I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy de Valera for a discussion about school transport and related issues. I now invite her to make a presentation.
School Transport: Ministerial Presentation.
Thank you, Chathaoirleach. I welcome this opportunity to outline to the committee the range of measures my Department has put in place in recent times to improve the range, quality and safety of school transport services. To begin with, I will give members an outline of the extent of the school transport service. It is a very significant operation managed by Bus Éireann on the Department's behalf and covering more than 40 million miles annually. More than 138,000 children, including more than 8,000 children with special needs, are transported in more than 3,000 vehicles on a daily basis to primary and post-primary schools throughout the country. Inaddition to the 138,000 children carried, Bus Éireann also issues almost 10,000 tickets to schoolchildren for travel on public and privately licensed scheduled local and national bus and public rail services.
Government investment in the scheme has increased very significantly over the years. In1997, expenditure stood at €49.6 million, while this year's allocation is €116.5 million, an increase of 135%. This investment has been targeted towards the development of new services, improvements in the quality of service and extensions and alterations to existing services, mainly relating to special needs. For example, the following improvements were made to the school transport scheme in 2001. The number of pupils required to establish and maintain a new primary school service was reduced from ten eligible pupils to not less than seven eligible pupils. The threshold for maintaining a post-primary service was reduced to four eligible pupils, provided there is a minimum of six fare-paying pupils using the service. At post-primary level the combined daily travelling and waiting time was reduced from a maximum of three hours to 2.5 hours; the distance requirement for the remote area grant for primary pupils was reduced from 4.8 kilometres to 3.2 kilometres, and the distance requirement from the nearest route was reduced from 4.8 kilometres to 3.2 kilometres in respect of fully eligible post-primary pupils. While the overall number of children being carried has decreased by about 12% since 1997, this in itself has not resulted in a commensurate reduction in cost. Members will appreciate that a reduction in the number of pupils being carried on an individual bus does not automatically mean a smaller bus will suffice.
Without doubt, a major focus of the increased investment is the provision of improved services for children with special needs. It is estimated that 30% of the financial allocation for school transport is now being expended on transport services and grants for children with special needs who account for approximately 6% of the overall number of children carried. Costs are high because it is not always possible to accommodate such children on regular school transport routes and special transport such as minibuses, wheelchair-adapted vehicles and taxis must be provided.
This substantial expansion and improvement in school transport services, mainly for children with special needs, is best illustrated as follows. More than 600 additional services have been introduced since 1998, of which almost 400 were minibus and taxi services, mainly for children with special needs. The total number of vehicles in the school transport fleet increased from 2,418 in 1998 to over 3,000 in 2004. In the same period taxis were introduced as a new category of school transport and more than 250 are now in service. Taxi services are primarily for special needs children, for whom transport by car is often the most appropriate option. The number of minibuses in service went up by almost 200, while the number of medium buses increased by over 130, again reflecting the expansion in the special needs area. A further enhancement has been the funding provided for escorts to accompany some children with special needs.
Other factors have contributed to the growth in expenditure. There is public demand for improved services in the form of extensions to provide home pick-ups, more buses to facilitate shorter travelling time, separate instead of combined services, and more modern and specialised school buses.
Educational choice has also emerged as a significant factor. Traditionally, children attended their nearest primary school. However, parents are now being afforded a greater choice of educational facility and many exercise this choice by sending their children to schools such as gaelscoileanna, gaelcholáistí and multi-denominational schools, in addition to denominational schools. This obviously involves the establishment of new services for eligible children or the payment of a grant to the parent to assist with the cost of making private transport arrangements.
Another factor is the retention of school transport services in rural areas, even where numbers fall below the threshold for establishing a service. For example, a school transport service is normally established if there are seven pupils residing in a distinct locality. If the numbers fall below seven, the service is generally retained. In addition, contractors have to be paid higher rates as their cost base rises. This would include factors such as labour, insurance, fuel, spare parts and replacement vehicles.
From this outline, I hope I have conveyed to members a sense of the scale, development and cost of school transport services. I should also convey my appreciation to Bus Éireann for the efficient and effective manner in which it manages such a large operation.
I now turn to the critical issue of safety. I emphasise that the safety record of the school bus service is a very good one. This is due in no small part to the skill of school bus drivers and the expertise of Bus Éireann which administers the service. However, there can be absolutely no room for complacency in this regard and the small number of tragic accidents that have taken place during the years serve as a constant reminder to us to keep safety at the top of the transport agenda.
As part of my commitment to safety, a warning flashing lights system pilot project was launched on 22 school buses in Ennis in January. This system is designed to alert motorists to the presence of a school bus as it stops to let school children onto or off the bus in order that the possibility of accidents occurring at such times is minimised. An initial evaluation report on the pilot scheme has been received by Bus Éireann which indicates that the system succeeded in increasing the alertness of motorists. However, some legal and technical issues have arisen such as whether motorists should be required to come to a stop when the lights on a school bus are flashing. These issues are being examined. The possibility of rolling out the system on an extended trial basis to a number of other sites is also being examined. Should such trials prove successful in terms of increasing school transport safety, the system could then be rolled out on a national basis.
In the light of EU Directive 2003/20 which requires seat belts, where fitted, to be used by 9 May 2006, my Department has been in discussions with Bus Éireann with a view to addressing the necessary measures that will be required to comply with the terms of the directive. Just weeks prior to the accident in County Meath, my Department and Bus Éireann tried out two demonstrator buses over a two-week period in counties Meath and Kildare. The buses were fitted with three seats on one side of the aisle and two on the other. All seats were equipped with seat belts. From my Department's viewpoint, the exercise served to test the reaction of pupils to the wearing of seat belts, the type and size of belt fitted and the seating configuration referred to.
There is no doubt that the fatal accident in County Meath focused minds and, as a result, it was decided to intensify our efforts to finalise measures already under consideration. An interdepartmental working group was established in June charged with progressing a number of issues previously under consideration relating to the safety and operation of the school transport scheme. The Departments of Education and Science, Transport and Finance were represented and Bus Éireann also attended as required.
As a result of the deliberations of the working group, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, and I were in a position on 27 July last to outline a package of measures. The key measures are as follows. Over 130 large buses will be added to the school bus fleet, of which some 50 are to go into service in the next school term, with the balance coming into the system in 2006. Included as part of this will be the purchase of 20 custom-built school buses, of different types, to test their suitability. An additional 250 minibuses will be hired from the private sector from September. The fitting of lap belts on all seats on the Bus Éireann school bus fleet will begin immediately. A target date of the end of December 2006 has been set for all private buses contracted to the scheme to be fitted with approved seat belts. All school transport will be on a one child per seat basis by December 2006. In the meantime, the three for two seating arrangement will cease for all second level students next term. From September, the calculation of the seat availability for concessionary or catchment boundary passengers will be on a one child per seat basis.
