On behalf of the committee, I welcome the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin, and her officials. This meeting will consider the Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Education and Science, Vote 26. A proposed timetable for the meeting has been circulated. It will allow for opening statements by the Minister and the Opposition spokespersons, which will be followed by an open discussion on the Supplementary Estimate by way of a question and answer session. I understand Deputy Brian Hayes wishes to make an alternative proposal.
Vote 26 — Department of Education and Science (Supplementary).
I propose we go straight to questions following the Minister's opening statement.
Is that agreed? Agreed. I invite the Minister to make her opening statement.
Go raibh maith agat. Táim buíoch daoibh as ucht teacht anseo. I congratulate Deputy Gogarty on his appointment as Chairman of this committee. I wish the new committee well and look forward to working with it.
I am here to discuss the Department's requirement for a Supplementary Estimate of €100 million this year. My Department has tried to stay within its voted expenditure for the year, which was substantial. While additional spending of almost €170 million is required, primarily for demand-led areas such as pensions and €27.2 million to cover a shortfall in receipts, I am declaring savings of €97 million in a number of areas. This leaves a net supplementary requirement of €100 million. I would like to detail for the committee the main areas that require extra funding and those in which savings have been made. I will go through the subheads concerned in alphabetical order. The areas requiring extra funding are as follows.
On value for money and public policy reviews, subhead A9, approval is sought for €800,000 to be transferred into this subhead from other areas to cover the cost of these reviews. A9 is a new subhead, created in 2007, specifically to highlight the importance of expenditure reviews and value for money initiatives undertaken by Departments, which provide a valuable analysis of Exchequer spending, and to identify the full costs of such reviews. This subhead will now be larger than originally estimated because it was agreed during the year between the Departments of Finance and Education and Science to include a wider range of costs under this heading. All the pay and non-pay costs involved in the reviews are now to be accounted for fully under this new subhead. These costs are, however, a technical re-adjustment of costs from other subheads within the Vote rather than additional expenditure as such. For example, the salary costs of the staff involved in the review are being accounted for under this value for money subhead and will not be a cost on the normal A1 subhead of the Vote.
The next area in which a Supplementary Estimate is being sought is subhead B13 under which an extra €300,000 is being sought for the Royal Irish Academy of Music. This sum is required to meet pay costs arising from the Protection of Employees (Fixed Term Work) Act 2003.
I will now deal with one of the areas requiring a large Supplementary Estimate. Under subheads C9 and D4, €63.6 million is required to meet pension and lump sum payments for retired teachers. Teacher retirements have shown a marked increase in recent years. Between 2000 and 2003, an average of 850 teachers retired annually. In the current year retirements are projected to reach 1,340, the highest ever number of retirements in one year. It marks a continuation of the trend that first emerged in 2004 when retirements increased by about 60% on the previous year. Overall, the pensioner population has increased from about 12,000 in 2000 to over 17,500 today.
The number of teachers reaching the age of 65 years is relatively easy to predict. However, the number who will opt for early retirement in any given year is not. Between 2000 and 2007, annual voluntary retirements ranged from 39% to 60% of overall retirements. The actual yearly number of voluntary retirements has likewise fluctuated from a low of 309 to a high of 745. As a result of prediction difficulties, the number of teachers retiring this year is significantly higher than provided for in my Department's budget for the year, hence the need for a Supplementary Estimate.
In order to improve our projections for future years, the Department of Finance, in conjunction with my Department, has undertaken a detailed examination of expected voluntary retirements. This exercise is in its final stages and preliminary results indicate that the higher retirement levels experienced in recent years will continue for several more years. The final outcome of this work will greatly assist future estimation of annual pension costs. However, there is likely to continue to be some element of variation between estimates and outturn, given that most teachers retire voluntarily before reaching age 65 years.
Under subhead D7, it is proposed to increase by €14 million the allocation to local authorities to meet the higher than expected cost of pensions and retirement gratuities paid by them to former education sector staff employed by institutes of technology and vocational education committees. Under subhead E8, a sum of €600,000 is being sought for the Dublin Dental Hospital to cover pension costs associated with unexpected retirements and the increased cost of medical and dental consumables.
