Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Select Sub-Committee on Education and Skills díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 22 Jan 2014

Vote 26 - Department of Education and Skills (Revised)

I welcome the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, and Minister of State, Deputy Cannon. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the 2014 Revised Estimates for public services, Vote 26 - Department of Education and Skills.

With the agreement of members, Deputy Butler will assume the Chair for approximately 15 minutes. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Ray Butler took the Chair.

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Quinn, and his officials to the meeting. The Revised Estimates contains information on how money allocated to each programme will be spent in 2014, along with the Estimate for 2013; the number of staff assigned to work on each programme in 2014 and how this compares with the previous year; performance related information, including departmental key outputs and context and impact indicators for 2014, together with the corresponding information for 2013; and a summary of the appropriations-in-aid and administration expenditure for the Vote as a whole.

Consideration of the Revised Estimates provide us with an opportunity to review the targets set out and whether the distribution of moneys across the Vote is appropriate in all the circumstances and demonstrates best use of resources. The timetable for today's meeting has been circulated. It allows for a brief opening statement by the Minister, followed by discussion on each programme listed in the Revised Estimates. Is the timetable agreed? Agreed. I now invite the Minister to make his opening statement.

A copy of my opening statement, if not already circulated, will be circulated soon. I thank the committee for the opportunity to present to it the 2014 Estimate for the Department of Education and Skills. I propose to make a short opening statement and I am happy to provide further detail, as required, as we work through the Estimate. I also make the observation that we are having this debate in regard to expenditure for 2014 while still in the month of January 2014. Last year, because of a different timetable we met in June to consider expenditure for 2013.

The net sum proposed for my Department for 2014 is €7,848.5 million, made up of current expenditure of €7,304.7 million and capital expenditure of €543.8 million. The allocation for current expenditure incorporates net pay related savings of €177 million under the Haddington Road agreement. In addition to voted expenditure, there is a non-voted allocation for this year of €362 million under the national training fund.

My Department has supplied some briefing material regarding the Estimate, which members will have received. This material supplements the content of the Revised Estimates volume published on 18 December last, much earlier than usual. Deputies will be aware of the changes made to the overall budgetary timetable, including the introduction of an October budget. Notwithstanding the teething problems that accompany such changes, the bringing forward of the budgetary process provides for much earlier Oireachtas involvement in relation to the budget. The year 2014 will be the second year for which my Department's Estimate follows the new performance budgeting format, with expenditure shown across the Department's four high level goals. The expenditure information is supplemented with broader detail on programme outputs and outcomes, widening the scope of the Estimates process.

On current expenditure, Deputies will note that almost €6.2 billion of my Department's gross current expenditure allocation of €7.9 billion for 2014 will go on pay and pensions. This equates approximately to €4 in every €5. This is not surprising given that about one third of all public sector employees are in the education sector, with some 92,000 whole-time posts spread across that sector. In addition, there are some 2,700 civil and public service posts in other education bodies and agencies. The pension bill pays lump sums and the pensions of some 42,500 retired people.

In addition to providing expenditure details in respect of each subhead area, the Estimates and briefing material gives information regarding the main outputs to be achieved under each of the Department's high level goals. Information is also provided on savings measures introduced to maintain education expenditures within their overall ceiling. These measures were required in order to ensure that the overall Government deficit position remained inside the GDP limit of 5.1% for 2014. The current estimate for 2014 takes account of savings and expenditure reductions of some €44 million. I am happy to discuss these in the examination of the relevant expenditure programmes.

Implementation of certain measures announced as part of previous budgets will also continue during 2014. While the preference would be to avoid taking any such measures, the reality is that we are still in the process of restoring our economy equilibrium. However, we are getting there. I have also sought with my Department to prudently balance and manage education expenditures across the 2012 to 2014 period, which is the period covered by the last comprehensive expenditure review. Work will shortly commence on a new expenditure review to cover the years ahead.

Notwithstanding the requirement to secure savings on expenditure, budget 2014 has again sought to protect front-line education services as far as possible. The pupil-teacher ratio in non fee-charging schools at primary and post-primary levels has been protected for the third year in a row. The 2014-15 year will see up to a net additional 1,400 teachers recruited to schools, providing positions for newly-qualified and unemployed teachers. Two thirds of these will be mainstream teachers, while one third will be resource teachers supporting children with special educational needs. In addition, I secured agreement for the recruitment of up to an additional 390 special needs assistant posts by 2014-2015, on top of the earlier ceiling of 10,575 posts.

The 2014 allocation includes seed capital funding, using proceeds from the national lottery licence transaction to allow primary schools without book rental schemes to set up such schemes. This will assist in reducing back-to-school costs for parents. I remain determined to push ahead with important educational reforms and in this regard have provided a further €9 million in 2014 to sustain the literacy and numeracy strategy. I am also providing approximately €5 million towards the reform of the junior cycle. Deputies will be aware that the junior certificate will be replaced with the new junior cycle student award. I also expect that high speed broadband will have been rolled out to all second level schools by September of this year, in time for the start of the academic year. My Department's expenditure programme for 2014 will continue to provide funding for training and reskilling, both for those in employment and for those seeking work. In order to help tackle youth unemployment, a minimum of 2,000 training places will be ring-fenced on the Momentum programme for under 25s who are out of work in 2014, at a cost of €6 million.

On capital Expenditure, my Department's €544 million capital expenditure allocation for 2014 will be in the main used in the ongoing delivery of the five-year 2012-2016 school building programme. This involves 275 major school building projects and an additional 80,000 school places to meet continuing demographic increases. The allocation includes some €65 million under the Government's stimulus initiatives of 2012 and June 2013. These initiatives include enabling works for the development of the new DIT campus at Grangegorman and 28 additional school building projects. There are 70 school projects scheduled to commence construction this year as part of the five-year plan, delivering over 27,500 permanent school places, of which some 21,000 are additional places. The projects will support 3,200 direct jobs and 640 indirect jobs in 2014. Projects include, 22 new schools and 12 extensions at primary level, 12 new schools and 20 extensions at second-level, and three new special schools and one major special school extension. Together with the school projects already announced under the jobs and investment package last June, and other ongoing projects from 2013, this means that a total of 168 major school projects will be on site in 2014. This represents significant investment by any measure. As 2014 progresses, projects scheduled to begin construction in 2015-16 will be assessed by my Department to see if any are ready to go to construction earlier than planned, and if there is financial scope to do so.