I would now like to consider the progress made on the issues referred to in the July press release. With regard to the acquisition of additional buses, Bus Éireann is evaluating tenders received for the provision of 20 dedicated school buses. It is hoped to award contracts by the end of October. It is likely that four contracts will be placed for as many types as possible as a basis for conducting comparative trials. Delivery is expected in 2006. With regard to the balance of 116 buses, 50 are to be purchased initially. To date, ten have been purchased and delivered and a further six are due to be delivered shortly. Bus Éireann is actively pursuing the acquisition of the remaining 34 vehicles. In regard to the hiring of an additional 250 vehicles, I understand the process is substantially complete.
Progress is also being made on the retrofit programme. Bus Éireann is evaluating tenders received and hopes to be in a position to place a contract by the end of October. The bulk of the work will be carried out next summer during the school holidays. Unfortunately, I have no figures at this point regarding the fitting of seat belts to private contractors' buses. However, Bus Éireann will undertake a survey, to be completed by the end of next month, which will indicate overall progress. Contractors have been told by Bus Éireann that any buses newly introduced for school transport services must be fitted with seat belts.
With regard to the phasing out of three for two seating arrangements, Bus Éireann has indicated only 31 out of a total of 2,500 post-primary services now operate on the basis of a seating capacity in excess of one for one. The end of term deadline for full implementation should be met. Again, much credit is due to Bus Éireann for the efficient manner in which it is managing the introduction of such significant change and improvement in school transport services. The company's expertise and commitment have been directly responsible for the rate of progress to date.
Much debate surrounds the type and fitting of seat belts to school buses. Some jurisdictions such as Canada and most states in the United States do not require seat belts to be fitted to school buses. There is also some debate regarding the relative advantages of lap belts and three-point belts. In deciding to proceed with the fitting of lap belts, account was taken of existing EU standards and the views of safety experts in Sweden, the United Kingdom, Holland and the European Commission. I am more than satisfied that the provision of seat belts on school buses represents a further safety improvement in an already safe service.
Having installed seat belts on school buses, it is essential all children wear them at all times and that their behaviour is always safety conscious while travelling on or in the vicinity of school buses. There have been calls for the provision of escorts on all services, not just those for children with special needs, as at present. Such an approach would not represent the best use of resources. Rather, education is the best means of achieving our objectives and I am making arrangements for the development of an information campaign for all school transport users. Schools, parents, Bus Éireann and the Department of Education and Science can work effectively together to develop and reinforce good safety practices on school buses.
The move from three for two to one for one seating arrangements serves to emphasise the priority that must be given to pupils who are fully eligible for school transport. This, in turn, highlights the position of catchment boundary and concessionary pupils, an issue I will now address. Post-primary pupils who are eligible for school transport to the post-primary centre in their catchment area may sometimes elect to attend a post-primary centre in a different catchment area. In such instances, pupils may avail of school transport to the post-primary centre they have chosen to attend. However, they will only be offered transport if there is additional capacity available on the relevant bus after all eligible pupils have been accommodated. Such pupils are referred to as catchment boundary pupils. The pupils concerned are not guaranteed school transport for every year of their schooling. Rather, the granting of transport in such instances is dependent on the availability of additional capacity on the buses used to transport eligible students. Any such additional capacity is calculated on a year-to-year basis. Catchment boundary pupils are required to pay the same contributions as eligible post-primary pupils in order to avail of school transport. In addition, such pupils are responsible for getting to the catchment boundary or the nearest point inside that boundary, where they are picked up by the relevant bus.
In the case of primary and post-primary pupils who are ineligible for school transport on the basis of distance requirements, transport may be offered on a concessionary fare-paying basis. The charge for such concessions is €26 per term for primary pupils and €51 per term for post-primary pupils. Such pupils are not guaranteed school transport for every year of their schooling. Rather, the granting of such concessionary transport is dependent on the availability of additional capacity on the buses used to transport eligible students. Any such additional capacity is calculated on a year-to-year basis. The position I have outlined is in accordance with the provisions of the school transport schemes and it is my intention to apply those provisions as we develop and improve services.
A related issue which has been topical in recent times is that of catchment boundaries. There have been calls for local and general reviews of these boundaries to enable pupils to be accommodated with school transport to attend a school of their choice. Catchment boundaries have their origins in the establishment of free post-primary education in the late 1960s. For planning purposes, the country was divided into geographical districts, each with several primary schools feeding into a post-primary centre with one or more post-primary schools. The intention was that these defined districts would facilitate the orderly planning of school provision and accommodation needs. They also facilitated the provision of a primary school transport service, enabling children from remote areas to get to their nearest school. While the service has been developed during the years to take account of linguistic and denominational considerations in the matter of school choice, it was never the intention that such choice would be unlimited. The cost of operating such a scheme would be unsustainable, especially in the context of competing demands, including the major safety programme we are implementing.
It is entirely reasonable for parents to exercise educational choice. However, expectation as to the extent to which choice can be facilitated must be tempered with realism. A review of catchment boundaries may be appropriate where, for example, a new post-primary school is established in an area where previously there was none or, conversely, where a "sole provider" school closes due to declining enrolments. However, to revise boundaries to provide school transport for pupils to their school of choice would not be appropriate and it is not my intention to undertake such reviews. Any other approach would make it impossible to operate the school transport service on a cost-effective basis and could well give rise to additional costs, related to additional teacher posts and accommodation.
Considerable progress has been made in the lifetime of the Government in developing school transport services and I am anxious to ensure the current momentum, especially in regard to safety, is maintained. I thank the Chairman and members for affording me the opportunity to outline what has been an effective programme to ensure safety on school buses. The service is one of which we can be even more proud in future. I will be pleased to answer any questions from members.
I welcome the Minister of State and her officials and thank her for her presentation. As there have been improvements in recent months, I accept her use of the word "momentum" in this regard. However, it has been a recent rather than a long running development.
The Minister of State initiated a review prior to the awful tragedy in County Meath in May. Various Deputies, myself included, had asked questions pertaining to school transport and were informed the issue would be dealt with in the review. What is the current status of the review? How does it fit in with the interdepartmental working group established in June? Has it been shelved or will decisions come from it?
I want to deal with the safety issue first because, despite the difficulties with catchment areas, safety must still be the priority. In July the Minister of State stated 50 new buses would be introduced in this school term. Will all 50 be new or will some be second-hand?
I tabled a parliamentary question in respect of lap belts. Has the Minister of State opted for their use permanently or will this only apply in cases of retrospective fitting? Will new buses be fitted with lap belts or is the Department considering the use of three-point belts? Has a decision been made?
