150 mark. Before the Minister and her predecessor, Deputy Quinn, took office, these colleges were in the 20s and 30s and very highly rated. Has that not been part of her legacy?
The Government has done absolutely nothing in the area I represent. Dublin 10 and Dublin 17 have the lowest take-up of third level education of all electoral areas in the State, at less than 20%, as well as having the lowest provision for third level education. The Government has done absolutely nothing to change that or to encourage additional people to go to third level. Is it not the case that, unfortunately, the Government's administration of third level been a disaster and another aspect of the fallout of the austerity years? We need a fundamental change. By the way, my own approach is to base funding on progressive taxation and progressive income tax.
The indications are that a range of options will be proposed by the Cassells group. We will consider all of them. I will not pre-empt that before I even see the report. Certainly, all options will be considered.
Regarding the Deputy's general points, I agree that we must broaden access, but a high percentage of our young people go on to higher education compared with other countries. However, that is not evenly distributed, particularly in Dublin city.
Some 6.7% in Dublin North Central.
We want to improve that level. Next week, I will publish a plan for access to higher education. It went through the Cabinet yesterday. It will include specific plans and targets for broadening the opportunity for access to higher education. Of course, higher education is not the only option. We will also introduce 25 new apprenticeships, which the Minister of State, Deputy English, and I announced earlier this year. We want people to consider options besides higher education.
Third level has faced difficult financial times. It has done well in some respects, for example, Horizon 2020, but the situation has been challenging and we are conscious that this issue must be addressed. The report will come to me in the near future.
With her party, is the Minister planning to provide additional resources through a progressive taxation system or will she go down the two roads of income-contingent student loans, which would be a further burden on young people who are facing high rents, mortgages, finding jobs in a tough economy and so on, and increased fees? Alternatively, will she begin to resource properly a sector that has been one of the victims of the austerity years to restore it to the level that it seemed to be reaching before the Government entered office and the previous Government embarked on its crazy austerity programme? The fall from grace in the international rankings of our top universities is deplorable. Our international reputation has been damaged during the period of this Administration.
I assure the Deputy that we did not cut any budget because that was what we wanted. We faced extraordinarily difficult political decisions.
The Government had choices.
Just the Minister, please.
We did not have choices-----
The Government did.
-----in terms of the overall amount of money available to us. What one takes in in taxation and what one must borrow are issues that one must deal with when in government. We dealt with them and have begun the recovery. My strong view, which has been supported by my colleagues in government in so far as we have attained an increase in the education budget in the past two years, is that public services, in particular education, need to be funded. We must ensure that good public expenditure on issues like education is a priority. It will be prioritised, but I will not pre-empt the report's proposal. We will consider the options that it suggests. I expect to have the report shortly.
As the Deputies who have tabled Questions Nos. 11 and 12 are not present, we will move on to the next question.
I will await the written answer to Question No. 13 and let Deputy Broughan ask his question. It is an important issue.
That is fine.
14. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if she will update Dáil Éireann on the roll-out of the junior certificate reforms in 2016; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [43781/15]
According to the last report, only one quarter of schools will be in a position to engage in the roll-out of the junior certificate reforms - English, science and business subjects - from next spring. Where does the situation stand, given that the Minister does not have the confidence of a major trade union, ASTI? What is she doing about this?
In September 2014, implementation of the junior cycle commenced with a new specification in English and the availability of a number of short courses. Talks with the two main teacher unions continued during 2014 and 2015 and the 2015 junior cycle framework was published in August 2015. Agreement was reached with the leadership of the two unions in May 2015 on revised reform proposals and supporting implementation resources in July 2015. Following a ballot of members in September, these proposals were accepted by members of TUI and rejected by members of ASTI.
A comprehensive professional development programme to support junior cycle is being rolled out. This includes seminars for school leaders, whole-school continuing professional development, CPD, subject-specific seminars, teacher-led CPD and school visits. In September 2016, new specifications for business and science will be introduced for implementation in schools. Only English is going ahead this year. TUI members are participating in the CPD programme following the outcome of their union ballot. The ASTI has recently engaged in a consultative process with its members on the junior cycle proposals following the outcome of their ballot.
This is a major policy of the Government, but the Government is ending and nothing has been achieved. There is still a great sense of uncertainty. Second level is a critical time in a child's development. How will it be handled, given the importance of the learning programme in teenage years? Will the Minister take any initiative in the coming months either to advance the programme or address the grave concerns that have been put to her by the ASTI and its members in recent years?
Implementation has commenced in respect of English. All of the other education partners have supported the changes. We held detailed negotiations with the unions. A relatively small percentage of ASTI members voted. They have rejected the proposals despite the fact that their leaders signed up to them. We are continuing to engage with the leaders, who are engaging with their members to determine whether any issue needs to be clarified. We are available to provide that clarification.
I am determined and reject the suggestion that we have not succeeded in making progress. We have done so. Implementation has commenced in the schools and will continue. It will change the way that teaching and learning happen in the classroom. It will be of great benefit, in particular to students who are in danger of being alienated from school because of the old system in which the written exam was the be all and end all. There will still be a written exam, but there will also be a practical assessment in the classroom.
I intend to provide whatever clarification the ASTI needs and hope it will be able to participate in the programme in the near future.
