Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE díospóireacht -
Thursday, 5 Nov 2009

Primary Schools Building Programme: Discussion with Department of Education and Science.

I welcome Mr. Frank Wyse, assistant secretary of the Department of Education and Science, Mr. Gavan O'Leary, principal officer, modernisation and policy unit, Ms Catherine Kellaghan, principal officer, developing areas unit, Mr. Tony Dalton, principal officer, forward planning unit, Mr. Jonathan Bliss, technical manager, professional staff, and Ms Caitríona O'Brien, principal officer, central policy unit. The Department officials will discuss the future plans for the primary school building programme, including an issue of concern to the committee, the under-spending from the 2009 budget. This is either a stroke of genius to eat into the €4 billion savings required or serious questions need to be asked about why the money was not spent. We are looking to see how this money will be spent in 2010 and whether it will be in lieu or additional to moneys forthcoming in the budget as well as future plans to establish new primary schools, particularly VEC community schools and Educate Together schools. This latter subject was dealt with in some detail earlier in the year but some issues are still outstanding which members wish to discuss.

I invite Mr. Wyse to make his presentation on the issues.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Thank you, Chairman. I propose to make a brief opening statement to outline the current position relating to the school building programme in 2009. I will also deal with future plans to establish new primary schools, particularly VEC community national schools and Educate Together schools.

The multi-annual budget allocation for the school building programme for 2009 is almost €423 million for primary schools and €191 million for post-primary schools. The Minister announced 78 projects to commence construction in 2009. These projects will provide permanent primary school places for more than 16,250 students in 29 new schools and 28 extended and modernised schools. A further 14,075 students at post-primary level will benefit from ten new schools and 11 major extension and refurbishment projects. To date in 2009, five of these projects have reached practical completion, in other words, they are in operation; a further 14 are under construction; 27 are at tender stage; 19 have submitted their draft tender documents and these are being examined by the Department, while tender documents have yet to be received on the remaining 13. The majority of these projects are sufficiently advanced and it is likely they will proceed to site in 2010. Any projects that proceed to site at this stage of the year will incur very little expenditure in the current financial year, with the bulk of the expenditure falling for payment in 2010. These are contractual commitments. Capital expenditure to the end of October was €368 million, which is almost €112 million below the anticipated figure for the schools programme.

The main reason for expenditure being less than originally anticipated on major school building projects is that it has taken longer than initially anticipated to progress projects to construction. The other significant contributory factor is that tenders obtained for this programme are yielding a reduction of up to 30% as compared to prices at the height of the construction boom. The projects planned to go to construction in 2009 were the first batch of projects to be tendered under the new form of public works contract which is now used throughout the public sector. This is a mandatory form of contract which became mandatory in February 2008. A bedding-down period has ensued while the industry develops its expertise and familiarity with the new requirements.

The need to ensure that the updated tender documentation is fully compliant with the new contractual requirements has resulted in some delays. I will deal with this aspect in some detail at a later stage in light of questions from members. It is a very important consideration because the new contractual arrangements put a greater onus on builders than would have been the case under the older regime. As the school programme involves a large number of relatively small projects, these delays have had a significant cumulative effect on anticipated expenditure over the year.

In response to these developments, the planning and building unit organised workshops to brief schools and their design teams on the requirements of the new form of contract. These workshops set out and explained the process of preparation or revision of the required documentation and outlined a timeframe for the submission of the completed tender documents. We would anticipate that the time taken to prepare tender and associated documentation will reduce in the coming months as the overall construction industry becomes familiar with the new forms of public works contracts. This is the situation as in recent times the volume of issues that has arisen as a result of mistakes, for instance, has declined. We will deal with this aspect in later questioning. Officials in the planning and building unit are continuing to give guidance and assistance to design teams in this regard. There is constant interaction between the Department and the individual design teams regarding a multiplicity of technical issues which will arise. A further series of workshops is due to be held this month and an extensive suite of technical guidance documentation is available on the Department of Education and Science website and through the planning and building unit, for the use of design teams. In addition to the major projects, the Department has a number of other schemes in operation, such as the summer works scheme, the energy efficiency scheme, the permanent accommodation scheme and the emergency works scheme. In 2009, almost 1,180 projects in 967 schools received funding under the summer works scheme. This year, the summer works scheme was expanded to include insulation efficiency measures in schools and approximately 1,600 schools have applied for this once-off funding to upgrade the insulation in their attics and external cavity walls. Yesterday the Department received a further influx of 100 applications under that scheme and we anticipate a further substantial number in the next few days. All those 1,600 applications have been given approval and in the majority of cases the work has already been completed. In addition to the normal works in 2010, part of the summer works scheme fund will be set aside for specified water conservation measures to help schools to reduce water wastage and the cost of water bills. Many of these schemes involve schools carrying out the work in the summer months when school buildings are not in use; therefore the majority of the claims for expenditure incurred arise after the summer when the schools submit the appropriate certification to the Department. The minor works grant, which is paid to all primary schools on an annual basis will be issued before the end of this month, at a total cost of approximately €28 million. The position relating to overall expenditure will continue to be monitored closely by the Department on a daily basis.

In addition to the major projects already mentioned, the first bundle of four public-private partnership schools went to construction in March 2009 and will be completed in September 2010. The Minister also announced the appointment of a preferred tenderer for the second bundle of six schools on 26 October and it is expected that this bundle will commence construction in the spring of 2010. As the committee will be aware, the Minister has also indicated he will be making an announcement regarding further projects to proceed to tender and construction in 2010. The Department is currently working full-time on this project.

With regard to future plans to establish new schools, in September 2008 the Department initiated a review of the procedures for the establishment of new primary schools by the Commission on School Accommodation. The technical working group established to undertake this review commenced its work in December 2008. It is expected the review of procedures for recognising primary schools will be complete and revised arrangements will be in place by the end of 2010. We anticipate the report from that group will be submitted to the Minister before the end of this year. This is the timetable towards which we are working. In the interim period and while the review is ongoing, the forward planning section of the Department has carried out a study of the country to identify the areas where, due to demographic changes, there may be a requirement for significant additional school provision at both primary and post-primary levels in the coming years. This study has been conducted using data from the Central Statistics Office, the General Register Office and the Department of Social and Family Affairs, in addition to recent schools' enrolment data.

The study indicates that the requirement for additional provision of primary schools in years 2010, 2011 and 2012 is likely to be greatest in more than 40 selected locations across the country based on significant changes to the demographics of those areas. These are mainly close to existing large urban centres. This information has been circulated to all existing school patrons who have been invited to bring forward proposals for the expansion of existing schools or indeed to put themselves forward as patron for any new primary school, should it be required. The requirement for the establishment of new schools will, of course, be lessened where it is possible to expand and extend existing schools in those areas.