From inquiries I made to the Department in September, I understand good progress has been made as far as the fitting of seat belts is concerned. It is ahead of schedule. Can the Minister of State provide the joint committee with more information on the current status? According to her presentation, the phasing out of three for two seating is envisaged for all second level students. What are the Department's plans with regard to primary students? Although they are not as physically developed, the same risks can be posed, especially for fifth and sixth class pupils. The Minister of State should deal with this point. The focus should not be exclusively on second level school transportation because of the recent accident in County Meath as the primary sector is equally important.
As far as the stipulation by Bus Éireann to contractors that all new buses introduced must be fitted with seat belts is concerned, I do not accept we can wash our hands of the existing buses used by private contractors. They must also be fitted with seat belts and the private contractors' contracts should not be renewed unless such buses are fitted with seat belts. I want the Minister of State to clarify this point. We are trying to implement a measure, yet allow people to get away with not doing so. Given the safety consequences, it is important that the issue be dealt with immediately.
As far as escorts are concerned, I am unhappy with the Minister of State's statement. While I appreciate there is a cost involved, the issue must be examined. An information campaign is all well and good. However, any member who has travelled on school buses — it was not so long ago for some — did so on school buses with teachers on board, be it for travelling to hockey matches or whatever. Even with teachers on board, pupils used to get up to all sorts of antics. Although I did not travel on school buses, I can imagine what can happen without someone in a supervisory capacity on board. If the Minister of State's plans are confined to an information campaign, it must be far more proactive than that envisaged. It could encourage the election of prefects on school buses or similar measures. I still want escorts on board, but the information campaign must address the desirability of having one or two people on board the bus who will be responsible for behaviour. In my native county I know of one bus, in particular, which has been withdrawn a number of times because of children's behaviour on board. This issue must be dealt with. Perhaps parents might play a greater role in this respect.
As for catchment boundaries, as they have been in place for 40 years, the situation is quite complicated and I will give concrete examples to illustrate my point. I do not ask for a catchment boundary review to be carried out on the basis of attempting to secure transport for everyone to go to his or her desired school. I accept this is impossible. However, Ireland has changed greatly in the past 40 years and our settlement patterns and population spread are completely different. Some schools would be extremely concerned about a catchment review because they feel they would lose pupils. It is not a situation in which everyone would win. However, the issue must be examined. Many schools have closed or been amalgamated and many new schools established. We must be able to take this into account and the only way to do so properly is through an overall review of the service.
I know of one case in County Laois where a local primary school was closed and its pupils were sent to another school in the area which thereafter served a wide catchment area. When it came to moving to second level, the children all wanted to attend the same school. However, the second level school in question is within the catchment area for some pupils but not for others. The primary and post-primary catchment areas do not overlap. Essentially, this means that primary school pupils are split in terms of their second level school destination, which is a pity. Many families are affected because they choose to send their children to the second level school to which everyone else from that primary school goes, although they are ineligible for school transport. This issue must be examined. Elsewhere in the county another school is in danger of closure. Forty years ago a primary school closed and its students were informed they would be obliged to attend a particular school. While many of its pupils live closer to another school in the area, they are ineligible as far as the school transport service is concerned. That school is now in danger of closure because of a lack of pupils. Such examples demonstrate why the school transport service must be reviewed.
As regards concessionary transport, expectations build up over time. Perhaps at the outset the fact that the concessionary terms were temporary and could change was insufficiently clarified. However, there is now a legitimate expectation. If one sends three children to a particular school, it is difficult to be informed one's fourth child cannot be transported there. Perhaps the Minister of State will clarify this point. What will happen next year? The situation has been more or less rectified this year, although I understand there are still outstanding difficulties in Deputy O'Sullivan's constituency. What will happen next September?
The Minister of State was effective in setting out timetables for the fitting of seat belts and the introduction of new buses. What timetable does she envisage for the delivery of other provisions to ensure safety? Can she, in her role as the Minister of State responsible for school transport, comment on her plans in respect of vetting? She is aware that a private bus operator in County Laois who was driving special needs children was found to be a convicted sex offender. As it carried special needs children, I presume there were escorts on the bus. The danger was apparent. This could be happening anywhere else and we simply are not aware of it. I ask the Minister of State to bring to bear whatever pressure she can on her colleagues. I believe the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is responsible. The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform also have a role to play in ensuring this cannot happen again.
I also welcome the Minister of State and her officials. We all acknowledge considerable progress has been made and much hard work done in the transport sector. Like Deputy Enright, I had reason to contact the Department to find out what was happening. I share her concern that private operators appear to have been given more time than Bus Éireann with regard to the fitting of seat belts. Why is that the case? Why can they not work to the same timetable as Bus Éireann?
I have another safety-related question pertaining to lap belts. I have carried out research to establish what is appropriate. In some parts of the world — Australia, New Zealand and some states within the United States — there appears to be a strong view that lap belts are unsuitable for smaller children who it is recommended should use three-point belts. Will buses for the exclusive use of primary pupils be fitted with lap belts only or is it intended to introduce belts which come down over one's shoulder? I understand there can be a problem with the level of restraint of lap belts, due to the size of smaller children. What research has the Department carried out on this issue?
My main concerns are in respect of the catchment area issue and the children who have still not secured school transport. It is an enormous issue in my constituency. Having discussed the matter with colleagues, it is clear the issues involved have not been fully resolved in other areas of the country such as Wexford, Galway and Sligo, as well as for the community school at Carraig na bhFear in County Cork. It is not an outstanding issue in County Limerick alone. At the beginning of her presentation the Minister of State noted that expenditure had increased by 135% and that this investment had been largely targeted at the development of new services. I assume most of these new services are within catchment boundaries.
The information given to me suggests that some new buses have been provided in some parts of the country to solve problems of getting children outside catchment areas to school. If this is the case, why can this not be done in the case of Salesian College in Pallaskenry? How does the Department decide which county gets the extra money and on what basis? Are there allocations to counties that would have provided new buses for children outside catchments? There are children in County Limerick who come from outside the catchment area to schools in the catchment area that includes Pallaskenry and Askeaton and there are children in the catchment area who go to city schools and get bus tickets. Affected parents in Mungret, Raheen and Clarina who cannot get bus tickets to Pallaskenry feel very hard done by and do not understand the logic behind letting children go in the opposite direction and take up positions in schools in Limerick city that their children cannot get because there are insufficient places.
Will the Minister of State look again at the case of Pallaskenry? This matter was raised last night on the Adjournment and she replied to us.
One of the factors relates to the Minister of State's presentation where it says that she can review catchments where a sole provider school closes due to declining enrolment. Mungret College, which is situated in a hugely expanding area of Limerick, closed down. There are no places in any schools on that side of the city. Any few places that might be available are on the other side of the city where parents face enormous problems with traffic and their children would have to take two different buses to get to school. It is logical to have a school bus to bring these children to Pallaskenry, which is a much shorter distance in terms of traffic flows. In addition, the school in Mungret has closed, which presumably would have been the reason the children were in the Limerick city boundary in the first place.
