There have been many questions, which I will try to group, as Deputies and Senators had related questions.
I will try to make it absolutely clear what the Dublin Institute of Technology policy is, because there seems to be confusion about it. Dublin Institute of Technology is certainly not trying to simply walk away from first and second level music provision. The decline in numbers has been happening for a long time. My presentation shows that it was happening even before Dublin Institute of Technology, which is trying to move the issue forward, so that we can have a comprehensive policy for handling music education in Ireland. We shall continue to support first and second level music to the best of our ability, but our ability is limited in a number of ways, not least in the financial area.
I was asked how I made the cost comparisons, on what basis I showed a 40% difference. I simply checked the whole range of activities with regard to teaching done in CDVEC and in Dublin Institute of Technology. Dublin Institute of Technology has moved to bring in the pro rata agreements. At the present part-time rate, it costs €44.66 to employ a part-time teacher in Dublin Institute of Technology. When we move to an hourly pro rata rate, it will cost €1,687.05 for a pro rata teacher to teach one hour of music, or one hour of any subject, for the academic year.
If one looks at the comparable cost in CDVEC, two things emerge. The teaching rates are different at second level. Dublin Institute of Technology has no option to pay second level rates and must pay third level rates. Not only that, but the contractual requirements are significantly different. A teacher teaching in CDVEC under the standard agreement must teach 22 hours weekly while Dublin Institute of Technology can only ask for an assistant lecturer to teach 18 hours per week. In getting the 40% figure, I looked at the balance of provision within Dublin Institute of Technology and the various grades and took averages. I am not saying it is an absolute figure, but I am known to be reasonably good at mathematics, and I can say the figure is not too far off.
That is the simple basis for the cost. It is not possible for Dublin Institute of Technology to continue carrying that cost and deliver the other third level activities it is required to deliver. I was asked if Dublin Institute of Technology will hold on to everything until other alternatives are in place. We would like to, but it is not possible. If Dublin Institute of Technology attempts to do so, it will run up a major deficit, and we are not allowed to do that. Action must be taken this year.
There is also a suggestion and a fear that somehow Dublin Institute of Technology has not spread these activities evenly. I guarantee that it has. I have looked at the reduction in part-time hours and spread it right across the board. Our business faculty has taken a considerably bigger cut in its part-time allocation than the faculty of applied arts. The latter has taken a cut in its part-time hours of about 34%, with 33% the Dublin Institute of Technology average.
Dr. Hazelkorn pointed out to me that because of the way the budgets are distributed within the schools, the Conservatory of Music will next year have 53% of our pay budget - it had only 48% this year. We are not trying to undermine the position of the conservatory - quite the opposite, we are trying to protect it. I was asked if we did not want to have first and second level commitment. We certainly want such commitment. Dublin Institute of Technology sees an essential role for the conservatory in the provision of music education in this State. The conservatory will always have a role to play, even when there is local provision, because by definition, local provision may well be small. There is a need to have a focal point where we can bring students together for example from ensemble playing, which is such a critically important part of student development. There will always be situations where we need specialist teachers of the "lesser" instruments - without insulting them, instruments which do not attract large numbers of students - and it may well be that an institution like Dublin Institute of Technology or CIT or some other specialist school will be the focal point of that type of tuition. All of that is certainly a role for Dublin Institute of Technology, and in our plans for our new development at Grangegorman, we are taking that very much into account, and want it to be part of what we are doing. If it has not come across to people that that is our view, then I must take responsibility.
As for the comments in our operational programme, mentioned by Deputy O'Sullivan, with regard to singling out music and apprenticeship, this has been put to me several times. Perhaps my understanding of the English language is not good, but I thought the programme said very clearly that we were looking across the board. We specifically mentioned music and apprenticeship because they are the two non-third level parts of Dublin Institute of Technology, and we wanted to make it absolutely clear in our budget submission that the cuts would affect every area, that the non-third level area would not be exempt. It was not intended nor has it happened that those areas were singled out to take the brunt of the cuts.