As the number of births in the country continues to rise, the Department is faced with the challenge of providing accommodation to cater for a 10% increase in school-aged children and to establish where in the country this accommodation will be required. In 2000 there were 54,789 births in Ireland, while the 2008 figure is 75,065, a 37% increase over the period. The 2008 figure is the highest number recorded since 1896 and it means that the total enrolments in primary schools may grow from just less than 500,000 pupils in the 2008-09 year to in excess of 590,000 by year 2020. While these figures indicate the situation at national level, the challenge is to establish in which locations the school-going cohort will increase most significantly so that sufficient school accommodation can be put in place to meet demand.

To this end the Department is utilising a geographical information system, GIS. As the Chairman will recall, we gave a demonstration of the system to the committee earlier this year and since that time further enhancements have been made. The GIS allows the Department to conduct detailed analysis on the demographics of each part of the country and enables us to model a range of forecast scenarios for each area for the coming years and assess the likely changes to the school-going population in those areas. The accommodation needs of each area will be considered in this context and addressed under the school building and modernisation programme consistent with the priority attaching to individual projects and the availability of funding as a result of the Estimates process.

The two existing community national schools have made good progress since the Department last reported to the committee on developments in this area in April 2009. The current number of children attending Scoil Choilm and Scoil Ghrainne is 360 with a combined staff of 28. The official opening of Scoil Choilm's new premises in Porterstown, Dublin 15, took place on 22 May last. Work began on the new permanent building for Scoil Ghrainne in Phibblestown at the beginning of the summer and it is expected to be completed by early 2011.

A joint Department-VEC steering group continues to oversee the development of the new schools, including arrangements for the delivery of religious education and evaluation of the pilot phase of the new model. The pilot phase of this new model provides an important learning opportunity and its evaluation is a critical element of the project in terms of future roll-out. A sub-committee of the Department-VEC steering group has developed a framework of evaluation criteria to assess the project from its inception through to its ongoing operational stage. A formal process has also been established to collate enrolment and other key information from the schools at start-up stage and to allow useful comparative data to be collected over the period of the pilot. As an example of some data, we have recently obtained on those schools, of the enrolment in Scoil Choilm, 16% is Catholic, 12% is Orthodox, 8% Pentecostal, 26% other Christian, 26% Muslim, 2% Hindu and Buddhist, and 1% declaring of no religion. That indicates a very broad range. It also indicates that the choice of this location was good in terms of identifying what the issues will be in educating that very eclectic mix of children. We will probably discuss this matter later. It will probably be somewhat more difficult when there is a preponderance of a single group with small minorities of other groups. We look forward to that challenge in terms of the future expansion of the project.

The views of teaching staff, management, parents, pupils, local community, neighbouring schools, the inspectorate and other relevant education partners are being sought as part of the evaluation. Having visited the schools on a number of occasions, I would emphasise that the involvement of the parents in this process is critical and is the key to the success of the development of the model. Above all things, for future roll-out I would advise that the parental involvement be maintained. The pilot phase has seen the building of links between the schools and their communities, and parent association committees have become increasingly active in both schools.

Primary legislation is required to facilitate VEC involvement in the provision of primary education. Obviously it is involved and has been involved for many years in the post-primary sector, but primary education is a new departure for it. The Education (Patronage) Bill 2009 has been included in the Government's legislative programme in this regard as an "A" list item for publication in the current Oireachtas session. The Government approved the draft heads of a Bill in June of this year and drafting of the legislation is under way in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel.

As already mentioned, the study carried out by the forward planning section of the Department has identified more than 40 locations across the country where the requirement for the provision of additional primary schools in the years 2010, 2011 and 2012 is likely to be greatest, based on significant changes to the demographics of those areas. All existing school patrons have been invited to bring forward proposals for the expansion of existing schools or indeed for the patronage of any new primary schools, which may be required. The extension of the community national school model will be considered in that context. The Minister has indicated that he intends expanding the pilot to include two further schools in 2010.

As I am conscious of the need to keep our opening remarks to a minimum, I will conclude. We will respond to questions members of the committee might have.

I welcome back to the committee Mr. Wyse and his colleagues from the Department. We have got to know them quite well in the past 12 months or so. I thank Mr. Wyse for his presentation. I want to deal firstly with the issue of new primary schools. The evidence Mr. Wyse has given to the committee is stark. From 2000 to 2008 effectively we have seen a 37% increase in births which of course is now coming into the system with the extraordinary school-going population, which next year will exceed 500,000. That means we need to plan for the future and make sure we get it right in terms of where the new schools and extensions need to be built. Earlier this week I received a reply to a parliamentary question relating to the GIS that the Department put in place. It is an extraordinary piece of work on which Mr. Wyse and his colleague should be congratulated.

What is the point in having a system in place if the Department does not inform the local authorities whose function it is through their development plan to provide for zoning policies on land use to get new schools? I wish to put on the record the reply I received earlier this week which stated:

Officials from the Forward Planning Section of my Department recently met with some local authorities with a view to exploring the possibility of sharing the data on Geographical Information Systems as a further aid to the school planning process. This will be pursued further by my Department and the local authorities.

It is a bit late. In some cases development plans are already being agreed or put together. Is it not a case of one arm of Government, namely the Department of Education and Science, not playing fair with another arm of Government, namely a local authority whose function it is to put land use policy in place for a five or six-year period? What is the point in having joined-up Government — allegedly — if we are not prepared to share information? What dialogue has occurred with those local authorities where the Department has identified those 40 locations? I understand that pretty much nothing has happened. I am aware of one local authority, the one in my area, South Dublin County Council, which is working on its development plan, as the Chairman will know, where this information was not provided for councillors or officials. If we are moving into the brave new world, why are we not prepared to share information?

Late last year, the Minister announced 78 projects for 2009. The evidence the Department has given in that regard is pretty stark and miserable, in terms of completion. Of the 78 projects that were announced in late 2008, the Department has described 22 as practically completed or under construction, which means that 56 of the 78 are at various stages of tendering or pre-tendering. If we cannot commit funds and get buildings up quickly, we are obviously getting it very badly wrong. If I read between the lines of what the officials said earlier, it seems that the Department's evidence to this committee is that the new contractual arrangements which are in place are acting as a barrier to prevent the effective completion of the schools building programme and the rolling out of new school buildings throughout the country. Does the Department of Education and Science believe that we need to re-examine the arrangements and change them so that we can get buildings up quickly?