The Grangegorman Development Agency also requires an additional €2.5 million to cover the additional costs in 2007 of the public consultation programme and other start-up costs that were greater than originally anticipated. When the 2007 Estimate was being framed in mid-2006, the board had not held its first meeting and, therefore, it was not possible to anticipate with any significant degree of certainty the costs in 2007 that might be associated with the appointment of master planners and the commencement of the consultation process and other the work of the agency. During 2007, the agency has done considerable preparatory work towards delivery of an overall plan and budget. It has established links with all the relevant stakeholders and established a consultative group as required under section 22 of the Act. It has held a number of very productive workshops and commenced the distribution of over 25,000 leaflets throughout the neighbourhood. It appointed legal and property development advisers to prepare and run two international competitions for the appointment of master planners and technical advisors. This higher than expected level of activity has resulted in the requirement for a Supplementary Estimate this year. As is the case with the value for money subhead, I am seeking Dáil approval because the level of excess is significant when compared with the original allocation.
I will deal with the sum of €88 million in supplementary funding being sought for primary school buildings. Some €30 million of this relates to a technical adjustment arising from the accounting treatment of some advance payments made in 2006. In line with standing practice over many years, my Department believed that once funding had been transferred to the OPW for site purchases and other works, it would be considered as having been spent for the purposes of the education accounts. However, the Comptroller and Auditor General's office considered in a report earlier this year that the funding should only have been considered spent by my Department when the OPW had actually used it up. The upshot is that €30 million which my Department paid to the OPW in 2006 but which was not actually spent by it until this year has had to be considered as 2007 rather than 2006 expenditure. This is just an accounting exercise, which means that the education accounts now show a €30 million saving in this area in 2006 and a €30 million charge in 2007.
The remaining €58 million being sought relates to additional funding for school buildings in order to maintain the strong pace of progress in delivering the building programme and to facilitate site purchases. In managing the programme we have worked hard to ensure there will always be a steady flow of projects ready to proceed to the next stage in order that delays can be minimised and any potential extra investment made available during the year can be used immediately. I am sure committee members will agree that the school building programme warrants the extra supplementary funding being sought.
The final item in which I am seeking a significant change to my Department's Revised Estimates for 2007 involves a decrease of €27.2 million to be applied to the appropriations-in-aid heading of the Education Vote, subhead G. A total of €20 million of this sum relates to lower than expected receipts from the dormant accounts fund as a result of the planned programme progressing slower than originally envisaged. Due to the nature and scale of the measures involved, particularly the small-scale capital grants scheme for disadvantaged schools, the original timeframes identified have proven not to be feasible. As a result, some measures which were intended for 2007 will now be completed in 2008. Again, the change is fundamentally technical and related to timing. The effect of this €20 million saving on my Department's Vote is neutral, as reduced expenditure on the dormant accounts subhead is directly matched by lower receipts from the dormant accounts fund under the heading of appropriations-in-aid.
The other technical adjustment being sought to subhead G reflects the fact that the timescale for some receipts from the European Social Fund will also be later than expected. I stress that there will be no loss of EU aid to the Exchequer. All profiled EU aid will be received but at a later date. While there will be an overall shortfall of €14.7 million in ESF receipts in 2007, a supplementary sum of only €7.2 million is required due to increased appropriations-in-aid receipts elsewhere in the Vote.
I will now deal with areas where savings have been made in the 2007 Education Vote. Apart from dormant accounts fund projects, savings also arise in the areas of schools' ICT projects and the strategic innovation fund largely because of timing factors. The Government is committed to implementing a comprehensive schools ICT strategy. Earlier this year I appointed a strategy planning group to advise me on the prioritisation of measures within the investment set out under the national development plan. Among the issues which the new strategy will address are the upgrading and renewal of hardware, the provision of software and digital content for learning, teacher professional development, curriculum development and technical maintenance and support requirements. The strategy group's report which I expect to publish shortly will provide a strategic focus for the future use of funds. Given that it was considered prudent to await the report before providing for significant extra investment in schools' ICT, there will be a saving of €9 million on subhead B18, current, and €8 million on subhead F5, capital, in 2007.