Funding of over €60 million is also contained in the capital allocation for investment in the devolved additional accommodation scheme. This enables applications by schools for additional classrooms to be considered where an immediate enrolment need in the area is identified. As part of the prefab replacement initiative that I launched in 2012, I announced a further phase of prefab replacements in June 2013. The overall result of this initiative will be that a further 2,600 students in primary and second level schools around the country will move into permanent accommodation from prefabs in 2014. This second phase of the initiative will cost some €15 million.

Despite funding constraints, I was also pleased to reintroduce the summer works scheme in 2014. This funding package of over €40 million is being made as part of this Government's continued commitment to improve facilities in schools throughout the country. These works will be carried out in schools over the summer months, so the disruption to schooling will be kept to a minimum. Funding from the summer works scheme will allow schools to carry out small and medium scale building works such as gas, electrical and mechanical works, roof and window upgrades and other structural improvements. Primary schools are also benefiting in the 2013 and 2014 school year from the payment of the minor works grant. The €28 million made available to schools last November will enable such schools to undertake small scale repair works without the need to contact the Department.

I do not intend at this point to go into further detail regarding my Department's Estimate. l am happy, together with the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, to respond to any matters raised by committee members. I commend the Revised Estimate to the committee.

We will now consider the Revised Estimate and proposed expenditure and performance for 2014 by programme. To get our discussion under way, we will first consider programme A, second and early schools education. I refer the members to page 7 of the Department's briefing material and page 8 of the document from the committee secretariat.

At the outset I thank the Minister, Deputy Quinn, for coming here today along with the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon. I also thank the officials for the preparatory work put into the briefing documents that have been put before us today. I thank the clerk to the committee for the briefing and assessments done by the secretariat for the Revised Estimate.

There are a few questions in general relating to heading A. The Minister indicated in his opening statement that €5 million is allocated this year for training for the junior certificate reform. What exactly does that encompass? Until last week the plan was for a day's training this year in advance of September for English teachers, and there was nothing planned for whole-school training or buy-in with regard to seminars. I know from last week's working group that it was suggested that one day of training for English teachers is to be expanded to one and a half days of training before September, and there was also a suggestion that schools may take one day for the whole school, with all teachers doing a day of in-service. I presume it will be in a school. What are the cost implications of that and does the €5 million cover it? Will the Minister elaborate on that?

There is a summer works scheme and minor works grant, and the Minister indicated that the minor works grant was paid in November to schools. Was it paid to all schools in November? I presume, if it was, it came from last year's Vote. I am not sure of the exact figure but it was approximately €28 million. Where did the Minister find the €28 million? It is a significant sum, although it may be a small percentage of the overall education budget. It is still not easy to find. Where was the funding sourced, as it was not indicated earlier in the year? It certainly was not in last year's Estimate. I presume it has come from the 2013 budget line. I assume the summer works scheme will come from the current year's Estimate. Where is the Minister finding the additional space in order to be able to pay for the summer works scheme this year? Is there anything in the 2014 Estimate to pay a minor works grant in 2014? With the 2013 Estimate and provisional outturn, the initial estimate for pensions was €1.128 billion but it came in at €26 million less, coming in at €1.102 billion. How did that change come about that led to an underspend in pensions?

Last year, we had a disagreement on resource teaching hours - the Department was going to cut resource teaching allocations. The allocation is currently at 0.85 and the Department was proposing to bring it down to 0.8 of an hour for every hour allocated. Will the Minister assure us the figure will remain at 0.85, and that there is sufficient provision in the Estimate to be able to cater for that? The new residential institutions statutory fund has seen the establishment of a board but it has not yet started to pay out any funds. What is specifically allocated in the Revised Estimate this year for that and how much, if any, is expected to be paid from that fund this year?

Over the course of the past year there has been a couple of schools from the private and fee-paying sector, particularly Kilkenny College and Gormanston College, which have moved to the free scheme sector. The Minister has made very significant cuts to the pupil-teacher ratio for the schools. Will the Minister elaborate on the cost to the Exchequer of those colleges and what the net difference will be to the Exchequer if those colleges join the free scheme sector rather than remain as fee-paying schools?

The Minister has indicated that he plans to bring high-speed broadband to all secondary schools by the end of September. We all agree that we have not yet achieved that goal of all secondary schools having high-speed broadband. Will he give an outline of the current position for broadband in primary schools and what is planned to expand provision for them? The Minister mentioned funding that he is allocating this year for transferring accommodation from prefabs, with €15 million outlined for 2014 for doing away with prefab accommodation and transferring pupils to permanent accommodation. What will be left after that?

After that, how many students will continue to be educated in prefab accommodation? Can the Minister give a figure for the estimated total cost in the coming year for the rental and maintenance of the prefabs that students currently must use?

Deputy McConalogue covered almost everything, but I have some brief questions on policy issues. How is the action plan on bullying progressing and how is the success of its roll-out being measured? Perhaps the Minister would give an update on it. Also, will he outline how the guidelines on mental health are proceeding? How is the Department measuring their success or lack of it?

With regard to the reform of the junior cycle, a reply I received recently to a parliamentary question stated that it would cost approximately €10 million in total to implement it. It is expected to cost €5 million this year. Deputy McConalogue asked some of the relevant questions about that, but perhaps there could be more discussion of it. Obviously, that is important in view of the current impasse between teachers and the Department regarding its roll-out.

With regard to the value for money report on SNAs, one of the key outputs for 2014 is to provide other supports for pupils with special educational needs and to further implement the recommendations of the value for money report on SNAs. Can we get more detail on that? What elements of the report is the Minister hoping to implement in 2014 and at what cost?

As regards DEIS, I read recently that the Minister is in discussions with the Minister of Education in Northern Ireland, whose Department is looking at the DEIS model. As far as I am aware, there were some discussions between both Departments on how to evaluate the success of DEIS. I recall that when I was speaking to the Minister, Mr. John O'Dowd MLA, he said the Department was examining some cross-Border initiatives particularly in respect of schools in disadvantaged areas and it was looking at the DEIS model in this State and, perhaps, taking on board the lessons that have been learned and implementing it in the North.

I had noted a question on early school years education but I cannot locate it now. I will return to it later. With regard to the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, the target for last year was that the NEPS would be available to approximately 95% of the target population and this year we intend to roll it out to all schools. Will that target be reached this year? The target for 2013 was 95% of the target population and one of the key outputs for this year is that it will reach all ordinary and second level schools.

On Question Time yesterday we discussed the funding for the book rental scheme. It is €5 million over three years which is coming from national lottery funds. Again, could we discuss that a little further? The Minister said yesterday that he would consider the possibility of getting more information during the course of 2014 and reviewing the scheme at the end of this year, to see if we could help schools that have school book rental schemes but are in the very early stages of getting them off the ground.