Perhaps some of my questions relate to the points that have been made by Deputy Hayes. If Mr. Wyse wants to respond to them now——

The Deputy can speak at this point and then we will take some responses.

I got answers to some of the questions that have been asked by Deputy Hayes earlier this week, by means of replies to parliamentary questions. Some of the sentences we have heard today are very familiar. I am concerned that the Department is dealing with the patrons of the various providers of schools, rather than directly with the schools themselves. I may be misinterpreting what Mr. Wyse has said so he can correct me if I am wrong. I am increasingly unhappy with the anecdotal evidence I am getting about the ability, quality and commitment of school patrons to manage this country's stock of 3,200 primary schools. At best, it is very uneven and at worst, it is indifferent. I am aware of principals who are tearing their hair out because they cannot engage in serious dialogue with their patrons or because their managers cannot get a response from the local diocese. They cannot make their feelings publicly known, for obvious reasons. In many cases, school patrons are more likely to have concerns of a pastoral nature, quite frankly, than to try to act as an offshoot of the Department of Education and Science. When one suggests to such people that they might like to relieve themselves of their responsibilities, one gets a very different response. To want to hang on to something and to be able to manage that thing effectively are two very different things.

I share Deputy Hayes's concern about our lack of preparedness. I am delighted that the Department is constructing an inventory. It is something I have been talking about for the past couple of years. I welcome the progress that is being made. I have read the latter part of Mr. Wyse's prepared note. Mr. Murray was here on a previous occasion. For the life of me, I cannot understand why it has taken two years to come up with new procedures in this regard. I would like to refer to the reply to a parliamentary question I asked about the matter, which was answered on Tuesday of this week:

As the Deputy will be aware, a review of the procedures for the establishment of new primary schools is currently being undertaken by the Commission on School Accommodation. The Technical Working Group established under the Commission to undertake this review commenced its work in December 2008.

The reply goes on to say it is expected that the review of procedures will be completed next year. Mr. Wyse has described the demographic background to this issue. The kids being born today will be knocking on the doors of schools in four years' time. Why is it taking so long? What is the mystery associated with the new procedures? Are there difficulties with the different patrons and participants? Is Mr. Wyse happy that the Department is getting the kind of response it wants? We are in a Titanic-like set of circumstances, to a certain extent, given the massive increase in numbers. Mr. Wyse will be familiar with a Green Paper that was published in the mid-1990s, which said that the challenge facing the primary school sector at that time was to manage the decline in numbers. We have made a full 360° turn from that point. I do not get a sense from the Department or its partners — the patrons, who are the key players in all of this — that there is a sense of urgency. I could elaborate on this point, but that is my essential concern and that of Deputy Hayes. I assume one of the officials will want to respond to our concern.

The various parties within the industry are getting more familiar with the mandatory new contract procedures that were established by the Department of Finance. This is not something that the Department of Education and Science invented. An extraordinary number of projects have been affected by the slowdown in this sector — there are 31 projects at tender stage, 14 at pre-tender stage and another 11 at draft tender document stage. I presume that will not be a normal state of affairs and it will speed up. Can the staff shortages on the construction side, or within the building industry, be used to accelerate such projects? Is it possible to provide for a hands-on approach? I know the Department has organised workshops. Does it need to do more? Is it satisfied that the design and construction unit that is supplying the education sector is more or less up to speed? Is it satisfied that we will not have the same kind of backlog of people coming on site next year?

Deputy Wallace has brought to my attention that there is a division in the Dáil Chamber. Perhaps Mr. Wyse will respond for five minutes before members have to leave for the division, and we will resume thereafter.

Mr. Frank Wyse

I will begin by responding to Deputy Quinn. There may be a misunderstanding of the review of the procedures for the establishment of new schools. The Department of Education and Science is continuing to proceed with the arrangements for the construction of new schools, regardless of whether a patron exists. In some cases, we have decided that a school will be provided even though we do not know who the patron will be. A new arrangement is being put in place. Up to now, the Department has placed newspaper advertisements in the national press inviting those who wish to establish a school to let it know when they have 17 pupils. We have brought an end to that approach. Under the new approach, we use the geographical information system assessment to identify locations where schools will be needed and make arrangements for such schools to be provided. We then find out whether there is an interest in being the patron of the school — that is a separate issue to be dealt with. It is not sufficient for the Department of Education and Science, on its own, to make the decision on patronage. We need some structure or mechanism, possibly involving existing patrons although not exclusively. An independent input is needed along the lines of the new schools advisory committee. The point I would like to make clear is that we do not feel this process means we will have to stop providing new schools. All interests, including Educate Together and the various national authorities, have welcomed our decision to continue providing new schools.

I thank Mr. Wyse for that clarification.

Mr. Frank Wyse

I would like to return to Deputy Hayes's point about the Department's engagement with local authorities. I will ask my colleague, Mr. Dalton, to go into more detail about that.

He can do so after the division.

Mr. Frank Wyse

I met the manager of South Dublin County Council, Mr. Joe Horan, to discuss the Department's on-line exchange of information with local authorities. Local authorities have extremely good information that we want to access. I refer, for example, to information on housing that is to be provided, not immediately but in the future. Such information will enable us to determine where school sites may have to be initiated. South Dublin County Council and the Department are establishing a joint group to deal with technical issues in relation to the exchange of information of this nature. We want our system to have full access to the local authorities' banks of data. During the course of my meeting with Mr. Horan, I raised the issue of the use by the Department of the local authorities' condition reports on existing schools. When Deputy Quinn raised this matter with me previously, I told him I would raise the matter. Mr. Horan was quite interested and undertook to revert to me on the possible involvement of the local authorities on the condition side of things. We are proceeding with a numerical analysis of how many rooms etc. are in place. We also want to add to the condition side of things. I would hope for progress in relation to that. The question of how our information is gathered and given to the local authorities is a technical one. This does not mean we regularly go into the specific detail of plans with the local authorities.

Is Mr. Wyse satisfied that officials in local authorities are fully aware of the scale of the crisis and the new sites and buildings which will be required to address it as they draw up development plans for the next five or six years?

Mr. Frank Wyse

I am satisfied that is the case in the majority of local authorities in the areas with the greatest increase in population. There are areas with which the Department is not involved to the same extent as we do not anticipate such substantial increases. No difficulties arise with regard to local authorities which expect large increases in population, for instance, Fingal, South Dublin, Kildare and Meath county councils. The day before yesterday, we met——-

I apologise for interrupting but we must suspend for a division in the Dáil.

Sitting suspended at 10.50 a.m. and resumed at 11.05 a.m.

I thank Mr. Wyse, who has asked Mr. Dalton to expand on some of the points he raised.

