The context in which we were invited to address the committee was a discussion on investing in educational infrastructure through the concept of a schools modernisation fund. In this short presentation, I will seek to give the committee an appreciation and understanding of the types of factors and issues which drive the costs, needs and demands in first and second level sectors. I will address these individually, beginning with the primary sector.
At the outset, it is useful to consider that we have a relatively large number of primary schools, almost 3,200, in terms of the size of our population. The fact that slightly more than half these schools have four teachers or fewer is a key element which has significant cost implications given that one does not achieve the same economies of scale with small units as with larger units. The needs of a modern primary school curriculum, in which service is expanding into the realms of catering for children with special needs, visiting teachers and so forth and where teaching space for teachers is being withdrawn, must be provided for in the three teacher school to exactly the same extent as in a 12 teacher school. This is the landscape in which we operate.
The vast majority of schools with four teachers or fewer are in rural areas. One also has smaller schools in urban areas serving, for example, some of the minority communities. These factors can be described as the technical cost drivers. In the past three or four years inflation in the construction industry has also been a factor in determining how much we can deliver from our budget. Like anybody else seeking to build in the economy, we are price takers in the market. The upward trend in inflation has meant we have got less done for our buck than previously. There are indications that the trend is now turning and we are seeing moderation in some of the recent tenders we have received. If the inflationary position stabilises, we should get more done for a similar amount of money.
The number of listed buildings on the primary side is not significant, but it increases at second level. As the law of the land dictates that one must maintain listed buildings, modernising or improving such buildings is significantly more expensive than other projects. In terms of what I call local authority requirements, like anyone else building or constructing something, we must accept the charges local authorities impose on us, for example, those arising from the polluter pays principle. These requirements are a new element of schools building costs which we did not have ten to 15 years ago.
We also have higher safety standards and other regulations, which did not apply to schools building projects in, for example, 1980. Therefore, the cost of building schools increases as we meet these standards. Consider cost drivers which are more specific to the education sector or which come from the way we structure it, or how we are governed by the Education Act. In the past decade we have seen a reduction in the number of primary pupils and an increase in the number of teachers, and therefore the amount of teaching space required has grown. This is now stabilising, but may increase slightly.
The impact of where people choose to live or are forced to live must also be considered in light of the extension of the Dublin area into neighbouring counties and counties as far as Westmeath and Carlow. We are faced with building schools in places where nobody imagined they would be needed a decade ago, or where the existing schools will be hopelessly under capacity. One can have a stable population of schoolgoing children, but those children are not always located where schools were in the past.
Twenty or 25 years ago, when one spoke of primary schools one was effectively talking about schools either under the patronage of the Catholic bishop or perhaps the Church of Ireland bishop. However, the diversity underpinned by the Education Act and parental choice means that we are catering increasingly for multi-denominational schools, largely under what one might call the Educate Together umbrella, or gaelscoileanna
Site acquisition is an issue. In the past, the site was provided by the parish and the State did not have to do so. The parish contributed to a portion of the cost. However, the State now has to acquire the site for almost all new schools, and sometimes sites are extremely costly because they have to be bought at development land prices.
Many of the existing buildings, particularly the large cohort of smaller schools which will not disappear and which are part of the fabric of rural Ireland, have been in existence for a long time. Some of them may date back to the early 1900s. To upgrade them physically, make them capable of meeting the needs of a modern curriculum and end up with a stock of school buildings that are IT-equipped and prepared for all the challenges we face will require money.
The pupil-teacher ratio has lowered and extra resources have been delivered into special education. While the number of primary pupils is about 100,000 fewer than in the past decade, the number of primary teachers has increased from 20,000 to in excess of 24,000. This has lowered the pupil-teacher ratio from about 27:1 to below 20:1. A school with 100 pupils in 1990 had approximately four teachers but today it would certainly have five or maybe six, and probably an additional post allocated for learning support. That is what gives rise to many of the issues people have in school communities. A learning support teacher is probably forced, particularly in smaller units, to teach children under the coats of the cloakroom because the old tradition of building produced schools with only three or four classrooms. They probably do not even have a principal's office or space in which the principal could meet a visiting parent, nor do they have space for the psychologist, speech and language therapist or all the improved services that have come into being largely in the past decade.