I might have further questions based on the Minister's replies.

Any other questions?

I had a few but they have been asked, so I will not duplicate them.

Chairman, I have a final question on the capitation grants. There is a reduction again this year, yet the amount of funding allocated for capitation grants has increased. I presume that is due to an increase in the student population. Will the Minister clarify that?

A number of questions have been asked and I will answer them as best as I can. If I do not give a complete reply, we can return to them, subject to the rulings of the Chair.

Junior cycle reform was raised by Deputies McConalogue and O'Brien. The first meeting of the national working group on junior cycle reform, as I said yesterday, took place last Friday. I would have preferred it to have taken place on the Friday at the end of June but due to the industrial relations difficulty with the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland, ASTI, at that time, it was not possible.

What about the Department?

We took the decision that the union had taken itself offside and was not in a position to discuss it with us and we did not want to prejudice the outcome, frankly. It was decided that we could not have that meeting while the ASTI was in that place.

Was the roll-out of junior cycle reform reliant on the union accepting the Haddington Road agreement at the time?

It was, in effect. It had an effect on getting clarity. One of the two unions, the Teachers Union of Ireland, TUI, had voted for the acceptance of the Haddington Road agreement, but the advice I received, which I accepted, was that to try to attempt to do something in the context of the ASTI standing back and not balloting its members until September was likely to jeopardise constructive talks, so we were unable to commence them. It was not that the union refused to talk or that we deliberately stopped talking to its representatives. We believed that given the context it would have been prejudicial, perhaps, to an overall outcome in that regard. It was a judgment call rather than a hard decision. Nevertheless, I accepted that judgment and I am responsible for the final decision.

Notwithstanding that, it is expected that there will be meetings of the group, starting from last Friday, every three to four weeks over the next few months and thereafter while the new junior cycle is being phased in. In that context, three sub-groups have been established to address: continual professional development; assessment or moderation, as both words are used - that is, how one measures and assesses students as distinct from examinations; and resources for schools. This new working group will be a forum where the concerns of the parents, including the teachers, can be heard. The concerns raised can be addressed through dialogue, to enable the successful implementation of junior cycle reform to proceed over the next number of years. The sub-group on resources is due to meet next Friday, 24 January. The next meeting of the group is scheduled for 7 February.

This builds on the regular engagement and meetings with education partners since the launch of the framework in October 2012. The talks have not started now. They are a continuation of talks that commenced after the launch in 2012. The working group is made up of representatives from the parent bodies, management bodies, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, officials from the Department of Education and Skills, and the two teachers' unions ASTI and TUI. Since this is the junior cycle, the Irish National Teachers' Organisation, INTO, is not involved.

Originally, English teachers were to receive three days of continual professional development, and Deputy McConalogue referred to this. This has now been extended to four and a half days. Other subjects will be provided with an additional day, which is an increase from three days to four days. In addition, a whole-school day will be provided each year, so the whole-school team can have continual professional development together and develop a whole-school approach to the implementation of the new framework. This means that the school will close for pupils, but will remain open for the teaching and support staff to devote the entire day to discussing the items I have just described.

The NCCA will provide schools will resource materials. The teachers' education centres around the country, numbering approximately 12, will provide additional elective opportunities for continual professional development, CPD. Teachers can go to these centres and participate in CPD courses. The Department will continue to fund subject associations, such as the History Teachers' Association of Ireland and Association of Teachers of English, so they, too, can augment the opportunities available to teachers. It is not just three days increasing by one and a half days. Additional facilities are being made available as well.

I will turn now to the phasing-in of the junior cycle. Change for the junior cycle will happen in a planned and measured way. We will assess progress as we go along and if we can report good progress, we might consider speeding it up or if we are running into difficulties, we can slow it down. That is built into the system. Phasing-in as proposed in the framework for the junior cycle has been changed from what was originally planned. Only English will be introduced in September this year.

The phasing-in of the other subjects will be lengthened so that there will be fewer subjects coming on in each year over the next seven years. The final suite of subjects will be introduced for first years entering the system in the year 2019-2020. We believe it will allow schools more time to adjust and will ensure that the pace of change does not outstrip the system's capacity to absorb it.

In order that areas of concern can be given adequate time for resolution it is now proposed that the pace of the roll-out of reform be amended as follows, and I can make the documentation available to Deputies should they so wish. For the start of the next academic year, 2014-15, which will commence in September, a revised English curriculum will be introduced for students entering first year next September 2014. Short courses will be introduced only for those schools that are happy to do so in September 2014. Deputies will be aware that when the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment tried to test this particular junior cycle reform it asked for co-operation from participating schools. It sought 40 schools to participate in the exercise in order to get a spread of schools and received 120 applications. That proves that there was a lot of interest in the scheme. It is anticipated that the schools that have experience of working the system are likely to want to use short subjects. There is no compulsion on any school to use short subjects and it is a matter for themselves to decide. For young students with learning difficulties, level 2 priority learning units will be available to schools that wish to implement them. It will be the first time that we have a grade for students with clear learning difficulties. That is what shall happen in 2014-2015.

In 2015-2016, the following year, when these young people start second year, what has happened will be added to, namely a revised science curriculum will be introduced for students entering first year in September 2015 rather than a group of three subjects as was previously planned. We had planned to introduce three but we slowed it down to one, which is science.

In 2016-2017, the following year, revised curriculums in business studies and Irish will be introduced for students commencing in September 2016 and not the original year of 2015.

Standardised testing in English and mathematics will take place in the spring of 2017 - the junior certificate exam month. The testing will be introduced in spring of 2017 for second year students and I am sorry to have misled the committee on the matter.

Members will be familiar with standard testing of students in primary school taking place at second class, fourth class and sixth class. Now, for the first time, there will be standardised testing in second year, as well as another group. It will be introduced and will complement the assessment work that has been done under the Programme for International Student Assessment, PISA. It will provide a regular snapshot of where we are nationally in terms of standards achieved at both primary and secondary levels. The measure will be introduced in 2016-2017. At the end of that year a review will be carried out to see if the pace of change in the junior cycle reform is either too slow or too fast.

In 2017-2018, revised curriculums in two rather than four further subject areas will be introduced. These are as follows - art, craft and design; modern languages to be introduced for students commencing first year in September 2017 which was originally scheduled for 2016; standardised testing in science and Irish to be introduced in 2018 for second year students rather than 2017 as intended or planned; and finally - and I can answer supplementary questions on the following matter later - in the years 2018-2019 and 2019-20, for commencement purposes, revised curriculums will be introduced over two years and the subjects to be included - again I mean subjects starting in first year so the completion will be two years further down - will be home economics, music, geography and mathematics, technology subjects, religious education, Jewish studies, classics and history. I can give some other information but I do not wish to take up too much time.