Mr. Tony Dalton

Deputy Brian Hayes referred to co-operation with local authorities and the sharing of information therewith. For as long as I and my predecessor have been involved, certainly for the past five to six years, there has been very close co-operation between the planning and building unit and the local authorities in respect of developing areas with expanding populations. Last year, the code of practice on schools and the planning system was formalised to put the concept of co-operation on a firmer footing. Interaction is a regular and ongoing part of our work.

With regard to local area plans developed by local authorities, it is required by statute that observations be obtained from the Minister for Education and Science. All the draft local area plans end up in our unit and are subject to detailed consideration, after which observations are made. It is our bread and butter work to respond to the plans on an ongoing basis and inform the local authorities as to the likely demand for school infrastructure based on their proposals. Our responses inform the development of the plans.

We have regular meetings on the development of the plans and issues that arise in respect of specific locations or schools where difficulties may be emerging. As Mr. Wyse stated----

Have the local authorities access to the GIS?

Mr. Tony Dalton

They do not have direct access at present. We certainly share information regularly.

Is it proposed that they have access?

Mr. Tony Dalton

Yes, it is proposed that the system would work in two ways such that we would share information with the local authorities and they would share information with us.

When is that likely to come into play?

Mr. Frank Wyse

To expand somewhat further, we intend to make the information on the GIS available to everyone over the Internet. The information is available internally to everyone in the Department, not just the planning and building unit. There are aspects of interest to those who are not involved solely with planning and building. I refer to the deployment of teachers, the issue of small schools and a range of other issues, including visits by inspectors and special education. Mr. Dalton and I are to have a meeting this afternoon to proselytise further within the Department.

Our intention was that, before the end of this year, the system would be available to everyone within the Department over our intranet, the internal system. We intend to make it available over the Internet during the course of 2010. This is where there would be direct links with the local authorities. There are a number of technical issues we want to resolve.

Are they technical issues rather than data protection issues?

Mr. Frank Wyse

There are no data protection issues. We clarified that very carefully with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner. As long as the data are anonymous, there is no difficulty. We met the Data Protection Commissioner directly on this issue because we were afraid of doing something wrong, and his response was basically that as long as the data are anonymous and that it is not possible to identify individuals, there will be no difficulty in making information widely available to facilitate the efficient planning of school accommodation.

Let me refer to links with local authorities. In August 2008 a circular was issued to each county manager and director of planning in all the local authorities. It outlined a code of practice for planning authorities that was agreed by the Department of Education and Science and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. It was agreed by the two relevant Ministers. The purpose was to put in place a framework for co-operation between the Department of Education and Science and the local authorities. That is the first point of departure. It enables us to tell local authorities formally that we and they have a statutory role and are supposed to be operating in the manner outlined. The core principles of the code of practice are:

(1) Schools provision should be an integral part of the evolution of compact sustainable urban development and the development of sustainable communities;

(2) The provision of any new schools (both primary and post-primary) should be driven by and emerge from an integrated approach between the planning functions of planning authorities and the Department of Education and Science; and

(3) Local authorities, as planning authorities, will support and assist the Department in ensuring the timely provision of school sites.

That is the brave new world.

Mr. Frank Wyse

No, we are using the local authorities more to acquire sites for the Department. In addition to this document, there are more detailed memoranda of understanding between the Department and the local authorities in, for example, payments. The Department is not simply asking local authorities to acquire a site. They must know whether we are going to get a payment, when and under what terms and conditions.

Was the 2008 circular sent to county councillors and vocational education committees?

Mr. Frank Wyse

I will have to check that with the Department.

Councillors have only two reserve functions, one of which is the drawing up of the county development plan. Not all local authorities may necessarily be aware that they have an involvement in this and that there is co-operation between the two Departments.

Mr. Frank Wyse

We will confirm that with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government because it issued the circular. We can also give a copy of the documentation to the committee secretariat if it would be useful.

Yes, it would. Thank you, Mr. Wyse.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Regarding the role and capacity of the patrons to respond in a meaningful way, it has been a general problem, not unique to the functions of the planning and building unit or to providing school accommodation. The traditional patrons have grave difficulties in fulfilling some of their functions. They have raised this both in public and with the Department directly. These are issues to which the Department will have to consider a response.

The Department took conscious decisions in identifying need and would not necessarily wait around because there was no patron. The Department knows accommodation will be required in various areas. There are two ways of securing the accommodation. First, the existing schools can be expanded. In some areas such expansion might be near enough to capacity. Alternatively, new schools have to be built in new locations. The Department is not waiting around. It is planning for the provision of accommodation in many of those 41 areas. We are not waiting around saying we have not got a patron and, therefore, we cannot do anything. We are taking it as a matter of course that there will be requirements for schools in particular locations which must be planned.

Is there dialogue between the Department and existing schools which have the capacity to expand and are operating by an existing patron? What has been the nature and quality of this dialogue?

Mr. Frank Wyse

Generally much of the interaction would be with the principals of existing schools. A principal cannot agree to the expansion of a school without the involvement of the patron. This is an important point, one which is difficult to overcome. By and large, the interaction with the patrons is business-like but we know they have difficulties with, for example, secretarial support and assistance.

Mr. Tony Dalton

We have had a mixed response. Some more established patrons are keen to expand into new areas. However, there are others who claim they have enough work catering for their existing flock. There is no one-size-fits-all in this and it tends to be more a mixed response.

Mr. Frank Wyse

There is indeed a structural issue with the schools system at large. This country has an unusual system in that we do not have an intermediary structure for primary and the majority of the second level schools whereas most other countries do. These would consist of educational library boards, local authorities and so forth which would be the bedrock for the organisation of the system at local level. We have a VEC structure and much use has been made of it. As we stated in the presentation, it is intended that the new model of primary school provision would be in the VEC structure. That is a pilot project and is still very much in its infancy. The difficulty with the education system, which does not relate to the operation of the planning and building unit, will have to be addressed.

On a similar point, the business of patronage is central to much of the development that needs to take place. The point about the capacity difficulties which patron bodies may have is taken. I hope the Department acknowledges that while patrons may not be able to drive change uniformly, they can at least allow local school communities to be drivers of change. I had the experience in County Kildare where local school communities engaged with themselves and were proactive.

Does Deputy Ó Fearghaíl mean individual and different primary schools?

Yes, it is about individual and different primary schools sitting down together to assess their capacities to meet future demands and then engaging with the broader communities as to what style of provision needs to be put in place. If the patrons do not feel capable of doing that directly, all they need to do is empower their constituent bodies – their local schools – to do that.