Essentially, the capital side of the education business has been playing catch-up. It was playing catch-up historically during periods when the State could not invest and has been doing so in the past decade in respect of improvements that have been made in terms of human resources. The teaching posts that were delivered under the Programme for National Recovery, the PESP and the PCW were all delivered without the capital cost of the physical infrastructure having been reckoned with at the time when the policy measures were being agreed. That is an issue we must address in the future.
While all this must be considered under the budget of any given year, we are also dealing with issues that have imposed themselves on the landscape and which did not arise before, such as the remediation of problems concerning asbestos and radon and dust extraction in woodwork rooms of second level schools. In the primary and secondary sectors this year, we are spending approximately €16 million across those three areas.
An amount of the budget is compromised before one begins to commence a building project. At primary level, the devolved grant, which has existed for the past six years or so, enables schools do more minor works. This costs €18 million before one even starts to do anything more.
About 100 new schools are in temporary accommodation each year, the bulk of which come under the categories of Educate Together or gaelscoileanna. In crude terms, to get those 100 schools into permanent accommodation requires 100 sites, most of them in urban areas and many in cities. Then one has to build the schools. A conservative estimate of the cost of those schools alone amounts to €400 million, never mind the cost of modernising or dealing with the rationalisation of existing schools and the building projects that flow from these.
What have we been doing in terms of strategies to deal with this and to deliver value for money at the same time? We have been pushing the standard design template issue, which we will continue to do. We are also looking at the concept of the multi-school campus. Let us take, for example, one of the significant growth areas on the outskirts of Dublin, such as Littlepace. One has to anticipate that there might be a demand for a gaelscoil, Educate Together or maybe an existing provision. Instead of having three or four schools dotted around, one would attempt to have the different providers on the one campus with their classes, but sharing some of the common facilities. It is an attempt to achieve economies of scale. There will be tensions involved but we are examining the possibility in terms of what one can get for what the taxpayer gives one.
We are looking at the new small schools initiative, which was launched in this year's programme. It is grounded in the concept that the approach to establishing a new 16 teacher school may not be the optimal one for a smaller school. That is why we are devolving and empowering the schools with two, three and four teachers and allocating a funding envelope that allows them to deliver to their own agenda within a set of priorities that we identify. We do not want them to landscape the property at the expense of providing the space for the learning support teacher. Instead of imprisoning them within the system, steps and stages that apply to a more major build, we are trying a different approach. We are trying it with 20 schools this year and we will see what happens. If it works - we think it may - it will clearly have significant potential for expansion.
The PPP process holds some possibilities. It is applied at second level in the case of a pilot bundle of five schools. If it is to apply at primary level, it will be more appropriate in greenfield circumstances and in terms of bundling some of the larger units. Looking at what we have just done and at some of the experiences in the UK, PPP seems to work better in greenfield circumstances than in cases where people wish to upgrade. Another complication is that the State does not own the vast majority of the primary schools. An issue arises in terms of the extent to which the private market would want to engage there. We believe PPP may have a relevance in respect of the larger units that will be required in greenfield areas.
We are also examining design and build contracts, which involve reusing standard designs. One challenges the market to take the standard design and to build to it, possibly in bundles, the intention being to lever some market power to get better value for money.
Greater use of what we call pre-engineered building methods must be considered. The prefab can have a connotation, but we have been to see some of the more high-quality examples and there may be situations in which they would constitute the appropriate initial response, particularly if there is an uncertainty about the landscape in the longer term in the particular circumstances.
The inventory of accommodation is another key plank. We are attempting to build the database concerning the utilisation of accommodation, a pilot version of which was launched in Kildare in the past year. We are currently evaluating the programme and questions arise as to how it may be expanded given the available budget. It is aimed at maximising the utilisation of existing accommodation and at being able to identify accurately the state of play in any school to aid prioritisation.
In the primary sector the main issue is the adequacy of the funding. The allocation of the funding in a multi-annual framework is important if we are to plan at all. The stop-start basis on which school buildings have been dealt with since the foundation of the State is a fundamental obstacle to good planning. Apart from the issue of people knowing where they are - which is clearly an important consideration - things must be done in a coherent way. As matters stand, we have to put in place fire brigade solutions in many instances. If, however, the funding envelope had greater certainty and was within a five or six year timeframe, we would be confident that we could deliver better value for money in the longer term.
I made the point that accommodation costs need to be factored into the costing of other policy proposals, not just their current costs; otherwise one just reinvents the problem we are trying to solve. We also regard the publication of the programme as important. It provides clarity and transparency and shows people where they stand.
On the second level——