As members will be aware, the strategic innovation fund was established to support strategic priorities in the higher education sector such as internal restructuring and rationalisation, improved performance management systems, teaching and learning reforms and the promotion of stronger inter-institutional collaboration. There are two reasons for the saving of €60 million in the strategic innovation fund dealt with in subhead EI6 this year. First, progress made by the higher education institutions in the first cycle of SIF has been much slower than was profiled by the institutions at the commencement of the projects. The projects supported have proven to have needed a much longer lead-in time to become established, as they involved a considerable period of preparation and, consequently, the absence of a demand for drawdown on this year's allocation. Second, the call for proposals for the second round of SIF projects issued later in 2007 than had been anticipated, with the result that no projects have yet been approved. It is anticipated that projects will be approved before the end of the year but no expenditure will arise under this cycle this year.
I hope I have given members a good overview of the reasons for the Supplementary Estimate being sought for my Department. As I outlined, the bulk of the extra funding being sought is required to cover the demand-led area of pension payments and desirable additional investment in school buildings. This is in the overall context of a budget of €8.64 billion. I am sure members will agree the Supplementary Estimate required is not a huge amount. I will be happy to respond to any questions they may have.
I thank the Minister for her opening statement. I invite Deputy Brian Hayes to commence questions on subheads under Vote 26.
I welcome the Minister and her departmental officials on her first appearance at this committee. It might be more sensible to ask questions rather than make Second Stage speeches.
In the context of a budget of more than €8 billion, €100 million is not a huge sum of money. None the less, some interesting issues arise from the statement made to the committee by the Minister. I presume the figure of €58 million on the capital side mentioned by the Minister will be included in this year's Estimate. Does the Minister anticipate that any decisions on the schools building programme will be taken between now and the end of the year? In recent weeks, I have heard of 15 cases of schools which had been given an explicit commitment by the Department of Education and Science that a decision to proceed to construction would be taken in November or December of this year, but are still waiting for the decision to be made. Can the Minister tell the committee whether additional decisions will be taken at this stage?
Many schools throughout the country made applications and received fairly firm commitments from the Department earlier this year that decisions would be taken in the latter part of 2007, but are still awaiting approval. I would be interested to hear the Minister's assessment of how these cases will progress between now and the end of the year. She will probably tell me that the programme is a multi-annual one, etc, but we have a responsibility to proceed in the cases of schools which received clear commitments.
The technical adjustment under subhead F1 is being made on foot of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Department of Education and Science got a pretty severe rap across the knuckles in that report for its dealings with the Office of Public Works. The Minister has presented this adjustment to the committee as an accountancy exercise. When did this practice — the normal annual dialogue between the Department and the OPW — first come to the Department's attention? Although the figure of €30 million can be characterised as an accountancy exercise, it is a significant sum in the round. When did the Department become aware of it?
I recently put a question to the Minister about the pensions issue. Some 641 teachers retired early in 2001, but that number increased to 1,060 in 2006. The Minister has told the committee that she expects approximately 1,300 teachers to retire early in 2007. The number of teachers who retire early has virtually doubled over the past five years. Schools will face considerable pressure if experienced classroom teachers throughout the country continue to leave the profession early. The Department of Education and Science will also be under pressure because the sum of money needed to pay for such retirements will grow considerably over the next few years. The reply I received from the Minister indicated that the total cost of early retirements over a period of five years was €783 million, or 10% of last year's budget. We will have to make provision for a significant sum of money as we go forward. I would be interested to hear whether the Department intends to make proposals about how we can encourage teachers to stay in the education system. That so many teachers are retiring from the service early is a great drain on the pool of experience within our schools.