I welcome the delegation from the Department. The report on the work in progress from the Department is much better than the previous ones we have had. The people that have driven this new work programme and its transparent manner must be complimented.

Unfortunately, there are still many schools still caught in what can only be described as a time warp. With regard to the 30% reduction in costs for school accommodation provision and renovation, has the Department accelerated giving accreditation to the new building designs? Such a move could further reduce costs and eliminate much of the time given over to the various building stages.

Several months ago, the Archbishop of Dublin made a widely welcomed statement that his diocese would be willing to withdraw from management and patronage of various existing schools. Has the Department unit responsible for this area taken up this offer? There are certainly shortcomings in the changeover of management in many schools across the country. I shall mention two or three schools. For the past ten years as regards Killimor national school, Ballinasloe, County Galway, there have been ongoing discussions on whether an additional couple of rooms would be added. Of far greater importance, however, is the fact that a site had been acquired and offered for sale to the Department. It could have been acquired for just over €100,000 — and this was the preferred site. Eventually the Department purchased another site for more than twice that cost. As a result there is an enormous delay in addressing the conditions in that school, which are absolutely unbelievable, the overcrowding there and so on. It is of the utmost importance that the Department clarifies the situation.

We can all raise particular cases. Perhaps Mr. Wyse could take note of this and communicate with the Deputy, separately.

Another example is St. Catherine's national school, Aughrim, Ballinasloe, where the provision of a new road——

The Deputy can give us the roll number and then leave us.

My colleague, Senator Fidelma Healy Eames wants a similar briefing on Coláiste na Coiribe, Galway city, and Clifden community school. Perhaps Mr. Wyse could address those, too.

They will all be noted and responded to. Thank you, Deputy.

Mr. Frank Wyse

On the individual schools, my colleagues will respond directly. We have taken note of the schools' names. Mr. Bliss will deal with the technical specifications and so on and the work we are doing, relating, inter alia, to the provision of good quality accommodation of a modular type to replace prefabs.

On the issue of patronage raised by Deputy Burke, statements have been made by certain members of the Catholic hierarchy to the effect that they could foresee circumstances in which they would divest themselves of the patronage of a number of schools. We have specifically written to Archbishop Martin and asked him to identify the specific schools that would be potential candidates for such divesting. The Secretary General of the Department and I have arranged to meet senior members of the hierarchy next week on these very issues. We want to get a sense of what precisely is involved and the hierarchy's view on how such a transfer might take place. We would like, as well, to get a sense of how it might fit into the work we are doing on the recognition of new schools, because part of that relates to potential changes of patronage.

We want to get a sense of what is involved in moving from the principle of divestment of patronage to the practical reality of specific examples.

Is Mr. Wyse talking about the transfer of patronage from one patron to another, and securing the rights of pupils, parents and existing staff?

Mr. Frank Wyse

In essence that is correct. The issues involve finding out whether the hierarchy has specific schools in mind and what we, as a State, should look for. The State would always have to look to the long term, not just ten or 20 years but a very long term in some cases. Any such discussions would need to have regard to the immediate issues to do with the schools, including parental consultation, as well as the long-term issues if such change were to become more widespread.

There are major policy issues in this and major financial issues, too, to be considered. However, we believe, since this has been raised on several occasions by members of the hierarchy, that we need to find out in very specific detail how they envisage this process moving into action.

In talking about discussions with the archbishop, heretofore there was what might be termed an educational officer within the hierarchy. Has Bishop O'Reilly been involved or is it envisaged that he will be included? Who is the meeting with?

Mr. Frank Wyse

Dr. Leo O'Reilly is included, yes.

Archbishop Martin will be there too.

Mr. Frank Wyse

That is correct.

I take Mr. Wyse back to the part of his presentation where he said that any projects that proceeded on site at this stage of the year would incur very little expenditure — with the bulk of expenditure relating to 2010. The Minister told Deputy Hayes and me that most of the building programme would be spent by the end of the year. Is this a change of tack? Does it mean that much of the money allocated for the 2009 building programme will not now be spent? In the event, this could have major implications for projects that have been in line for a long time — and I shall give him a list of the roll numbers at Mayo Abbey and Bonniconlon schools as well, about which he might respond to me privately. He mentioned that this year the summer works scheme had expanded to include insulation efficiency measures, and so on. Have schools a better chance of getting the summer works scheme if they include the insulation component rather than other features that might be covered, such as the refurbishment of a kitchen or whatever?

Mr. Frank Wyse

On the expenditure issue, we expect that the bulk of the money will be spent in 2009. I mentioned, for example, that €28 million will issue to the schools in the normal course of events in November this year for the minor works grant. This happens every year, usually around this time, and for good reasons that have to do with the planning of the schools and so on. That will take care of much of the expenditure. A substantial amount of other activity is ongoing, for example the 1,600 improvements I mentioned under the energy efficiency scheme. The payments for those are now in the process of issuing. We have had to put extra staff into that area.

All of this relates to work carried out in the summer.

Mr. Frank Wyse

All this work was carried out during the summer, and in some cases not just the summer. The work on the energy efficiency scheme, for example, lends itself to being done at weekends, as a relatively short intervention. Those bills are now coming in. We have had to divert staff into that area to process payments and so on.

If there is any money left, we shall obviously need that because projects are changing, as I mentioned in my written presentation. Even yesterday, I believe, a number of schools went on site as they are doing all the time. The amount of expenditure they will incur between now and 31 December will be very small. As the Vice Chairman will be aware there is an "S curve" expenditure model on a capital project, with very little in the initial stages, increasing dramatically in mid-term and then falling off towards the end. That dramatic increase in all of those projects, which have moved from about August-September, will still be on the upward curve, so we anticipate that most of the allocation will be spent. There may be an unspent amount, but there is provision within the capital procedures to transfer up to the 10% of the total amount of money into the following year. If the necessity to use that proviso is there, we will use it.

Schools were asked to prioritise whether they wished to use the summer works scheme under the energy efficiency scheme. It was not unusual that schools would undergo the replacement of a roof or windows and have the energy efficiency part improved. While it is associated with the summer works schemes, many schools would have got the energy efficiency scheme but also some other part, such as the replacement of the roof or windows and so on. Mr. Bliss might just speak on the technical issue relating to Deputy Burke's question.

Will you also address the issue of water conservation? The schools will have to start paying water rates from next year.

Mr. Jonathan Bliss

There are current savings in the tenders coming in of up to 30%, when compared to the height of the construction boom, which was early in 2007. The Deputy also raised the issue of designs and ensuring that the quality is good, and asked whether the money saved from better tender prices is used to best effect. For a number of years, we have had standardised designs in the form of generic repeat designs. We have been developing over the past year or two a range of templates——

I am sorry to interrupt, but the Deputy specifically raised the issue of the various stages which in the past were seen as unnecessarily slow. Will you address that as well?