I add to the points made by my colleagues and me last night in the Dáil by urging the Minister of State to re-examine the situation in Pallaskenry because these parents also received a guarantee in the form of a letter to the school in 2001 from the transport section of the Department of Education and Science. Could the Minister of State comment on this letter, which indicated that the status quo would prevail until there was a revision of the boundaries? There has been no revision of the boundaries, yet the status quo is being changed this year and families that formerly had a transport service no longer have one for their younger children. There are situations like those described by Deputy Enright where older children in a family have a bus ticket but the younger children do not. Deputy Howlin told me about a situation in his constituency involving twins where one had a bus ticket while the other did not. There is no logic to some things that are currently happening.
I would make a particular plea with regard to Pallaskenry. There is a genuine argument for reviewing the catchment in this instance. I am sure other colleagues have genuine arguments for reviewing catchments in other areas. I am very disappointed by the Minister of State's statement that there will not be a general review of boundaries because demographics have changed enormously. Parts of the country that had very few children living in them in 1967 and 1968 when these boundaries were drawn up now have hundreds of children living in them. There is surely no logic in maintaining the same catchment boundaries as were set up in 1967. Demographics have changed enormously since then. Whatever about the particular situation in which I am involved, there is a very strong general argument for reviewing these catchment boundaries in a logical way that addresses the traffic situation with which people must contend and the places where people now live which once housed very few people.
I again ask the Minister of State to re-examine the case of Pallaskenry. There are strong arguments, even in the context of her speech to the committee, for reviewing the catchment and possibly putting the school into the Limerick city catchment if this will resolve the problem. Anybody reading the national newspapers over the past two years knows that there is an issue regarding the lack of places in schools in the Limerick city catchment. I know the Minister of State will tell me that there were places left over last year but the reason for this was hundreds of parents sent their children outside the catchment because they could not get places in schools that were in any way accessible to where they lived because of traffic conditions in any modern city.
I thank the Minister of State for attending and for her very detailed and comprehensive report. The previous two speakers raised the main issues and I do not wish to be repetitive. I will concentrate on catchment boundaries and echo the sentiments expressed by the previous speakers.
Could the Minister of State clarify some points she made? Towards the end of her presentation, it was stated that a review of the catchment boundaries may be appropriate in certain circumstances. The Minister of State then went on to say that the review of the boundaries to provide transport to schools of choice would not be appropriate. I accept this point but she then said that it was not her intention to undertake the reviews even though, if my reading of the presentation is correct, she stated that she felt it would be appropriate under certain circumstances. I am slightly confused by this.
The entire system is undermined somewhat by the fact we are dealing with boundaries that were established in 1967. There have been changes and as the situation changes with the closure of schools, geographic districts must move to reflect this if the system is to stand up to scrutiny. The fact that we are locked into a system that was established in 1967 and which is not reflective of the current situation is the cause of many difficulties. Could the Minister of State elaborate slightly on this area, particularly on the area where it is stated that a review of catchment boundaries may be appropriate where a post-primary school is established in an area where previously there was none or, conversely, where a sole provider school closes due to declining enrolment? We should not review boundaries purely to make it all fit but there is a weakness in the other area and I would like the Minister of State to elaborate on this.
I welcome the Minister of State to the meeting. Every speaker has said that there is a need for a review of catchment areas. Minor adjustments would make the difference. Situations have been thrown up, particularly this year, that cannot be justified.
I provide one example to illustrate this. Traditionally, people have attended a particular national school in an area, which in this instance is Killimer. To date, every member of a particular family has been transported successfully to Portumna community school. On this occasion, the last member of the family was refused transportation to Portumna community school because the family lived in the parish of Killimer. The family had always gone to Killimer national school. This last member of the family was told that they now had to go to school in Ballinasloe. The very child that needed the most attention and the support of the family members on the transition from national to secondary schooling was told that they would have to travel approximately 15 miles in a different direction to a new school because of this boundary, fictitious though it may be. It was applied practically before now but this year, the new in-depth analysis and the one person per seat rule necessitated a greater look and more accommodation on the bus. When small things like this happen, an adjustment and a practical application are needed.
Another issue I wish to raise, which has landed on the Minister of State's desk on numerous occasions over the years, is the situation that has developed regarding the girls' school in Kinvara, County Galway, and the wishes of parents from the hinterland that their daughters should attend this school. They could secure transport to that school if the board of management of another school within the catchment area were to give them permission. We have such a case. In some instances, there is competition due to the declining numbers of students. This is the excuse given by the Minister of State's Department for not providing transport for the girls to attend the Kinvara secondary school. They must seek sanction and approval from the chairman of the board of management who is the principal of the school to go to Kinvara. This is ridiculous. It has been the Department's answer to various representations in the past five or six years. This will continue to be the case where there is a failure to apply practical responses to an area's needs.
When one speaks about a welcome review of the provision of flashing lights on buses, we should examine other service providers such as those involved in road construction. If one looks at the history of bus accidents, it is one of children getting off buses and walking straight out onto the road. While I was teaching in Ballinasloe, there were two such tragedies. If there were flashing lights, there would be a warning and other traffic would take notice. We should not delay this provision much longer.
Where there is an established family loyalty to a particular school, there is a need for practical applications due to the costs involved. Somebody should be given discretion.
On the subject of liaison officers, I am uncertain that the best person to be appointed is the CEO of the local VEC. I hope the liaison officers, when appointed as others retire, will be independent. In some instances, there are vested interests involved, as has been highlighted. A liaison officer should come from within CIE or other service providers rather than being a person with a vested interest.
I would like to comment on the issue of escorts to primary schools, private buses, flashing lights, etc. I have much to say and will try to say it in a reasonable amount of time. I am surprised in one sense that members have not been more outraged in their deliveries. This is a professional committee but if one tries to gauge the level of outrage felt by parents, the terminology used or its delivery could have been stronger.
I for one welcomed the introduction of the three for two seating arrangement, as I now welcome its phasing out, but the Department should have got its act together in respect of concessionary transport. For example, I was in Borris, County Carlow where one parent was told two of her children had seats but her son who was going into first year did not. Someone called the scientologists' suggestions a few weeks ago daft but I call this ridiculous. A parent followed a bus in a car all the way to school because her son could not secure concessionary transport.
I take on board Deputy Enright's comments on the need to better explain the meaning of the word "concessionary". Three weeks before pupils start back at school is not the time to have parents worrying. The last three weeks of the summer holidays were ruined due to worries over this situation. A creative approach must be taken to this matter and to the issue of students living in close proximity to schools, as one is still more likely to get knocked down as a pedestrian. Concerning catchment areas and boundaries, as Deputy O'Sullivan mentioned, the problem still prevails in large urban areas such as Limerick and Sligo. While the position has improved in more rural areas, in Galway, for example, parents continue to car-pool and follow buses with empty seats that could be used in certain circumstances.