Regarding the Grangegorman Development Agency, as the Minister is aware, the multi-agency proposal that has been made involves a number of Departments. Are other Departments contributing to the promotion of the Grangegorman Development Agency in the same way as the Department of Education and Science? While I accept the agency is primarily a matter for the Department of Education and Science, there is a great deal of private sector involvement in it. Given that the housing market has been deflating over recent months, why has there been such a significant increase in the agency's total running costs? I would have thought that better value for money could have been obtained by the agency, which I presume is working, as prices have decreased. I would be interested to hear the Minister's comments on that matter.
I thank Deputy Hayes. I will begin by commenting on the capital budget. It is probably a sign of the times — I refer to the slowdown in the construction industry — that bills have started to arrive more quickly this year, as we approach the end of the year, than in previous years. A consequence of this development has been the need to engage in increased levels of financial management. Before these circumstances changed, we had been in a position over the last two or three years to tell schools that they could proceed immediately as soon as they reached stage 2 or 3. The new stages of developments had been phasing in prior to the last two or three years. No school has been told it cannot proceed, although some schools were told to wait until after the budget to see how next year's expenditure is shaping up. We will make further announcements after we see what today's budget brings. As schools had got used to everything moving immediately, they were surprised when things started to slow down as we approached the end of the year. It is more of a financial management issue.
The Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the OPW money was published in September. This is not just an issue for the Department of Education and Science — it has also arisen in other Departments for which the OPW works. The Department was required in July 2007 to change its accounting practices in this respect. This is the first chance it has had to do so. It is obvious that this approach will carry through into other years.
The pensions issue is a curious one in many ways. Perhaps it would be helpful for the Departments of Education and Science and Finance to engage in a study of the issue. Teachers choose to retire early for a range of reasons. The average lump sum given to a teacher on retirement is €94,500, which is quite significant after many years in the profession. The average pension received by a retired primary teacher is almost €29,822 and by a retired secondary teacher is €29,268.
People will point to a whole pile of reasons for early retirements by teachers. It might not be popular to suggest that the feminisation of the profession of teaching may be a factor. In many cases, the salary being paid to a teacher may be the second salary within a household. A pension worth almost €30,000 is a significant second salary for any household. That is not the case with most other pensions. I have noticed in recent years that many teachers who are retiring are going into other education-related work, such as ICT, textbook production, software development and educational support industries. Having spent time in the classroom, retired teachers tend to be flexible and capable of filling other positions. At a time of difficulty in other sectors — people are losing their jobs, for example — teachers are reminded that the teaching profession offers security of employment and a pension. That places a great deal of responsibility on the education sector and on teachers, in particular.
Deputy Hayes is right to point out that a significant amount of money from the Department's budget is spent every year on early retirements. Some €1 million is spent every time ten lump sums are agreed. It seems likely that the number of teachers taking early retirement will increase each year, which will put pressure on the system. I have had to come to this committee with a Supplementary Estimate for the pensions sector each year for the last few years. I hope we will be able to estimate the cost of pensions more accurately over the next few years.
Deputy Hayes quite rightly pointed out that early retirements result in a loss of expertise. I agree that it is an issue. It is fortunate that people of a high calibre are being attracted into teaching. It is still the case that people in the top quartile of leaving certificate students are entering our primary teacher training colleges. Top level young people, who are enthusiastic and interested in the profession, are continuing to go into teaching. People involved in the primary sector agree that the additional jobs which have been created in primary schools have helped to rejuvenate the profession. Large numbers of young people are working alongside people who have been in primary schools for many years. While we do not like to lose expertise, it is good to keep rejuvenating the profession. Pension provision will be a big issue in the education sector in the coming years, just as it will be an issue for the country as a whole.
The Grangegorman Development Agency did a great deal of work in its first year. It provided the Department with its work programme for the year, including the strategic plans it was setting out and its budget, etc. It recently appointed legal and property development advisers and, as I indicated, it held an international competition for the appointment of a design team.