I shall quickly go through the other items that were raised. Deputy McConalogue raised questions about savings on pensions. In the superannuation payments there was a €50 million underspend and the overall 2013 Estimate for superannuation awards was €1.128 billion. It has been extremely difficult to forecast retirement numbers in recent years due to the introduction of a number of retirement incentives. Experience has shown that only 10% of teachers retire on age grounds which means we can only predict up to a maximum of 10% based on age. After that retirement depends on the will of the teacher, the number of years served and their entitlements. We have no way of knowing the figure.

In 2012 there were 3,300 retirements in the education sector. The 2013 allocation provided for approximately 2,200 retirements while the actual number of people retiring in 2013 appears to be 1,600. Hence, the underspend against the Estimate in the first instance.

Deputy McConalogue also mentioned resource teachers. The overall level of learning support and resource teaching support for pupils with special educational needs has increased this year. In June despite increased demand for low incidence resource teaching the National Council for Special Education was authorised to make resource teaching allocations at the same level as 2012-2013 - in other words, 85% of the recommended Special Education Review Committee allocations. The decision resulted in the subsequent allocation of an additional 455 posts in October - referred to by the Deputy - to maintain resource teaching provision at the same level as last year. More than 5,700 resource teaching posts have now been sanctioned by the NCSE for the 2013-14 school year. Additionally there were 4,160 posts allocated to primary schools under the general allocation model which is inclusive of English language support. There were 650 permanent learning support posts at post-primary level and approximately 235 additional permanent learning and behavioural support posts. This brings the total to over 10,700 learning support and resource teachers in schools in the current school year, which is a greater number of posts than at any time previously.

I have dealt with SNAs and visas. Deputy O'Brien also raised an SNA issue. I can inform him that the value for money report and policy review of the SNA scheme report have been addressed and implemented as follows. First, as part of the national programme for recovery, a cap on the number of wholetime equivalent SNA posts in schools came into force in September 2011 which limited overall SNA numbers under the scheme. Second, all SNA posts are now subject to an annual review. Third, there is an annual allocation for schools to apply for SNA support. Fourth, schools are issued with a quantum of SNA support to provide for the care needs of qualifying individual children. Fifth, there is an ongoing monitoring of all SNA numbers throughout the year. Sixth, NCSE circulars 01/11 and 02/11 issued details to schools on the criteria surrounding allocations and the timeframes for applying SNA support to pupils.

Seventh, the circulars set out that an annual allocation and review process for SNA support would be put in place, detailed the care needs which would be considered as priority needs for SNA support and set out the measures which should be taken into account in arriving at a level of SNA allocation to schools, including the development and implementation of specific learning or behavioural programmes following assessment of needs and strengths.

Finally, circular 71/2011, relates to the implementation of the Croke Park agreement for SNAs. It sets out revised employment terms and conditions for SNAs. It restated the provisions of the scheme to include the necessary duties required to support the care needs of deaf and hard of hearing pupils and blind and visually impaired pupils. The Department intends to issue a new circular for the SNA scheme early in 2014 which will restate the scheme and will clarify for parents and schools the intended purpose of the scheme. It will also implement any of the outstanding recommendations of the value for money report and the review of the SNA scheme, in conjunction with the NCSE recommendations in relation to the provision of SNA support contained in the policy advice papers on supporting children with special educational needs in schools and the provision of education for children who are deaf or hard of hearing, or provision for education for pupils with emotional behavioural disorders. I have just been told that we have increased the cap regarding that matter.

The number of SNAs has increased - we answered that question yesterday.

Deputy McConalogue raised the question of the residential institutions statutory fund. That body is open for business although we had some delays in getting off the ground. A new chairperson is due to replace the current chairperson, who is retiring on health grounds. There is a vacancy because of the resignation of one of the members representing the survivors' groups and it must be filled. I hope it will be done next week. The body, its chief executive and the board have agreed application forms for applications for support within the terms of the legislation. The forms are available, which is being communicated to the relevant bodies, and I understand applications are beginning to come in.

With regard to private fees, we have had meetings for a number of weeks with Gormanston College. The decision was taken by the patron of the college and the board of management to come into the free fees scheme. It will be treated as a start-up school. The school was established in 1958 as a single sex boarding school. It is now a co-ed with a small number of boarders. There were internal difficulties, as evidenced in the whole school evaluation, WSE, report. The school has a new principal and the numbers had dropped from approximately 450 to 205. With the advice of the Department, I have decided to accept the school into the free scheme on the basis that the school is on the borders of Meath and north County Dublin, which is an area of population growth. We will need its capacity to provide additional projected numbers over the coming years. It is joining the scheme on that basis and it will be treated as a start-up school. If there are pupils who have the expectation of doing a certain subject for leaving certificate or junior certificate and it entails a teacher providing teaching in a subject, those undertakings will be maintained in a transitional phase. The expectation is that there will be enough population demand in the area to justify it. We would otherwise have had to build a new school. The cost of a post-primary school with a capacity of 700 to 1,000 pupils, including the site cost, is of the order of €12 million. That was the background that informed the decision.

The Minister of State, Deputy Ciaran Cannon, will discuss high-speed broadband.

By the beginning of September, every single post-primary school in the country will have 100 Mbps broadband, an industrial or high-quality level of broadband service, supplied to it. It came about because of collaboration between our Department and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources predominantly supported the capital costs and the Department of Education and Skills will support the ongoing revenue costs associated with providing the service. Subhead A.14 shows an increase of €2.3 million for this year to cover the revenue costs associated with sustaining the service into the schools.

We need to explore whether we can do something similar in our primary school network across the country. Our experience in the post-primary sector is that providing that level of broadband support leads to innovative methodologies being used to enhance and augment the learning experience for children across the post-primary sector and in the primary sector. Some areas do not have a successful broadband service. It has not arisen because of an issue within the Department. It is a national issue that must be resolved on a national basis. Primary schools with a poor or non-existent broadband service reflect the area or the community in which they are located. In such cases, the community does not have a very strong broadband service. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, has ambitions to ensure that by the end of 2016 there will be a minimum of 30 Mbps into every community in the country. That is something I applaud and am very supportive of. After providing such broadband infrastructure across all of Ireland, including rural Ireland, we can look at connecting our schools to the network.