Will the Minister of State acknowledge that this should not have been done three weeks before pupils started back at school? What is planned for next year? As she said in her presentation, a review of catchment areas and boundaries is needed. When I raised this issue with either her or the Minister for Education and Science in the Dáil a few months ago, the response was absolutely negative. Now the Minister of State says there are cases where a review may be appropriate. What is stopping the Department making decisions in terms that are realistic regarding the finances available? Does she acknowledge she must carry out a wholesale review and weigh the choice versus resources issue? One cannot do this without knowing what the situation is. Since 1969, gaelscoileanna, multi-denominational schools and community schools have entered the equation. Populations have risen and fallen and bad planning has resulted in housing estates being placed in the middle of rural areas. The issue has not been addressed since 1969. Does the Minister of State acknowledge that a review is now appropriate? The Department has the wherewithal and ability to state it will try to strike balance after the review is completed.
I feel strongly about the safety belt issue and take on board the Minister of State's comments concerning the results of research from Sweden, Holland, the United Kingdom on the use of lap belts. If one examines research findings from the United States of America and Canada where a system of compartmentalisation is preferred, such a system is better when proper school buses are used as they are strong and sturdy. We have all seen them on television or when we travelled to the countries concerned as committee members. Is the Minister of State aware that in the debate on the issue of compartmentalisation in the United States and Canada, it is stated that lap belts fare worse when the benefits are weighed and that what is really needed is a three-point harness?
Are lap belts being considered primarily because they are cheaper and buses cannot be retrofitted to provide three-point harnesses? I would welcome an honest answer. Many injuries are caused by lap belts, for example, stomach injuries, internal bleeding and even head and neck injuries. Although one is still safer in a school bus than walking to school, due to penny-pinching, do we want to see a student brain damaged when a proper belt could have saved his or her mental faculties? Has an analysis been carried out of the cost of lap belts versus the provision of three-point harnesses? Is price the main consideration? Will the Minister of State consider bringing in experts on the use of lap belts and three-point harnesses to ensure there is a proper debate? Committee members do not know what criteria, experts or evidence were used. When one is dealing with safety issues, one must know what the evidence is, from where it has come and how many students are involved. We are talking about lives, not money.
I am outraged. Other members have spoken about flashing warning lights in terms of the number of accidents that occur when children are alighting from school buses. The Minister of State referred to the 22 school buses in Ennis. She also mentioned the possible extension of the scheme to a number of other locations on a trial basis. Why must it take so long? There are examples of flashing warning lights on council vehicles, building sites and so forth. It is common sense that this would be an additional safety feature. Is there a particular reason we must go through this process? The report refers to progress made and it is clear that substantial progress has been made. The difficulty is that parents whose children have not got access to buses are not interested in the progress but in gaining access for their children. A number of children, particularly those with concessionary tickets, are losing out.
Other Deputies have provided examples from their constituencies and I have heard from councillors throughout the country. One example is St. Catherine's in Killybegs, where on one route 11 children are entitled to free transport on a 16-seater bus. Some 21 children wish to avail of this service. On the first day, Bus Éireann allowed all the children to board. Following an inspection, however, a number of children lost their places. There are also reports of parents on medical cards seeking places for their children. I assume that these children would automatically be entitled to free tickets on the buses. Is there a new review taking place?
In respect of the retrofitting programme, can the Minister of State explain what it involves? Does much work need to be done? The Minister of State referred to most of the work being done during the summer. In view of the urgency, could much of the work on Bus Éireann buses not be done at weekends? The retrofitting programme is scheduled for the end of October and tenders for delivery will go out at the same time. Why does it take so long if delivery is expected by 2006? Perhaps these questions are stupid but I do not see why it takes so long once the Department decides it wants 100 extra buses. There is a problem of access but there must be buses available on the world market. Of 130 additional large buses, why are only 50 scheduled to be used during the next school term? Is this a matter of funding?
The contracts relating to dedicated school buses are expected by the end of October, with delivery by the end of 2006. Why does the process take so long? Is a completely new model of bus being designed? Other speakers referred to problems in respect of catchment areas and I agree that these need to be addressed.
Media reports suggested that the Minister and the Department are considering cost cutting measures. Can the Minister of State elaborate on what these measures may be or was this just a rumour in the media? The privatisation of school buses was also considered. From the experience of other countries, privatisation leads to a reduction in safety and perhaps the Minister of State can address this. There is genuine confusion as to why these measures are not coming on stream much faster if the political will and funding is available.
I wish to put on record my experience in County Cork where 1,079 pupils were alleged to be affected by the improvement in safety standards, reducing ratios of children to seats from 3:2 to 1:1. I acknowledge that this matter affects 20% of pupils in the country. It is more of an issue in rural areas than in urban areas. It is easy to criticise but I acknowledge that in all instances except one pocket that affects me, all pupils have been facilitated.
I have dealt with this issue as a councillor since the 1980s and the vast majority of concessionary pupils received their tickets a day or two before the school term. In many cases, they were received in the first week of term. There was a major furore in my area and local radio ran this story for two weeks in August when we were supposed to be on holidays. Although these issues were largely resolved, a review of catchment boundary areas could take place. I met some parents at public meetings who stated that tickets were received four days into the term last year. However, it was known that the tickets would arrive and the bus could facilitate the pupils. I give the Minister of State credit, although her attempts to resolve one issue may have temporarily caused another problem. We must consider safety on buses as paramount but it should be recognised that 95% of cases have now been resolved.
While I wish to compliment the Minister of State, I also wish to highlight Dunbeacon. This is in the parish of Schull and all feeder national schools use the parish of Schull. There are 27 pupils in limbo who are involved with the Gabriel Rangers GAA club and with the Bunratty soccer club. The vast majority of Dunbeacon pupils in limbo are four to five miles from the community college in Schull that dates to the 1980s and 12-15 miles from the school in Bantry. These pupils are entitled to transport to Bantry but in reality these schools cannot cater for them. The Minister of State's senior counterpart provided good news that a new community college in Bantry has been given the green light.