Mr. Jonathan Bliss

I will indeed. It is related to the reduction in the time it takes to get from the start to the completion of a project. We have been developing standardised designs or template designs. We have highly developed design guidelines. As a result of that, the process from the initial phase through to planning permission is reduced because we have standardised room lay-outs. In some cases where both the site and scheduled accommodation is suitable, we are pretty much able to take a design off the peg and use that. This tends to reduce the period of time, or it will do so in the future.

We have encountered difficulties over the past few months in getting projects through the system to the construction phase. We are quite happy with the GCC forms of contract. As was rightly pointed out, we do not have an option on it. There have been teething problems with it, but that results from a lack of familiarity with the contract and its implications. As a result of that, there was greater need for us to ensure due diligence to make sure that when the projects went out to tender they were of a suitable standard and problems would not occur after the contract. We expect that those problems will be substantially reduced over time. We will not let up on the measures we are taking to ensure that we minimise the time it takes to get the projects to site in a proper manner. That will include further briefing sessions with individual design teams.

We are also considering going out and proselytising a little. By that I mean that we will be going to the institutes and asking who wants to know and that we are prepared to tell them. We are also upgrading procedural guidelines so that rather than have to come and ask us a question, they will be able to download the problem from the web.

I welcome the witnesses today and thank them for their clarity on so many issues. It is great to hear Mr. Bliss talking about going out there and asking who wants to know the story. Our experience in dealing with schools is that it is very easy for everybody to blame the Department of Education and Science. In many cases, we can have difficulties with the outside technical people or with the individual design teams which are not following the instructions given when they go to meetings in Tullamore with the Department. The more clarity on communication, the better. It is our experience that when we sit down at the table and find out, the problem can be closer to home than many of us would like to admit. It is obviously a two-way street, but communication is great and it is good to hear Mr. Bliss talk about that.

Deputy Brian Hayes spoke about local authorities. My experience of local authorities has been quite different. I come from the fastest growing area in the country, according to the 2006 census. I come from a place of a four classroom school to a place of four schools. These had to be obtained by going through all the stages that we are discussing. Our experience with the forward planning division has been very positive as there was much communication with Meath County Council in the development plan process that was very helpful. Mr. Wyse mentioned the circular from August 2008 that went out to local authorities and the Vice Chairman asked whether that was brought to the attention of local authority members, as opposed to the manager. Having been a former local authority member, I would have thought that the manager should put this on the agenda of the monthly meeting under the heading of correspondence, but maybe that has not happened.

To assist the Department to make sure that has happened, this committee should write a letter to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to say that the matter has been raised today. We know that the circular issued from his Department to the county managers and we should clarify that it was brought to the attention of each local authority.

I suggest we write to our colleagues, namely, the chairpersons of all the county and city councils.

Mr. Frank Wyse

The reference for the circular is SP308. It was issued to each county and city manager, each director of planning, each town clerk and An Bord Pleanála on 25 August 2008.

I welcome the Deputy's suggestion, but as we are elected politicians, I suggest we ask the clerk to address the letter to the elected chairperson of each council.

Mr. Frank Wyse

I would not like to give the impression that the local authorities are in any way not forthcoming.

You have not given that impression, I assure you. This is just to make sure that our colleagues at local level are as well informed as the officials working for them.

Mr. Frank Wyse

We would like to see the process develop further. We have internal ideas which we are trying to develop to bring things further.

I would not like to give that impression either. I come from an area where the system is working very well. Whatever way we go about this is fine with me. My message is that the circular was for the attention of the local authority members as well as for the attention of the officials. From my point of view, it is working very well on the ground.

It was stated that any projects proceeding on site at this stage of the year will incur very little expenditure. I am familiar with a project that was announced this week. The builder will be beginning in two weeks, as he has to give such notice to Meath County Council. I understand that all that expenditure will not happen this year, but we are delighted to see that project go ahead. There will always be those projects that carry over.

The discussion on patrons is important. The 40 areas study has been broken down into nine areas of immediate need. Is there a timeframe concerning patrons coming forward to expand their existing schools? When they were written to were they asked to reply indicating whether, as patrons, they were interested? If they have not done so it might be useful to put a timeframe on it.

The second question related to the VECs. They are not the existing patrons and so would not have received that correspondence. However, this committee strongly supports the work the Department of Education and Science is doing on the pilot scheme with the VECs and the two existing community national schools, about which the Deputy spoke. That project is going very well. Mr. Wyse made some interesting comments on the mix of children and that being a good way to deal with these issues. I would certainly see that and also the expertise of the VECs as becoming more and more important. I am also interested to know two additional schools will go forward in 2010, as announced by the Minister. Perhaps Mr. Wyse has the names and location of these.

Under the overall heading of timeframe, we will very quickly get to a point, especially in the developing areas, where we need completion of the pilot scheme. We know that to be next summer. The Bill on education patronage which must move through the Oireachtas is now with the Parliamentary Counsel. We must see all these pieces of the jigsaw put into place so that when we need a new school we will have the nuts and bolts in place, if it is to be a VEC-patronised school. This can happen very fast in some areas, as Mr. Wyse states in the document. There is one such in my area. We are watching to see whether it is for next year or the year after when the legislation will be in place.

I am delighted to hear that progress has been made on all these issues but the timeframe is of importance. The work in this area is good, as is the thinking around it, and the committee very much supports it.

Would Mr. Wyse or his colleagues care to respond to any points made?

Mr. Frank Wyse

Mr. Dalton will respond because many of the issues relate to forward planning. I shall make some remarks regarding the expansion of the new model. While the existing locations are very good they are also very dispersed, as to different religions, and so on. We also want the model to be tested in other areas that might not be quite as dispersed where there might be a different set of issues to deal with in terms of approach. We have not identified the specific schools yet but that work is being done.

Regarding patrons, many have responded but some have not so there is a follow-up process. Perhaps Mr. Dalton might address that matter.

Mr. Tony Dalton

The process with patrons certainly must have a time frame. It cannot go on forever. We had been talking about additionality for September next year. That is the whole purpose of it. When we flagged the 42 or 43 areas to them last Easter we had considerable interaction with many patrons in the key areas. We wrote again a fortnight ago, zoning in on a smaller number of areas and have had communication with several patrons regarding these. However, decisions on those must be taken very quickly and the matter cannot be allowed drag on. We must have it settled this side of Christmas.

Deputy Paul Gogarty resumed the Chair.