I am loath to get into a deep statistical argument. It must be remembered, when looking at a simple body count in an area like music, that a part-time student may attend Dublin Institute of Technology for as little as half an hour per week. There are, perhaps, not too many like that and perhaps an hour and a half would be more normal. A full-time student could be there for 25 to 30 hours. If we are to compare the cost base and the amount of resources being put into something there must be some agreed way of comparing like with like. The number that is held by the Department of Education and Science is the so-called FTE, full-time equivalent. If we look at the balance of provision in Dublin Institute of Technology we see that full-time equivalent students in music have increased.
I do not know if I can make it any easier. I was thinking of an example that might be less numerical. Let us look at the health services for example. The health services might report today that it did 2,000 operations last year but this year it has only done 1,000 operations. It might mention that, by the way, last year the 2,000 operations were all tonsillectomies but this year the 1,000 operations were all major heart surgery operations. Where would the balance of resource provision be in that? We cannot simply count numbers and take the resources. We must count full-time equivalents to see what the correct basis for comparison is. On the basis of full-time equivalents, Dublin Institute of Technology has quite definitely increased its commitment to music. I do not deny that the balance of provision has changed. Dublin Institute of Technology has a limited base of resources from which it must try to provide all that type of music education.
Senator Tuffy, I think, made the point that there is funding for music included in our budget. It is not clear to me that this is the case. The Department stated this morning that part-time programmes were to be self-financing. Dublin Institute of Technology has been subsidising part-time programmes in music to an enormous extent. While listening to the debate about Cork I did a quick calculation. If Dublin Institute of Technology was to charge the economic fee, on a self-funding basis for a programme in music, the fee would be something like €4,000 or €5,000 per annum. The current fee is €383 or €363.
There is no way music can be charged for on a self-funding basis unless we want to stop it. Dublin Institute of Technology has been carrying that cost, in significant measure, for a long time. It is not that we want to get rid of part-time music programmes but we are forced into the real world of our present economic circumstances. Dublin Institute of Technology cannot run up a budget deficit and therefore must take action to protect its programmes. I made a public statement that we would try to protect our full time programmes. That was a difficult decision but it had to be made. Our students come in out of schools with expectations. They have been studying for a number of years to go on these programmes and we have an obligation to do everything in our power to protect that route.
I would not like anyone to get an impression because of a present, and I hope transient, financial difficulty that somehow Dublin Institute of Technology has changed its whole policy on part-time education, and I do not just mean in music. Dublin Institute of Technology is resolutely committed to its concept of education. It is very proud of the model of education it has espoused. I would go so far as to say that Dublin Institute of Technology and its model of education has served this country well and that the staff of Dublin Institute of Technology are to be congratulated for that activity over a long period of years.
We also have to live with the reality. We have to make these, I hope, very temporary, cutbacks. Again what happens when one has a certain amount of financial difficulties can often be an opportunity to get things right. There is a need to reopen this debate. I was asked how I knew the outcome of the report. I have not seen the report, I hasten to add, but like every other report in Ireland its contents are pretty well known in a wide sphere. Incidentally, I was not consulted by the group involved although other people in Dublin Institute of Technology were. I was not personally consulted.
Should we build up a position of protecting what is there and of not undermining the existing situation? Yes, but the reality is that Dublin Institute of Technology has to balance what it can protect and what can be cut back at the present time. What we have been trying to do is a strategic analysis of where we are, what we can provide and what we can do to make sure we are not just making knee-jerk reactions in a difficult financial situation. Rather than that we are trying to make decisions that are fully in accord with our published strategic plan.
I am sure there are many specific questions that I have not addressed but I hope I have addressed the bulk of them. I was asked by Deputy Andrews if we could defer the budget. The answer is "no". We have to produce a budget and if we do not the Minister will. The budget has gone forward.