Speaking as chairman of the joint committee on the Constitution it is wrong that 27 children should be deprived of transport. In most cases these are the children of subsistence farmers who are not well off. In one instance, a man on farm assistance with four children must commute a return route of twelve miles to Schull morning and evening in a banger of a car. I would like this matter to be resolved. Although I am aware that these pupils are in limbo because of the catchment area since the school in Schull was set up in 1983, there has been no transport from Dunbeacon to Bantry. Why should a group of pupils suffer? Even if the pupils wanted to attend the VEC school in Bantry it is overcrowded and could not accept them. I know that a number of teachers in Bantry lobbied the ASTI not to change the catchment areas as their jobs would be on the line. Some 100 pupils that naturally would go to Bantry are going to Schull or Skibberreen but the pupils in Dunbeacon are being treated unfairly. I would like the Minister of State to examine this matter. What has impacted severely impacted on the frustration of children and parents was that the VEC supplied a bus service. I do not think it is on record at the Department. I do not know the capacity of the bus but it resolved the difficulty. This year the VEC stated it would not do that. An earlier speaker mentioned that the liaison officer for school transport is the chief executive officer of the VEC in each county. I am not sure that is a good idea. In a case where people were waiting 15 or 20 years for transport they suddenly received it last year or this year and the Minister of State is blamed, not the VEC. A compromise must be reached. New colleges for Bantry and Skibbereen were announced today. The school in Schull received a €3.5 million extension last year which was recently opened. No child should be caught in limbo where neither transport to Bantry nor places in the school there are available. All their brothers and sisters attended school in Schull as do they, but they do not have transport to Schull.
Heads should be banged together in order that the issue for these 26 or 27 children from an extremely rural area who are naturally in the parish and county council area of Schull is resolved. If it were resolved, I would give the Minister of State a mark of ten out of ten in praise. At the moment that mark is nine.
I will be brief and, if allowed, parochial. I support the comments made by my colleague Deputy O'Sullivan. I appreciate we were allowed to be parochial during the Adjournment debate in the Dáil last night and we received a reply from the Minister of State. I wish to return to a point the Minister of State made in her speech. She mentioned a review may be appropriate in some cases. This is a shining example of such a situation, and I ask the Minister of State that, in the absence of a review or while we are awaiting one, dialogue take place. Sensible adults should be able to sit down together with representatives from the various interest groups and reach a compromise solution to this problem.
The tradition in the past 20 years or more has been that children attended these schools because of an absence of places in second level colleges in their own catchment areas. Criss-crossing occurs and pupils are given transport, albeit concessionary, from this area to the city area. These were never concessionary children. They received full eligibility for a particular reason and that status quo should remain as per the letter sent from the Department in 2001.
Whoever is right or wrong, it is unreasonable that parents were notified only on or after 30 July and were left with no choice as they had already enrolled their children in good faith in schools such as the Salesian College and expected to be provided with the same transport as had been provided to other children in the family. Some parents follow the school bus in the morning with one child on the bus and a brother or sister in the car. That is ludicrous. I appeal to the Minister of State to re-examine this with regard to the Salesian College, and initiate or facilitate a meeting whereby people can sit down and make a decision acceptable to all sides.
A vote has been called in the Dáil. After Deputy Andrews speaks we will adjourn until that vote has been taken.
I will give Deputy O'Donovan nine out of ten for believing it is exclusively a rural issue. It also affects urban areas. We raised this issue before with regard to the impact of school buses on transportation and traffic problems in urban areas. That is a little outside the scope of what we are discussing today. It is all well-documented. After the adjournment will the Minister of State indicate if any discussion is taking place between the Departments of Education and Science and Transport on expanding the school bus service in urban areas to relieve traffic congestion?
We will adjourn until after the vote and will return to the business in hand. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Sitting suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 1.10 p.m.
Deputy English sends his apologies and regrets that he could not attend today's meeting. I wish to obtain some information on his behalf. He has been informed by an official in the Department of Education and Science that students who wish to get a bus to a school that is outside their area can seek permission from the principal of a school within their catchment area and they will then be able to avail of school transport. However, this is not happening in practice and Deputy English is seeking clarification of the official policy within the Department in this regard.
Many questions have been asked. I thank the members for their interest and genuine support. All referred to the fact that great improvements have been made. Deputy Enright agreed that momentum had built up. It is important to keep it going.
The Deputy referred to the review carried out by the Department. That review has been superseded by events. We have dealt with seat belts, the question of three for two seating and the acquisition of new buses. The review made reference to three for two seating because work had already begun to eliminate it.
What exactly was the review supposed to deal with?
It was an overall review of three for two seating, seat belts and general issues relevant to the Department. I said on 25 May on RTE that I wanted to see seat belts in all buses, which goes further than the directive to come in on 9 May 2006 which requires seat belts to be used where they are already present in buses. I wanted to supply school buses with seat belts and was supported in that.
The review also dealt with charges for pupils. There has been no increase in charges since 1998. Before anybody asks me the obvious question, I have no plans at present to increase charges. Running costs and administration of school transport were also dealt with but the issues have largely been overtaken in a positive way.
Deputy Enright raised the question of safety, which is what this is all about. We have a safe system and will continue to do everything we can to make it safer still. She asked about the 50 buses coming into service next term. Their average age is three to four years. The 20 custom-built buses will be new. They are made up of four different types, the result of a trial of two types I took the opportunity of carrying out before the tragedy in Meath. The students found the buses to their liking and the seat belts satisfactory. Lap belts will be standard on the new buses. We will have phased out three for two seating for post-primary school pupils by the end of 2006.
The Deputy also asked about bus contractors. We announced in a press statement on 27 July that we wanted seat belts on all school transport operated by Bus Éireann and private contractors. I agree with her that seat belts must be fitted in private buses as well. The private contractors will be given until December 2006 to implement that provision and must bear the cost themselves.
There are, quite rightly, escorts for special needs pupils. Deputy Enright has raised the question of supervision on many occasions on the floor of the House. I do not believe that is the way forward but I agree with her that we should encourage co-operation between parents, teachers and the Department. Education is the key. Accordingly, there will be an information campaign in schools. We also hope that the older children will take the opportunity to show a good example to the younger ones.
The question of catchment areas is an old chestnut, like an exam question that appears every so often. It is important to remember why we have catchment areas. A number of Deputies have revealed in their contributions the need for catchment areas because this not only protects schools in rural areas that would perhaps not otherwise be viable but also prevents poaching from one school to another, whether in an urban or rural area. That has consequences for teaching posts as well. It is also a factor in school planning because the need for a particular educational facility is decided with regard to population. Catchment areas are adjusted for new schools and amalgamations. This is done on a local, individual basis. When we are talking about catchment boundaries it is important to note there are two types of concessionary pupils. Some are outside a catchment boundary and others ineligible because of their distance from a school.
A concession does not mean a right. There is no change to the rules with regard to catchment boundaries or concessionary pupils from any other year. It is important to remember that pupils wondering whether they will get into schools because they may be catchment boundary pupils or otherwise concessionary still have to wait to find out if a space is left on a bus. Only if there is will they be in a position to avail of it.
The main change this year is the phasing out of three for two seating, allowing every child his or her own seat and seat belt. That is our main priority for safety reasons, one which most, if not all, people would accept.
The three pupils to two seats practice will be phased out by 2006. The timeframe for the fitting of seat belts by bus contractors is also December 2006. It has been stated that there would be logistical difficulties in acquiring buses, as it is not easy to get second-hand buses within Britain at the moment, and the buses must be right-hand drive. Moreover, it must be ensured that these buses are fitted with seat belts.