Deputy Brian Hayes is probably correct that we will probably obtain much better value for money in construction in the next few years because companies will clamour for this type of work. One must bear in mind, however, that a great deal of valuable property around the city will be sold and proceeds used to contribute to the costs of construction at Grangegorman. While the Exchequer will provide a substantial sum towards these costs, valuable buildings will be sold at Cathal Brugha Street, Aungier Street, Bolton Street, Kevin Street and in Rathmines as the colleges in question will move to the Grangegorman site. The proceeds from their sale will make a valuable contribution to the new facility.
The Department of Health and Children is also involved in the project and has buildings on the site, although I am not certain of its precise contribution to the development of this plan.
As the Minister answered some of the questions I intended to ask, I do not propose to put them to her. She noted the pattern of early retirement in the primary sector and pointed out that high calibre young people are entering the teaching profession. Nevertheless, we are losing substantial experience at a time when the teaching profession and parents are arguing that more staff are needed in classrooms, particularly as there are newcomers in classes in some areas, although not in all primary schools.
The large number of teachers choosing early retirement could be due to lifestyle choices. While the issue is sensitive, it is possible to fill out the rest of the picture for oneself in the case of a hypothetical couple where the man has retired, the woman, who may be younger than her husband, is a teacher and the nest is empty. Is it possible to explore with the relevant stakeholders — principals and the INTO — other options for retaining some of this expertise in the classroom? While we cannot and should not interfere with a person's right to make lifestyle choices, would it be possible to invite those who take early retirement to return to teach in the educational system? Problems arise in the Department of Finance when retirees decide to return to work but there are many examples of people taking this option and mitigating circumstances being accepted with regard to their pensions. A path is available. It may well be that former school principals who no longer want to assume the responsibility of being principal — in many cases, this is a nightmare position — would be happy to return to classroom teaching on a part-time basis with reduced income if the position could be made to fit their needs.
In any kind of business one loses a professional skilled workforce at one's peril. The skills of the teaching profession have been manifestly endorsed by the OECD report covered in today's newspapers. Detailed analysis is needed to identify the reasons teachers are leaving the profession. While some of us are anecdotally familiar with these reasons, it is possible that anecdotes do not give the real picture. I ask the Minister to elaborate on the study by the Department of Finance.
Oireachtas Members from my party and our spokesperson on education have received telephone calls from staff at schools which were told to slam on the brakes and not proceed with construction projects. When will they receive a call to tell them to restart works? It is important in psychological terms that they are given the green light before Christmas, otherwise momentum will be lost not so much in terms of time, but in terms of perception. Given that some of the schools in question are raising funds to try to augment the process, it will be very difficult to maintain morale among parents, students and teachers if they are forced to wait until after Christmas to find out if the project will be allowed to proceed.
To summarise, we need a qualitative analysis of how we retain the expertise and skills of teachers who are taking early retirement for lifestyle reasons. The Minister will know by the end of business today what will be the allocation for her Department. In light of this, when will schools, which have received telephone calls telling them to wait until the Department finds out what funds are allocated in the budget for capital projects, be given the green light?
On the Deputy's final question on school buildings, I understand that only 30 schools with ongoing funded projects received a call informing them to hold on. Nobody was told to stop. All capital expenditure projects must be phased and planned. Much will depend on further announcements later today. I appreciate the Deputy's comments in this regard.
The pensions issue remains curious. The programme for Government includes a commitment to examine the issue raised by Deputy Quinn concerning school principals who do not want to remain in their posts for the long term. If a principal returns to the teaching staff, he or she will lose his or her seniority and returns to the bottom of the pile, as it were. Issues always arise in this regard with the Department of Finance. One has principals who are ready to retire and others who want to return to the teaching staff for a set period, but do not build up sufficient time to be able to add a sufficient amount to their pensions. We have undertaken to examine this issue.
The teaching profession facilitates staff who wish to stay on in the profession. Job sharing and career breaks are very attractive options for teachers, particularly those who wish to maintain their expertise. It is possible to work for three days or five mornings per week and this facility is more widely available in education than elsewhere. However, some boards of management do not want so many teachers to avail of job sharing. I recently spoke to representatives from a second level school which has five teachers on job sharing. The teachers in question are delighted because it fits in with their lifestyle. While the school retains the expertise of these teachers, the other members of staff have their timetables changed to suit them. The board of management argued that it cannot continue to facilitate this situation.