If I pick up Mr. Dalton correctly, two additional schools will be provided somewhere in the country in September 2010. We are not quite sure about the appropriate locations but, most probably, each will be in an area where it will test that broad and varied situation, as Mr. Wyse mentioned.

Mr. Frank Wyse

The location will obviously be one of the rapidly growing areas because these are where the new schools will be provided.

From our point of view, it is great to see such a development. I thank the delegates.

I thank Mr. Wyse and his team for the work they are doing. It is extremely impressive. I have some questions that follow the order of Mr. Wyse's paper. Last week the second bundle of six schools in the public private partnership arrangement was announced. It has taken an inordinate length of time to get to the point of identifying the preferred tender. I understand there is to be a third bundle and perhaps subsequent ones. Can we be advised as to whether we have learned lessons from the difficulties that have surrounded bringing us to the point we are at regarding the second bundle? If there is to be a third bundle it should happen more expeditiously than was the case with the current one.

Regarding demographic change, the work done by the rapidly growing areas unit is entirely positive. However, one is struck also by the fact that in a county certain areas will be designated as rapidly growing while areas adjacent to them will not. I was particularly alarmed in the past week when enquiring from the Department about a school that is more than 100 years old. Most of the pupils are accommodated in prefab buildings. When we raised the question of whether this village might look forward to the provision of a new school we were told the Department was concentrating its efforts in the larger centres of population. It is no solace to the manager or the parents in a village community to be told that a new school is to be built four to six miles away in the town. I would like to think I got the wrong message and there is not a change in approach by the Department concerning meeting the needs of small communities.

The point made by Deputy Quinn and others about development plans and a line of communication with the elected members is very important. I would even go so far as to say there would be benefits for the Department of Education and Science in engaging directly, perhaps even on an annual basis, with councils by making a presentation. It has been my experience that the view of the world of the manager and the planning department may be radically different from the view and the knowledge possessed by the elected members. The real benefit that would accrue from that type of engagement would come to the Department of Education and Science.

Regarding local rationalisation, of which quite an amount is happening, two things can occur. We can see the provision of a new purpose-built school with other schools remaining in their existing buildings. The people who move to the new school are thrilled at the state-of-the art facility while those left in the accommodation considered only somewhat fit for purpose probably have been promised an upgrade or improved facilities. However, there seems to be no serious follow up on that element. If we are to achieve the sort of rationalisation we need, which would be in everybody's interest, primarily that of the students, we will not encourage local education communities to buy into rationalisation if some of the partners get left behind.

I had some queries in recent days regarding prefabs because I understand the Department indicated to some schools it wants to buy prefabs that are currently rented. That is very positive but schools are now frightened that the purchase of these by the Department may have some implications for the building programme and the provision of permanent accommodation. Perhaps the delegates might reassure us on that.

The very substantial work done throughout the country in meeting the needs of special needs children and children on the autistic spectrum has seen a number of autism special units set up in existing primary schools around the country. In reply to a written question this week, the Minister indicated that all new post-primary schools will have special needs units included. From the point of view of the planning and building unit, what are the Department's plans to meet the needs in areas where there is an autism unit at primary level? Not all children with special needs can be integrated into the mainstream and therefore there is a consequential need for an autism unit to be provided in the existing post-primary school.

I shall take Deputy Quinn's question.

I will come back to the patronage issue. I am very clear about what the Department is trying to do in new green field areas. It says it will not wait for applications from patrons but will go ahead to build and will allow the patron issue to resolve itself. In existing built-up areas where in many cases there are waiting lists for pupils trying to get into the schools, and issues of prioritisation, whereby patrons will give preference to members of their own community, for reasons with which all members are familiar, as they are entitled to do under the legislation. What can the Department do in respect of such schools? I wish to expand on the point made about the discussions with the Catholic hierarchy on the transfer of patronage. I presume a file exists within the Department on the difficulties that were encountered in the 1960s when the community school projects began to come into existence. This topic is referred to in John Walshe's biography of Paddy Hillery when, for want of a better description, the Brothers were at one end of a town, the Sisters were at the other end and the technical school was in the middle. The same issues, including the ownership of property, job security, the type of curriculum, boards of management and the maintenance of ethos were part and parcel of that experience. It is possible that in some cases, those primary schools that the Archbishop of Dublin deems suitable to be handed over to another patron, which probably but not necessarily will be Educate Together, will be in property located on church ground. Moreover, such property may have been built at a time when its ownership was vested in the particular patron body and not the school itself. I presume a template for dealing with such issues existed in the past. Will it inform how the Department's negotiations and discussions might take place in the future?

I thank Deputy Quinn for chairing this meeting in my absence as I was obliged to attend to an issue. I wish to indicate publicly my support for the letter being issued in my name on behalf of the joint committee in respect of circular SP308 that will go to the Minister and which will be copied to the local authority heads. It is important to have joined-up thinking in respect of this matter. I will not take up any more time with personal comments as I presume they have been made by other members. I invite Mr. Wyse to respond to the final questions.

Mr. Frank Wyse

In response to Deputy Ó Fearghaíl, there have been delays in respect of the PPP bundles. We are working with the National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, to ensure that such delays are minimised. The issues arise because of the great complexity of a PPP project. As the Deputy will be aware from the Portlaoise experience and others in that general area, it is not simply a matter of providing a building. This pertains to a long-term contractual arrangement, which also relates to the upkeep of that building, as well as ensuring the availability of a building in virtually pristine condition for the duration of the contract. While there is a legal element that gives rise to delays, we are satisfied that we can overcome them and curtail the time spent through the use of template approaches based on the experience we have gained in the past regarding the types of issues that are likely to arise, as well as proper documentation. The majority of such schools are in the post-primary sector and, effectively, any 800-pupil to 1,000-pupil post-primary school building is a relatively straightforward and standard building. In general, the level of specialist accommodation tends to be similar. Without creating such a straitjacket that renders the process highly bureaucratic, we consider that such approaches will quicken the process. We have this debate with the NDFA in respect of how such projects should be dealt with on an ongoing basis.

The third bundle includes Coláiste Ailigh, Letterkenny, Ballinamore community school, County Leitrim, a post-primary and a primary school on a single site in Doughiska, County Galway and post-primary schools in Gorey, County Wexford, Tramore, County Waterford and Athlone, County Westmeath. The pre-procurement work on this bundle commenced earlier this year and it is expected that we will be going to the market later this year with a view to construction in 2010. These schools will provide new accommodation for more than 4,000 pupils.