Before Christmas, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, and the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, launched the digital schools of distinction programme, developed in collaboration with HP and Microsoft. It is not unlike the green flag programme and it involves encouraging best practice in the use of technology across our primary school system. In the short 11 weeks the programme has been up and running, 650 primary schools have registered and want to be recognised and affirmed as digital schools of distinction, using technology in an innovative way in the learning process. The 650 schools will be validated and accredited over the coming years.

Are there other questions?

Subject to the direction of the Chairman, there are some outstanding questions. Deputy McConalogue referred to the replacement of prefabs. In 2012, under the prefab replacement initiative, approval was given to 170 schools nationally to replace 458 prefab units with permanent accommodation. In excess of €42 million was allocated for the initiative, of which €35 million has been paid to date. Of these, a total of 157 projects have gone to construction and 108 have been completed. The total rental saving achieved by the 108 completed projects is in the region of €2.1 million per annum. The figures will be subject to change as further projects are completed. Last year, I announced a further prefab replacement initiative, replacing in the region of 115 prefabs in 46 schools with permanent accommodation. A total of €15 million is allocated for the academic year, 2013-14, and the further initiative should result in an additional rent saving of €2.5 million. Both Deputies have received details on the matter concerning the replacement of prefabs and a list of all schools currently renting such accommodation at present. If Deputies want to ask me a question on any of those, I will happily answer it.

With regard to the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, referred to by Deputy Jonathan O'Brien, from the start of the 2013-14 academic year and based on a staffing complement of 173 whole-time equivalents, NEPS assigned a psychologist to all mainstream schools in order to provide the full advisory and support service. This means that NEPS psychologists have taken on additional school numbers and pupils supported by the use of the scheme for the commissioning of psychological assessments, SCPA, where the psychologist deems it appropriate. Particular attention is being placed on the development of clustering of small schools, which constitute a large proportion of schools not currently assigned a psychologist in respect of the effective provision for direct NEPS services. Some special national schools, which currently receive psychological services from HSE agencies, will continue as before.

I welcome the fact that every school will have access to a psychologist. One of the issues that came to my attention is that when NEPS personnel come to a school, they can only carry out so many assessments. A maximum of three students can be assessed at any one time. Some schools have more than three students awaiting an assessment by NEPS personnel and I wonder if the Department has plans to address it. The earlier a child receives the assessment and has the resources put in place, the better the educational outcome for the child. Do we have figures or information on the number of students awaiting a NEPS assessment and how quickly the students can be reached?

In one case, a student is waiting over three months for a NEPS psychologist to carry out an assessment of the child. Teachers have written to NEPS to try to get the process speeded up. I understand there are only so many personnel and students but I wonder what is the average waiting time facing students.

We do not have the information to hand and I would prefer to reflect on the question, which we have recorded, and to write a comprehensive note.

I will table a parliamentary question on it.

The Deputy does not need to if he does not want to. I will write to him based on his question at this meeting. A parliamentary question is not necessary.

Are there any more questions before we move on to programme B?

I asked about the minor works grant and the summer works scheme. From where did the money come in last year's Estimates to pay them? I should probably know the answer to the following question. The budget was brought forward to October this year, but is it still from 1 January?

It is the calendar year.

That is what I thought. Will the Minister confirm that the minor works grant was paid in November to all schools? If so, that means the grant was paid from last year's Estimates. From where did that money come? Is there any money allocated in the 2014 Estimates to pay the minor works grant? I presume the applications for the summer works scheme are only in so nothing has been paid yet and that there is an allocation in this year's Estimates for that. How much is it for and how did the Minister manage to find that money?

It is not smoke and mirrors. There is a five-year building programme. Building projects, which are estimated and deemed to be considered to go on site, may run into different difficulties. There may be a planning appeal process, there may be difficulties with the site or otherwise. There is a capital underspend for planned expenditure. It fell short last year and there were savings available which were not going to be drawn down for projects that were deemed to go on site or to go to a further stage along the planning process, incurring design costs etc. That amounted to a sum of approximately €28 million and we were able to keep that. It was within the capital budget, so we were able to use it for capital purposes and we devoted it to the minor works scheme.

There is no provision within the current allocation for this year for a minor works scheme. If more moneys become available, it would be one of the things I would try to do. We are driven in trying to ensure we meet existing demand for net new places, which is a continuous demographic pressure on us in many parts of the country.

In regard to capitation grants, we are looking at another 1% reduction this year. We are also looking at an ever-increasing number of schools running financial deficits. Obviously, that burden is being picked up by parents. I know the Minister's Department is trying to address the cost of sending children back to school and trying to alleviate some of that financial burden parents must face. That is evident from the Minister's extension of funding for the school book rental scheme. The Department is also examining the school uniform issue with the survey. Many schools are reaching crisis point and parents' pockets are not any deeper. I hope the Department can examine this over the next number of years. I do not think schools can continue to face a reduction in capitation grants. Are there any other proposals, schemes or initiatives at which the Department is looking to try to help schools facing financial deficits?

The response I have here, on which I can elaborate if it is insufficient, is that 2012 provided for an overall reduction in capitation to primary and post-primary schools over a phased basis. It was a reduction of 2% in 2012 and 2013 and a further reduction of 1% in 2014 and in 2015. We have factored that into our savings over the next number of years, as has the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. If we were to alter or change it if say allocations increase, that saving is already set into the figures, so we would have to unlock that. It would cost more than just the amount of money about which we are talking because it has already taken that saving and banked it. If we were to say we did not want to proceed with the reduction of 1% next year, the baseline we have for next year would be increased by the amount we would not be saving. Notwithstanding, the departure of the troika, we are still in difficulties in terms of reducing capitation grants, albeit at a very small number in that 1% is still 1%.

In many cases, schools are growing, so the pressures are there. There is a certain degree of balancing in that if the numbers in a school increase, one gets more capitation even if it is of a smaller amount. The price pressures are on schools.

I know the Deputy is very involved with primary schools but all school managements should be looking at ways in which they can effect savings in terms of procurement and shared procurement. We do not believe they are necessarily availing of the potential for those savings.

Has the Department given out guidelines or information?

It has. I have just got a note to that effect. In the area of electricity, a schools electricity competition is currently under way with the support of the National Procurement Service. This is the service run by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform which is assisting large spending Departments like the Department of Education and Skills. More than 1,700 schools are included in the competition and the overall savings that can be achieved from the competition are an estimated €1 million, with most schools set to achieve savings of approximately 10% from their existing electricity costs. There is support and it is co-ordinated. I would be surprised if the principals in the schools with which the Deputy is in contact are not aware of this. Many principals will say there is a lot of administration involved and so on but we are trying to be as helpful as possible. There are great opportunities for mitigating - not balancing - the costs of the 1% capitation grant reduction.