I hope the study on early retirement will show what progress can be made. We do not know the answers to questions on the who, why and what.
Many principals are contacting the Department's leadership support service which has expanded significantly in recent years and its in-service team. Some have been doing in-service training on the primary curriculum and some in post-primary individual subject areas. We have a range of leadership programmes, including Misneach and Tánaiste, for prospective principals and deputy principals. The experience of principals who join these programmes may be lost to their respective schools but it is not being lost to the education system. They are not the teachers who are taking early retirement.
There is no easy solution to the problem of early retirement. When we first examined the issue, it appeared that the timing was related to benchmarking. Many teachers waited until the benchmarking payments were made before retiring. We anticipated that the numbers retiring would decline the following year but this did not occur. It is probable that a large number of teachers will retire following the next benchmarking process, although this will depend on the outcome. Teachers are waiting on the report before making a decision on retirement. I hope the joint study with the Department of Finance will identify issues that will enable us to determine how best to manage the problem.
The two main Opposition spokespersons waived their right to make opening statements and have asked questions. I propose to take questions from other Deputies. Opposition spokespersons may also ask a brief supplementary question.
I join the Chairman in welcoming the Minister and her officials and congratulate her on doing her job extremely well. On retirement, the Minister expressed hope that an exercise being undertaken by the Department will provide a more accurate prediction of numbers. What does this exercise entail and on what grounds is she confident that it will be any more accurate than previous estimates produced by her Department?
Some teachers do not want to retire at 65 years but are required to do so. Will the Department examine the Green Paper on pensions and survey teachers to determine how many of them are willing to continue in the profession until the age of 70 years? In my experience, many retired teachers are available for substitute work after they retire. We should be flexible. I accept the point made by Deputy Quinn. We are losing vast expertise. These are individuals who are enthusiastic and want to remain in the system but, effectively, they have been told they have to go. Would the Department be in favour of this approach?
I am disappointed that the ICT strategy has not been finalised yet and that the money allocated for its roll-out has not been spent. Is it expected that money will be spent next year, because many schools have been waiting for it to be spent? Some schools are waiting urgently to upgrade their software and hardware, in particular. I hope money can be spent in the coming year.
Under subhead G, the Minister has referred to the fact that due to the nature and scale of the measures involved, the original timeframes identified have proven not to be feasible. Will she elaborate on the reasons for this? Is it the fault of the applicant schools or the Department? Schools that have made applications are waiting to hear about other parts of the scheme and have contacted me. I do not know if other Deputies have been contacted. I hope the schools in question will hear soon. Will the Minister indicate why it was not possible to ensure the money could be allocated?
On the question of early retirement for teachers, it would be a terrible mistake on the part of the Department of Education and Science if it identified the reasons as being mainly connected to the availability of lump sum payments and financial incentives to retire early and find alternative employment or activities in which to engage in a private capacity. It should initiate a study of teachers who want to retire early. I have spoken to some former colleagues in the profession.
The Department has never been serious about in-service career development. I previously mentioned to the Minister that when a curriculum change was introduced at junior certificate level in recent years, funds were not made available to those delivering the service, let alone teachers subsequently to implement the changes.
I previously cited the example to the Minister of a commerce and IT related presentation where the co-ordinator of the in-service training module had to compromise by drawing keys on a piece of cardboard, as a computer keyboard was not available for demonstration purposes. That will remain with me forever. Approximately 40 commerce teachers, as they were then known, attended that in-service training session. They were almost at the point of walking out because of the way they were treated.
Until such time as the Department devises an initiative for a properly funded in-service training programme, early retirement will always be a factor. Currently, a significant number of teachers want to get out of the profession and they are not necessarily those close to retirement. Younger teachers also want to change career because of the pressures on them. As previous speakers stated, this is a serious loss to the profession in terms of experience and qualifications.