On the issue of schools in rapidly developing areas as opposed to existing schools, the Deputy mentioned a school that is 100 years old. When formulating the programme, we are particularly conscious of this issue because in 2008, for the first time, we had a large rapid response programme to cater for the developing areas. The feedback we received from schools revealed great anxiety that the Department of Education and Science would concentrate on such rapidly developing areas to the exclusion of existing schools. The Department and the Minister are anxious to ensure a proper balance between the needs of existing schools and the needs of developing areas. We have introduced measures such as devolved grants and the option of extending through permanent as opposed to prefabricated accommodation to deal with such issues.

However, in the case of individual projects, it would depend on prioritisation. The Deputy mentioned rationalisation and amalgamation, which probably will be more of an issue for the future in the primary sector. The Department recognises that one must have some mechanism in place to ensure that if one proposes a rationalisation, the capital will follow within a relatively short period. It is for this reason that rationalisation has been made one of the higher priorities in our prioritisation scheme of things. However, it depends on the individual circumstances. While I am not familiar with the specific circumstances of the school mentioned by the Deputy, if a school needs an upgrade and if a rationalisation is involved, and if that upgrade also includes a possible extension to the existing building, that would be given priority in the scheme of things. I am unable to comment further on the individual case because I would need to know more about it.

May I come in at this point? It is important and I would rather deal with it in general rather than in specific terms. Such scenarios invariably result in some partners getting a new school while others stay on-site. If one wishes to gain acceptance into the future of such a level of local co-operation, as well as a move to a new kind of primary level delivery, everyone must get a piece of the cake. As for priorities, the facilitation of the existing school that remains on-site is as important as building the new school and this must be prioritised.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Yes. However, the issue is that where there is no school, a problem exists in that location. We had a serious problem in this regard in 2007 and we took measures to avoid that. Those measures meant there was a certain prioritisation in favour of those areas. However, I emphasise that it does not exclusively pertain to such areas. Many programmes are going to construction that involve, for example, gaelscoileanna that may have been in temporary accommodation for a prolonged period or very old schools. We will continue to include such schools in the programme because there must be a balance. We will not simply include areas in which there are no schools. In some cases, as Mr. Dalton will confirm, the programme identifies the most basic needs of rapidly developing areas. However, that would not necessarily encompass the entire programme. In normal circumstances, there would be plenty of money to deal with the existing stock of schools as well. Moreover, we are highly conscious that the existing stock of schools must be maintained in a proper order. While this goes beyond the capacity of the summer works or minor emergency schemes and so on, it is not always possible to give it quickly. I suspect that in the individual case raised by the Deputy, the issue pertains to timing as opposed to the intent of actually doing something.

As for the question on special needs provision in all schools, as the Deputy noted, this has been included in new post-primary schools. If there is a large unit in a primary school and we do not have immediate plans to provide a new post-primary school in the area, we would give a high priority to the provision of secondary school accommodation in an existing school to cater for those children. As Mr. O'Leary will probably confirm, we have been processing many of these applications in relatively recent times. We realise that it is not just a question of those areas in which there are new post-primary schools. We also need to cater for special education, which is a high priority.

Deputy Quinn asked a question on templates and reverting to the past in terms of the community school sector. Certain lessons could be learned, but those circumstances generally saw an agreed amalgamation between a secondary girls school, a secondary boys school and a vocational school on a new site in the same area, a site that was almost always purchased by the State. All community schools are built on State-purchased sites. At the time, there was much discussion with the hierarchy regarding the type of religious instruction to be given in such a new entity and assurances to cater for it were provided.

The transfer of patronage in an existing school situation is somewhat different. This is an issue to be determined. Are we discussing the transfer of the property to the State? In areas of no growth, a new school might not necessarily be provided. Rather, it may be a simple transfer of the patronage, although some upgrades might be required.

We are operating under the current educational provisions wherein the right to school education in the ethos of the parents' choice is enshrined in our Constitution, which I would not necessarily propose being changed, but there cannot be four primary schools at every crossroads. In built up areas, however, where the Catholic church accounts for 92% of patronage, one could ensure within reason a choice for parents between a gaelscoil, an Educate Together school, a Church of Ireland or Anglican school and a Catholic school. As the census data show, the nature of religious denomination is changing dramatically.

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, when speaking on the radio in the context of another educational debate, suggested that trying to ensure a pluralism of education supply should be one of the principles guiding the Department of Education and Science in the re-allocation of patronage and the facilitation of overburdened patrons. I say "overburdened" in the sense that it is an historical legacy that no longer reflects the contours on the ground. To facilitate this while keeping the day job going, the schools must continue to operate, the pupils be educated and the teachers do their jobs.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Yes. It is a question of diversity from a situation in which there was none. There was simply 100% of the same patronage. I wish to raise an issue of importance to the Department, namely, social inclusion. In this process, we must be careful not to replace a particular type of problem with another. Wherever the State takes over a situation, we must be careful to prevent it from becoming the body responsible for caring for the most disadvantaged segment of society. I am not suggesting that——

I will offer a model from my observance in the Dublin area. Many people who send their children to Catholic schools are not Catholics.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Yes.

Were an alternative Educate Together school provided in an area and a social mix gravitated towards it, it could lift the level of educational achievement within that primary school's student population, given the wider cultural class mix, to be blunt about it, and take pressure off the patrons, be they Roman Catholic or Anglican, of the nearest schools. Many children are driven to school so walking distance is a thing of the past for most. Within a built up urban area, we could remove pressure from existing Catholic schools, which are dominant, and give parents the choice of an Educate Together school for the first time. The other side of Mr. Wyse's concerns about irresponsible social engineering is the possibility of upgrading existing schools by attracting into them people who would not necessarily want to attend them under their present arrangements, but would if they were Educate Together schools.

Mr. Frank Wyse

Absolutely. One could envisage a number of scenarios. To answer the Deputy's specific question, we would consider past experience as a guide to the future. However, the State's role in education has changed substantially since the 1960s and early 1970s. I expect that its role will continue to develop. We are all aware of the situation. In a mundane way, we often initiate the process of providing a school because we know it will be needed. This is a departure from the past.

How the community school model will pan out and affect the configuration of the school system is underestimated. We are watching this matter carefully and it is something that we will——

What of the desirability of a forum on the future of educational impairment?

We will conclude. Mr. Wyse may have more questions to which he wants to respond.

Mr. Frank Wyse

We will go through our notes. If I have missed issues, we can respond in writing to the Chair.

Members made requests about geographical pinpointing.

Mr. Frank Wyse

We will do that, but there may be other general issues.

The clerk informs me that specific schools require responses, which would be appreciated by the members in question. I thank Mr. Wyse and the other officials for attending and briefing us so thoroughly.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.10 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Thursday, 19 November 2009.
Barr
Roinn