There is good communication between the Department and schools in regard to possible ways to close that gap in terms of financial incentives.

I have just been informed by a colleague that the Department is actually telephoning schools but if the Deputy knows of specific schools which are having difficulties-----

If one looks at the figures for capitation, we are actually increasing the spend on capitation but that is to offset the increase in the number of students.

I do not think the Minister will be able to continue to do that over the next number of years because the student population will continue to grow. If it is a policy decision - I am not saying it is one - to keep the capitation payout at the same level, then one is looking at decreasing it continually to offset the increase in the number of students.

The idea of co-ordinated procurement, which no previous Government really did in the manner being undertaken by the Department of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, is to use the purchasing power of 3,200 primary schools, turn them into one customer for electricity and exercise that bulk buying volume to reduce unit prices in terms of cost. Prior to that, there was an understandable culture that individual schools saw themselves as individuals dealing directly with the Department of Education and Skills and with other suppliers, whether for reams of paper, for electricity or for other commodities. In the case of electricity, where one is dealing with one or two suppliers and because of the nature of the network, one is able to say 3,200 primary schools is a bulk buyer of the product and to leverage that price per unit of electricity downwards. That is a new concept and we are trying to introduce not only in education but right across the entire public sector spectrum. We found that the same unit of typing paper or whatever was being supplied by the same supplier to different public authorities, which were not in communication with each other, at different prices. The National Procurement Service has been deliberately put in place to avoid that kind of mismatch and to get the maximum value for the same quality of product one is currently getting. It is not a diminution of the quality of the product one is getting but rather getting the flattest price one can based on the total demand for the product.

I asked about bullying and the implementation of-----

The new national anti-bullying procedures, which have been adopted and will be implemented in 4,000 primary and post-primary schools, were launched September of last year.

Funding of €60,000 was made available for anti-bullying training for parents which is being provided jointly by the National Parents Councils, primary and post-primary. There were some 105 parent anti-bullying sessions for 3,279 participants last year and further sessions will be arranged this year. Arising from the review of teacher education support services provision, a phased programme of continuing professional development has been developed to support schools in the context of the action plan and anti-bullying procedures. This will be provided through the support service in the education centre network this year. The Department supported Safer Internet Day in 2013 and will continue its support for the event in 2014. As Deputies know, the Internet is connected with cyber bullying.

The Department provided over €50,000 in support of the Stand Up! LGBT Awareness Week last March against homophobic and transphobic bullying in second level schools. We will support the initiative again this year. The production of guidelines for school staff and boards of management on homophobic bullying is also being supported.

Two research projects on children with special needs and social media, suggested in the plan, were commissioned in 2013. It is anticipated that this research will be completed this year.

The last question raised by the Deputy was related to the evaluation of DEIS. The key commitment is to have ongoing evaluation of the programme to ensure its successful implementation and the best possible approaches to measuring progress and outcomes at both local and national level, with an increased emphasis on formative evaluation in the sense of providing regular feedback on the operation of programmes, as well as on the summative evaluation which assists in coming to a judgment on the overall worth and value of the measure. The Education Research Centre, based in Drumcondra, has been carrying out an evaluation of DEIS on behalf of the Department of Education and Skills since the programme's introduction in 2006-07. The evaluation was the subject of a substantial conference recently, details of which I will give to the committee. The bottom line is that DEIS is working and closing the gap between the achievements and scholarly outcomes in DEIS schools and those in normal, mainstream schools. There are lessons to be learned for all schools because some of the methodology used to manage and measure DEIS inputs should also be used in mainstream schools. Were they to use it, it is probable that their own outcomes would improve. The gap between socially disadvantaged DEIS schools, in terms of educational achievements, relative to mainstream schools has been closed in a number of ways. I will write to the Deputy with the precise references in that regard.

Under which heading does the summer works scheme come?

We will move on to the next programme - skills development. It is to be found on page 20 of the Department's briefing material and page 12 of the notes from the committee secretariat.

If we were to try to work from a single programme next year, that would help us all. It might also save a forest in the process.

It is well structured and-----

It is confusing for all of us, me included. At what page should I look?

At page 20 of your own briefing material. It is to be found on page 12 of the document from the committee secretariat. I invite the Minister of State, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, to make some introductory remarks on programme B - skills development.

I am happy for members to pose questions.

That is fine. I will reverse the order and start with Deputy Jonathan O'Brien.

I wish to refer to the apprenticeship schemes. We spoke about them in the Dáil yesterday and the specific issue of the changes in the fees being charged. I have looked at the figures and worked out that the changes will result in the raising of an additional €1.6 million. Apprentices will now have to pay a pro rata student contribution, proportionate to the time spent in institutes of technology, through which the Department will raise an additional €1.6 million. That is a very small amount of money relative to the overall budget. I ask the Minister of State to confirm that the money raised will amount to €1.6 million.

That is correct, yes.

It will only yield €1.6 million, but it will cause a high level of hardship for apprentices. Given that we are awaiting a report on a review of the apprenticeship system, it seems to be a very premature move by the Department. I know that it is probably tied in with the establishment of SOLAS which will be taking over responsibility from FÁS for training courses, but it is a small amount of money in the overall scheme of things. I again take the opportunity to ask the Minister of State to explain the rationale for this decision, given the modest savings involved. Did the Department examine possible funding streams from the European Union such as ERASMUS to try to offset some of the cost? Was no other option available to it other than to charge full fees to apprentices? We will quickly reach a situation where apprentices who are currently undergoing off-site training in institutes of technology but who are unable to pay the full fees will not be able to obtain their examination results and will not be able to progress their training career. It is a very retrograde step for such a minuscule amount of money. I, therefore, ask the Minister of State to review the decision.

I recall a former Minister, many years ago, following a debacle involving wasteful public spending, describing €50 million as a "drop in the ocean". At the time I made a solemn promise to myself that if I ever became involved in politics at national level, I would not fall into the same trap. I genuinely do not consider €1.6 million to be an insignificant amount of money.

It is in the context of the overall budget.

It is still a significant amount of money. I do not think the imposition of the extra charge on apprentices will act as a major disincentive to them in either accessing the apprenticeship system or completing their apprenticeships. Deputies must bear in mind that the charge is €833, of which apprentices were already paying 30% and had been for many years. The fee was predominantly related to the cost of examinations within the institutes of technology. Furthermore, apprentices, unlike others attending institutes of technology, are receiving a wage which ranges from €293 to €647 a week during the entire apprenticeship period, including the time they are in the institutes. That compares very favourably to a typical maintenance payment to a normal student of €31 a week. While I acknowledge that in a very difficult budgetary time for all of us we would prefer not to have to do this, when one looks at the overall picture, I do not believe this will act as a disincentive to becoming involved in the apprenticeship process or completing apprenticeships.