Presentation in science, commerce, IT and maths has changed significantly. These matters were highlighted to the Minister only yesterday. It is important to provide proper in-service training, otherwise we will have a continuing drain on resources. The Minister is living in a fantasy world if she thinks we can have teachers in classrooms up to the age of 70 years, even in a temporary capacity. The necessary funding must be provided for in-service training, not a shoestring budget.
I invite the Minister to scotch the strong rumours regarding funding for school buildings. It is said most of the funding for school buildings for the coming year will be concentrated in the greater Dublin area where, no doubt, the need is greatest. However, there has also been major population growth in other areas. One of the most important initiatives undertaken by the Department's building unit in recent years relates to allowing reasonably small projects to go ahead at local level. This has been a major advantage to such projects, rather than simply adding them to a long list. Tremendous progress has been made in providing extensions to many small schools. I hope the Minister will review the matter and raise the ceiling for such projects. This would allow such valuable projects to continue on a wider basis than that on which the pilot scheme operates.
Work at some schools has been pushed down the list following a review of population trends. It has been said this is merely a delaying tactic to put off work on these projects.
I welcome the Minister and thank her for her contribution. As a deputy principal, retirement is a very controversial issue, especially when experienced teachers, particularly male teachers, leave. In many cases, male teachers are replaced by female teachers, which has significant consequences for school life.
In the light of analysis carried out on the number seeking early retirement, can we examine the supports which might encourage them to remain at work? Many schools have a strict policy on the number who can apply for job sharing. It can be very controversial when one person is allowed to job share and another is turned down. There is also a difficulty in finding a replacement with the expertise in the right subject area. This causes significant problems for boards of management, especially in minority subject areas.
I welcome the level of in-service training provided for managers. When I became a deputy principal, I received only two days in-service training. Subsequently we were in a position to participate in the Misneach or Tánaiste programmes under which persons who had taken early retirement remained in the education sector. They are the experienced practitioners from whom new, up and coming school managers need to hear. In-service training is every deputy principal's logistical nightmare in terms of facilitating the release of teachers, keeping parents, students and all the stakeholders happy and trying to acquire subject-matched substitutes. While in-service training is very important and necessary, we need to determine how best we can deliver top quality in-service training for teachers while continuing to deliver the programme for the students whom teachers are obliged to teach.
Deputies Hayes, Quinn and Burke mentioned the hold-up affecting schools building projects and the schools that received a phone call to put the brakes on. Given the recent announcements concerning schools in rapidly developing areas, what are the implications for schools in rural areas that have been on the waiting list with a view to commencing projects for the past seven to ten years? Representatives of some rural schools tell me they are despairing over the tightening budget and the fact that schools must first be built in the rapidly developing areas. Considering the length of the waiting lists, the money being spent by the Department on prefabs etc. would be sufficient to build the required schools in some cases. Health and safety issues arise in many schools. Does the Minister have any hope for schools that are not in areas with rapidly growing populations? The rapidly growing areas are receiving attention at present.
Will the Minister comment on the increase in the retirement rate of teachers? This has certainly featured since the second level teachers' strike some years ago over the fact that their vocation or voluntary input was ignored.
Should we not consider increasing the grants for choirs and orchestras in schools, which grants are made available to school managers? Not enough is being done in this regard.
The Minister referred to 30 schools.
Fifteen.
I met representatives of 15 schools in the course of the past three weeks. One thing about this job is that people find one quickly if they have concerns to raise. Deputy Quinn is obviously waiting for an announcement in today's budget on the capital programme for next year. Will a global announcement be made in respect of the 30 schools between now and 31 December?
I thank the Deputies for their questions, which I will group according to subject. On dormant accounts, Deputy Behan's remarks raise a number of points because they fall under a number of headings. For example, 447 outdoor play facilities were approved while only 56 are complete. In the case of the latter, it is the schools that have not completed the projects and we therefore cannot spend the money. On the other hand, applications were made for parents' rooms, libraries etc., but the applicants requested a total of €114 million and there was no way they could all be facilitated under the scheme. The recommendation received was that the dormant accounts moneys be put back into the building fund of the Department of Education and Science. We will continue to examine this in the context of dormant accounts.