The issue of vetting is very important and has come up repeatedly. A unit will be set up in this regard in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, with 30 gardaí and other administrative staff. There will be a lot of work for this unit to do, as no fewer than 900 organisations will be looking for its assistance. The issue of school transport will be prioritised within the scope of people that are hoped to be vetted. This is the way we should proceed on the vetting matter.
Does the Minister of State know if there is a timeframe on that issue?
The unit will be in operation in early November.
Three legislative changes are required and a full new Act must be brought in to enable the unit to work properly. Although the new staff will be there, the personnel will be constrained in what they can do because of current legislative problems. It is a question of implementing relevant law in addition to having useful resources. That point must be addressed.
I know the Minister is well aware of that issue. The Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has made a statement on the importance of vetting.
Deputy O'Sullivan raised the issue of retrofitting seat belts in buses and the associated timeframe. At the time of initial discussions and in debating the issue in the Dáil, it was felt that it might not always be possible to retrofit seat belts. Further research has taken place on the subject. Retrofitting seat belts takes time, as the safety of the seat and bus floor must be checked in addition to fitting the actual belt. People must be trained in the procedure. On 27 July it was stated that the process would begin immediately and it has. Summer was chosen as the time when most of the work would be carried out as this is the most practical.
Deputy O'Sullivan is also correct in her statement on lap belts. No belts are used in Canada and most states in the US, as has been referred to by other Deputies. There is a debate on whether belts should be used at all. However, my Department has contacted experts, as I would not pretend to be an expert on the issue or take any unilateral decision. Any decision taken will be based on expertise. Information from Sweden, Britain, Holland and the European Commission has been used and we are happy that our decision reflects best practice.
I have already briefly discussed the importance of having catchment boundaries. Although we have a small number of difficulties with catchment areas and transport issues, it is fair to balance these with the fact that 138,000 students on 5,000 routes travel over 40 million miles annually around the country. When put in this context there are relatively few difficulties and school transport is working very well.
It is a very big issue for the affected parents.
I understand that and I am coming to the issue regarding Pallaskenry which Deputy O'Sullivan raised on the Adjournment last night. Pallaskenry is a different case from anywhere else in the country. We all know that the history of that particular approach to school transport in Limerick arose from a situation where places were not available in Limerick for some students. That on has changed. The Central Applications Facility for places in Limerick city proved that there were sufficient places in the city for all applicants. I am phasing out the current position, where students are taken from within one catchment area to another.
This does not occur anywhere else in the country. I have from the beginning stated that those students already in receipt of school transport for the second-level system will continue as is for the rest of their education. The question relates to first-year students and their case is treated in the same manner as anywhere else in the country. The three for two system no longer applies and every student will have his or her own seat, so fewer places may be available. In this case, Limerick has received a concession not given anywhere else in the country as students can leave the Limerick catchment area where space on a bus permits.
I am phasing out this approach in Limerick because a balance should exist in the Department. Policy must be stated and should not undermine what is being done in other areas. There must be a balance, from the State's perspective, between social inclusion and parental choice, for example. Such a balance is very important. I can understand that parents would like to have all their children considered on such transport, but the position has changed and concessions not available in other areas have been given to students even in the present circumstances.
This is not about social inclusion. There are no places in any schools on that side of the city for these children, and it is not that parents are choosing a school in preference over another in their own area. There are not enough places on that side of the city. I ask again if the reasonable viewpoint of the Minister of State's party colleague could be taken up again in order to facilitate a solution.
Every child who applied for a place received one, with 95% receiving offers within their first three preferences. I will not play at politics, arrange a meeting and then give the same answer in a few months time. That would be disingenuous.
I am not asking the Minister of State to do that. This is a genuine case.
As I have indicated that I wish to phase out this practice, any provision put in place should not compound what I am trying to eliminate.
There will be a half-empty school in one catchment area with reducing numbers and insufficient room in another catchment area; this does not make any sense.
I realise we will not agree on this issue. I understand the Deputy has her own views and concerns in regard to this issue. I also have views and have outlined my position. We cannot find agreement but that is the position.
I referred earlier to the catchment boundaries being adjusted for new schools. That matter was also mentioned by Deputy O'Donovan but I shall deal with his questions later.
Senator Minihan referred to issues such as individual reviews where new schools have been opened and older schools close down. These reviews are carried out in respect of specific issues where there are local considerations involved.
Senator Ulick Burke said that this may be an opportunity to look at the question of reviewing the catchment boundaries which were first initiated in 1967. I think that would result in many more problems for Deputies and Senators than is currently the case. As already pointed out one cannot base national policy on specific cases. The cases raised relate to specific issues. It is never wise to make a general law based on a specific case.
Senator Ulick Burke also referred to safety within the vicinity of buses. He is correct in saying that this is where most accidents have occurred. That is why it is important to do everything possible to improve the system and this is the reason I proceeded with the flashing lights system on a pilot basis in January 2004. There are already signs on the back of buses warning motorists to be particularly careful. The signs I had initiated were to ask motorists to slow down to 20 km/h. I am now considering a suggestion where it may be best to stop altogether. In order to do that, we will be obliged to discuss the matter with other Departments because we will have to examine the entire issue of traffic management. In America there is a stop system. It is not simply a stop sign on the back of a bus. There is also a pedestrian procedure which is very different from what we have been used to. We are not ruling that out but we must look at how best such proposals could be applied here. That is what we are examining because there will be legal requirements if motorists are asked to stop rather than slow down.
Senator Ulick Burke raised the issue of the independent liaison officer and whether that person should be from CIE. The reason we have local people is that local knowledge is extremely important in an area and giving up that kind of knowledge would not be a positive move. If it was the other way round, there might be an argument to seek local knowledge.
Deputy Gogarty was interested to note that there was no outrage at the committee. Perhaps this reflects political experience in the sense that Senators and Deputies know that at this time of the year there are always issues until children are settled on their school buses. That happens each year and was perhaps exacerbated this year due to the need to ensure one for one seating. To deal with the extra capacity we have put on all the mini-buses and are acquiring new buses so that the issue has been taken in hand. I do not agree with the Deputy's assertion that the question of concessionary pupils should have been considered before the other issues of safety. To delay issues concerning safety would not be wise. The priority was right. We sought and received funding from the Department of Finance and the support of Government to put in place a system that leads to greater safety within the system.
Deputy Gogarty also referred to the type of seat belts used. He will appreciate that there are seat belts on designated school buses. I said on 25 May that there was no way I would introduce extra buses unless they were fitted with seat belts. He asked for an honest reply with regard to the lap belts. Without sounding pious, I hope I can give an honest reply to all his questions. On expert opinion, the lap belts have been proved to be the way forward. I do not pretend to be an expert on whether three-point belts or lap belts would be sufficient. However, I take on board the opinions of those who have the expertise in this regard and I have been assured that is the best approach. The question of costs was raised. All the safety issues are taken first and foremost and cost is not an issue in that sense.