Those involved often have additional costs, including the cost of travelling to and from work, the cost of tools and so forth. It is not right to compare apprentices with the ordinary student population in institutes of technology. There are significant differences between them.

The Deputy should bear in mind that apprentices also receive travel and subsistence payments to meet the costs associated with their apprenticeships during the institute of technology phases. They are covered if they have extenuating costs associated with this. On the basis that they are receiving between €300 and €600 a week in wages, as opposed to €31 a week for a typical student, they are being treated favourably, as they should be because they are a very important part of the skills development process.

I do not think they are being seriously disincentivised by this measure.

Why did the Department not wait until the report was completed?

The report was a separate process. The report was tasked to look at the apprenticeship model nationally and how we move from our traditional understanding of what the word apprenticeship means. We are trying to modify how one thinks of apprenticeship as being in the construction sector predominantly into other sectors in which we see the economic growth of the future. That process was under way, and we published the outcome yesterday, which makes for very interesting reading. This was simply a budgetary decision taken in very difficult budgetary circumstances.

I wished to raise the same issue. The fee had been dropped a number of years ago and introducing it at this time, when we are trying to encourage people to do an apprenticeship following the significant drop in numbers in recent times, makes it very difficult for those who are serving an apprenticeship to find the funding to do the course. At the early stages of the apprenticeship, the weekly allowance is very low and we must remember that starting an apprenticeship is not confined to those who are coming out of school and others who are serving an apprenticeship have wider responsibilities. It is a regressive step that flies in the face of stated Government policy to encourage people to take up training for employment. As Deputy O'Brien stated, the actual figure, although significant, in percentage terms of the overall budget is very low. The Minister is taking money from people who have not sufficient resources to pay it. I know the Minister has answered it already.

We have the issue raised by the Deputies listed as one of the items the committee would look at in the context of the review. The Minister announced he would bring that to Government. Will he make a decision straight away or will he await the response to the report?

I brought it to Cabinet yesterday. It has now gone out for a response. A specialist group has been set up and is headed up by Mr. Kevin Duffy, the chairman of the Labour Court, who started his career as an apprentice bricklayer and has an intimate knowledge of apprenticeships through time since he was on the council of AnCO and then FÁS. The subject is now out for consultation.

The main recommendation effectively for members who are not immediately familiar with it - and the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon can elaborate on it - is that an apprenticeship should effectively be a minimum of 104 weeks or two years consisting of 50% spent on education off the job and the remaining 50% training on the job. The apprenticeship would be a paid post, subject to employment law and contractual protections in a number of areas and not a student rate position. The minimum period should be two years. Our biggest barrier to getting an effective 21st century apprenticeship programme up and running is the willingness of employers to engage with and to provide not just the places but the training associated with the places. There is a personnel manpower management imposition obligation for them. I welcome the fact that the committee will have hearings. I suggest that the committee focus on the training side. There is no difficulty relatively speaking - I think the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, will agree with me on the training side. We have the capacity to provide the educational components of the apprenticeship, the real difficulty is finding employers who are willing to put their money where their mouth is and pony up with structured places where training can be delivered on the job.

Let me suggest that the Chair might call the representatives from IBEC to see how they will respond to the recommendations in the report.

I wish to raise a matter in respect of section B5 on further education and training activities. Obviously there is a good deal of money, with €226.4 million being spent on this worthwhile area which is basically to get people to attain qualifications through a further education scheme. I have come across many programmes in Balbriggan and Swords where people have celebrated achievement in this area. This great opportunity for people is to be welcomed.

I recently came across a situation involving the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in which it did not give due recognition for FETAC level 5 or 6 qualifications in its preselection cull on those who should go forward for interview. People with a level 5 FETAC qualification have the equivalent of a leaving certificate, however people have come to my clinic stating there is no recognition for the other courses and qualification they have received since their second level education. They are only getting recognition for the junior certificate or the intermediate certificate they did all those years ago. I am pursuing that matter with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to see what is going on but it would be extremely unfortunate if there was no due recognition for what they achieved under FETAC.

Does the Minister wish to respond?

If Deputy Ryan would copy the Department of Education and Skills with the specific information, and I do not wish to intrude on the privacy of the individual who came to his clinic. The whole thinking around Quality and Qualifications Ireland, QQI, which brought FETAC and HETAC together into one qualifications framework is around ten qualifications. A qualification is a qualification and it does not matter what road one took to get to a level 6 qualification. The only issue is that level that one achieves. There should be no prejudice unless there are express reasons against the route one takes. All roads to level 6 or level 5 qualifications are equally valid, if they are properly signed off at that level. If the Deputy is encountering residual prejudice of one kind or another because a particular path was travelled to get to that point, I would love the Deputy to revert to me when he has done the business on the clinic case in question to have the data anonymised so that we can raise it with all Government bodies recruiting staff. It would not just be confined to that Department. My colleague, Deputy Cannon, may wish to add to my remarks.

I have had a similar experience with another body, UCD, when a constituent of mine wanted to begin a course in paramedics for which the minimum entry requirement was the leaving certificate. He had FETAC level 5 and 6 qualifications in paramedics as he was a very experienced paramedic, and could probably have given most of the course, but because he did not have a formal leaving certificate, UCD would not allow him onto the course. We have a job to do in affirming that a FETAC qualification means something in terms of further education and employment opportunities. The role of QQI is to bring that together and to give it that weight and depth of affirmation that is so necessary.

Through the Chair, I wish to ask members to highlight any such incidents of what I can only describe as academic snobbery and bring it to our attention. The qualifications framework was designed to eliminate that.

The universities are a bit of a mixed bag, because on the one hand UCD does a very good part-time programme which brings in mature students and it has been very good in terms of progressing that, but the issue that Deputy Cannon raised exists as well. I am often very critical of my former alma mater, Trinity College, because I feel it has not done what UCC has done, in which it takes people who have completed a diploma in the college of commerce in Cork and would let them into second year law. The institutes of technology have very good records. Maynooth has a very good record. There are, however, good examples in Trinity itself, but I think it is probably the least flexible in that regard. I think there is a need for the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland to set up a system to allow students the right to move from college to college.

Regardless of whether one is moving from an institute of technology to a university or from a vocational education committee post-leaving certificate course to a degree course, the system must become much more flexible if we are to address disadvantage in education.