Another example of spending concerns dual-use physical education halls. The money is being spent this year but not to the extent originally anticipated. Halls were built in Crumlin, Clondalkin, Firhouse, Palmerstown and Killinarden. I do not know the original arrangement made between the Departments but ultimately it fell to my Department to try to staff the programme in addition to the other tasks. Agreements were finally reached with Dublin City Council and the vocational education committees. There was a delay at first but the work is now done — the first tranche of expenditure pertains to this work.
Another heading in respect of dormant accounts concerns the access programmes for the institutes of technology, for which money was put aside. They did not produce their schemes on time but the expenditure will be rolled out next year. At least the dormant accounts funding is not lost — it will be rolled out. The same applies to the ICT money. When the strategy is published shortly, there will be a revised profile pertaining to the ICT money over the lifetime of the national development plan. Again, the same amount of money will be spent.
On in-service career training, times have changed since Deputy Burke's time and the bit of cardboard.
Not much.
The amount of in-service training nowadays is very substantial. The whole primary school curriculum took from 1999 until this year to implement in full. Every primary school teacher was trained in each of the subject areas. It was very intensive and different subjects were taken each year. That was very valuable.
Deputy Conlon, on the basis of her experience, referred to the management of the training of principals and deputy principals. Consider in-service training for the introduction of new curricula. A very substantial investment was made in respect of the science and technology subjects introduced this year. The focus was not only on the introduction of the courses and the necessary equipment but also on in-service training. This will continue and there is therefore a substantial budget heading for in-service training. It is very valuable given that there was no such training for teachers for years. I spent 17 years teaching and if I were still doing so, I would still be looking for an in-service course on history or Irish. We have addressed this because it is an important part of in-career development.
Deputy Conlon made a point on the wider issue of in-service days. Secondary schools operate for 167 days and primary schools for 183. In-service activity and exams are included in these periods. There is a lot to be said for making in-service days additional, but this would involve labour-relations and contract issues. Where heavy demands are placed on teachers by a school curriculum, it is very difficult not to keep eating into the time allowed. In this regard, management bodies are constantly telling us they would like oral exams to be conducted during the Easter holidays. As a society, we are putting terrible pressure on schools to deliver all the solutions to all the problems while at the same time we want to eat into class contact time and teaching time. These are very important issues that need to be discussed over the coming years.
The fact that we are looking for more money today for the building programme demonstrates that it is proceeding very well throughout the country. It is significantly ahead of profile and the number of small schools completed in recent years is very significant. There will be pressures on the building programme for the next few years because of the rapidly developing areas but we always have a priority list. We always had a band 1 priority list that incorporated developing areas, special schools and amalgamated schools and a band 2 list that focused on greatest needs. We will continue to follow that but a substantial amount of money will go to ensuring developing areas receive priority. That could include Galway equally with Fingal because there has been significant growth in various areas. Further announcements will be made after the budget.
Will they be made between before 31 December?
There will be general announcements first. Specific announcements will follow.
I appreciate the Minister's broad analysis and knowledge of the education sector but the specific question is whether the 30 people who were told to put things on hold will be told what is happening before 31 December?
All decisions and announcements are conditional on the budget which I will not pre-empt.
I am not asking for the details of the budget but if the Minister knows that the money will be available, will she inform the teachers and schools in question before Christmas? That is a straightforward question.
I will make all announcements after the budget.
That is outrageous.
With respect, the budget will be announced at 4 p.m. today.
The Minister is missing the entire point.
I remind Deputy Quinn and the Minister that we are limited to considering this issue. The question was answered and while I understand the Deputy may not be happy with the response, within the committee we cannot make any proposals to increase or decrease the Estimates. We can only consider them and raise issues within that consideration.
On behalf of the select committee, I thank the Minister and her officials for attending. I hope to see members in the Fire restaurant at 12.30 p.m. for the joint committee's Christmas lunch which might be interrupted by one or two divisions.