Deputy Crowe raised the issue of flashing lights. I have referred to my initial suggestion that motorists slow down to 20 km/h and the later suggestion that motorists should stop instead. If that proposal were to take effect, transport law would have to be amended. The Deputy also raised the question of medical card holders. Those families in receipt of medical cards do not pay any fees. I would not want to see that changed.
The Deputy inquired about the reason for the delay in retrofitting. The answer is that the seats must be tested in a certain way and the floor must also be tested. In addition, the buses have to be retained in service. It is not a question of taking a number of buses out of service at a certain period other than during the summer, during which we have an advantage. That is the reason the work is being done in the summer months.
On the question of acquisition, it is not easy to acquire buses in Britain. However, the Department is doing its best. Those buses should be approximately three to four years old. The left-hand drive on such buses is a major issue.
Deputy Crowe also referred to privatisation. The mix between Bus Éireann and private contractors is certainly the best way forward. If, for example, Bus Éireann was not in the equation, it would have been difficult to roll out the changes quickly and effectively. That is an important point.
I am aware of the particular case raised by Deputy O'Donovan for which he gave me nine out of ten in praise. He and I can discuss that matter at a later date. I will need to have more information before I come to a decision on it. I cannot promise that he will give me ten out of ten in praise. In regard to the issue of the delay each year in the allocation of tickets, the Deputy kindly referred to the fact that there was a great improvement this year.
Deputy Cregan raised the question of Pallaskenry, a matter in respect of which I have already provided an answer to Deputy O'Sullivan.
Deputy Andrews raised an interesting issue although I cannot see it happening for quite some time. Perhaps it is one of those ideas that might even be of great interest at a later stage. He referred to the difficulties in cities — he is obviously considering the matter from a city point of view — environmental concerns with regard to heavy traffic on the roads and the way school transport could fit into that equation. That is certainly a debate for another day but it is an interesting matter. I thank everyone for their contributions.
I thank the Minister of State and appreciate her responses. I do not doubt her honesty and integrity but in judging the worth of experts' views, she has decided to go with those of EU experts as opposed to those of their US and Canadian counterparts.
The Minister of State referred to outrage about catchment areas. I do not want to be facetious but because there is such a small number in each constituency, it was a significant matter in collective terms but sufficiently small, in a political sense, not to have a focus. Perhaps we should bring home, so to speak, the issue about the catchment areas. If the Minister of State's constituency of Clare had an increase of 30% in population, she would want an extra seat or two, although if one were in Fianna Fáil, one would want two three-seaters. However, that would require a change in the boundaries. The Minster of State needs to review that on the basis of what is happening.
Perhaps we need the former Deputy Tully to return.
I wish to refer to a report in a US publication, School Transport News, which stated that the practical difficulties of retrofitting seat belts to existing buses are so severe that even the strongest proponents of seat belts for school buses in the US do not support the measure. The Minister of State mentioned the difficulties in retrofitting seat belts in that if the under-floor structure is damaged or rusted in any way, proper anchorage cannot be achieved. I could go on about that in terms of the need for proper padding in conjunction with either lap belts or harness belts but given that this will be rolling out, what proportion of the seat would be suitable for retrofitting? Given that lap belt retrofitting, which is what the Minister of State is doing, is not as costly, what proportion would be suitable in terms of anchoring to the floors?
Has the issue of liability been raised? For example, has Bus Éireann indicated that it will cover the insurance costs of accidents occurring as a result of insufficient support in the harnessing of seat belts? Have insurance companies indicated that they will guarantee payment of any liability or will the State undertake that? As the Minister of State indicated, certain structural defects can arise with retrofitting and, with the best will in the world, we cannot ascertain where the weaknesses will arise. Has the Minister received a guarantee that the insurance will be paid by a public body or a private company if an accident occurs because of such a weakness?
I will be brief because the delegates have been here a long time. I wish to inform the Minister of State about an issue, with which she is very familiar, concerning Stramore national school in Donegal. The Minister of State has been involved with it, directly and indirectly, for a period of two and a half years. The campaign has been ongoing during that time. The parents have been lobbying and fighting the case. As the Minister of State is aware, the school principal has also been proactively involved. This week, however, the fight is over. They have given up the ghost. The parents have decided that two and a half years is too long to fight a campaign. They believe they came up against a brick wall and that no progress was made. The principal has also given up the fight. We do not know what the consequences of that will be but this is a two-teacher school and next June, as a result of the parents taking their children out of the school this week, we will have a one-teacher school. I cannot speak on behalf of the remaining teacher, whoever that will be, but I am aware that when there is only one person in the workplace, it is not the most favourable environment and we may be facing a school closure next June.
Stramore national school is located in a very rural area. It is a Gaeltacht school that has been in situ for 104 years. The community is outraged about this issue. Its members believe they fought a lonely battle against bureaucracy and a closed school amalgamation rule that was established over 40 years ago. Has the Department given up the ghost on this issue because I am fearful of the outcome in that, one way or another, it is not willing to budge. The Department suggested that if the three schools affected — Glenswilly national school, Termon national school and Stramore national school — got together and came up with a signed agreement that they did not have a problem with the parents who were getting transport when they should not have been, so to speak, the Department would consider this favourably. Agreement was reached among the three schools. The boards of management agreed. That is in writing with the Department but it does not want to move on the issue. It is using the closed school amalgamation rule. The fight is over as far as the parents and the principal are concerned but the Department can play a pivotal role. I appreciate the Minister of State’s work on this issue. I am aware that she stayed in touch with them but this is a decision made by the Department. It is a bureaucratic decision that will lead to a breakdown in major historical, traditional and cultural connections to the area in question. I am fearful that this school will close and that is an issue which should be examined sympathetically and sensitively.
On the question of retrofitting, the issue does not arise in terms of old or rusty buses because I assure Deputy Gogarty that we would ensure that whatever work was done on a bus was to the highest possible standards. The question of retrofitting is far more technical than I understood at the beginning of this debate but the work will be to the highest possible standard. This will also be a question for the Department of Transport, which determines the legislation in this regard. The Deputy also referred to insurance but that is a matter for the courts. It would not be a matter for me to comment on that.
Senator McHugh referred to a school in Donegal. I do not have all the facts in front of me, as the Senator can appreciate, but I will have the matter investigated and communicate further with him in respect of it.
I thank the Minister of State for what was a fairly lengthy discussion on an issue that will remain topical. This will certainly not be the last discussion of it. I thank the Minister of State, her officials and members for their attendance.
As there is no other business, we shall adjourn proceedings. Our next meeting will be on Thursday, 6 October 2005 at 11.30 a.m.
The joint committee adjourned at 1.50 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 6 October 2005.