I know many people, both at a personal level and through my political activity, who did not complete their degree course but may have studied for perhaps two years. Some form of recognition should be provided in such cases. If someone obtains a FETAC qualification, for example, he or she should be able to progress to the next level in the relevant institution. While much work remains to be done, the philosophy behind Quality and Qualifications Ireland, QQI, is very good.

Quality and Qualifications Ireland recently increased the fees it charges and must have received the Minister's approval for doing so. The increase may not present a problem for private providers because measures were required to prevent abuse of the system, for example, the practice of seeking recognition for courses that had not been properly thought through. However, the community sector believes the new fees regime will have a detrimental impact as it will not be able to afford the costs of securing QQI approvals for various courses. I do not have the full details to hand but the joint committee wrote to the Department about the issue. The community education sector is unique and operates on a shoestring. While the sector presents a mixed picture, many community education providers are strongly focused on the various FETAC levels and on ensuring people obtain recognised qualifications. Does the Minister have any concerns about the impact of increased fees on community education? Has the issue been raised with him? It has certainly been raised with the committee and we hope to examine the issue soon.

I believe it has been raised with us. If the committee has written to the Department, we will examine the correspondence and respond once we have done so.

We will probably arrange a meeting on the issue.

It costs money to certify courses and ensure certification is sufficiently robust to allow a course take its rightful place in the qualification ladder. Certification of a course by Quality and Qualifications Ireland to the educational provider is one thing, while the way in which the provider charges course participants to recoup the money is another matter. If the committee communicates with the Department in a comprehensive manner, we will respond.

The issue is that Quality and Qualifications Ireland will certify courses for for-profit operators and institutions that are well established and perhaps fully funded by the Department. The community sector, however, seeks grants from various sources as it cobbles together the funding required to provide a course. As its clients are very often not well off, the community sector is not in a position to impose the full costs on participants. We will provide the Minister with more information as we receive it.

We tend to be critical of the Department but it has introduced some radical policy changes in the area of skills development, for example, the establishment of SOLAS and Quality and Qualifications Ireland. These changes do not receive sufficient publicity or public attention. I commend the work of the Minister in this area. These are significant policy developments which will benefit the sector for many years. All the political parties have been supportive of these measures, which are delivering significant progress in this area. I congratulate the Department on that achievement.

I will briefly address the issues of Quality and Qualifications Ireland, accreditation and progression, which the Chairman raised and to which I have referred previously. As a result of the new legislation underpinning Quality and Qualifications Ireland, the new body has a role to play in regularly addressing and examining the access, transfer and progression model in place across the system. This system is very well developed in further education. When one begins the process of engagement with further education one can see a very clear line of progression if one wishes to continue to level 10 or 11. However, this line is not as visible or easily accessed in third level. QQI will have a role to play in ensuring third level education becomes as easily accessible as further education.

The third level sector is considering the possibility of modularising complex course provision into small, easily consumed modules and credit systems. This move will make progression easier in future. The Minister is correct, however, that there is a certain degree of academic snobbery towards people entering third level education through what could be described as unconventional routes. They need to be supported in that process.

We will move on to programme C, higher education, details of which can be found in the briefing material and secretariat's notes.

On subhead C4, general current grants to universities, institutes of technology and other designated institutions of the Higher Education Authority and grant-in-aid, there is a difference of €73 million between the 2013 and 2014 Estimates. This computes to a reduction in the allocation of approximately 7%. I ask the Minister to explain this significant reduction.

On student grants, cuts to postgraduate grants this year, last year and in the coming year amount to €42 million. The impact of these cuts has been brutal, with many people no longer able to access third level education. I ask the Minister to comment.

One of the key principles underpinning education is the need to make it accessible. This has been done through free fees and the provision of maintenance grants for those with limited financial means. One particular measure has resulted in the withdrawal of the maintenance grant for many postgraduate students. In addition, many of those who would have received a maintenance grant previously will no longer have their fees covered. I am aware that a grant in respect of fees of up to €2,000 is available to those with very low means. I ask the Minister to comment because in the past two or three years postgraduate education has become a non-runner for many people who do not have the financial means to cover their costs.

As the Deputy will note from the briefing documentation, the reduction of approximately 70% is attributed to the impact of the Haddington Road agreement on salary costs and related savings, the €250 increase in the student contribution and the ongoing 1% cut in core pay and non-pay allocations to third level institutions announced in budget 2012. The reduced allocation also reflects the decision in this budget to retain the 2013 reduction of €25 million to the higher education institutions in general by requiring them to use the existing large cash deposits and reserves available to them. Although we rolled over the reduction for another year, we will repay the money. That is the explanation. I do not know if the most significant of the three factors I cited was the Haddington Road agreement or whether each contributed equally to the savings.

Where does the report on capital assets sit at the moment? The Minister has announced that he will bring forward the heads of the Bill on technological universities. Leaving aside the educational advantages or outcomes of the proposal, what financial or resourcing pressures would be put on the Department with the implementation of that legislation?

The first question was on the position on capital assets. There is no agreement between the two parties in coalition on broadening the base of the assessment from household income to reserves, savings or capital assets. It is not part of the programme for Government and, as I have said previously in public, that is the position at the moment. There may be some movement on broadening the base to approximate the evaluation of means, similar to the assessment used for social welfare purposes. That might be a possibility. However, there is no agreement per se on capital assets. Therefore, there is no proposed change, despite my party's position, which is that we would like to see that happen.

The Bill on technological universities will be coming to the committee in due course in the normal way after the committee has sent back the enrolment policy Bill. We have no wish to overload the committee with two Bills at the same time. The 84 sections will provide for three things, in essence. First, to enable the existing 14 institutes of technology, if they so wish, to merge or come together. They have already indicated their position in response to an invitation from the Higher Education Authority. They were asked, inter alia, where they see their future in terms of collaboration and so forth. All third level institutions find themselves in educational regional clusters anyway and they are required to co-operate. Let us consider Limerick, for example, where the University of Limerick, the Limerick Institute of Technology and the Limerick School of Art and Design would be required to form an educational cluster. The same applies in other parts of the country. That is the first component of the Bill.

The second component of the Bill is to provide for a merged institution. The Dublin Institute of Technology and the institutes of technology in Blanchardstown and Tallaght have signalled their intention to proceed down the path to merge and become a technological university. The Bill provides for what they must do to get there, including the criteria they must meet. These are criteria established by an international recommendation panel of experts, conveyed to the Higher Education Authority and accepted by the Department and myself. The criteria would be enshrined in law in order that institutes will not be able to qualify to become a technological university unless they manifestly meet the criteria. The last thing this is about is changing the badge over the door of the building. It is about transforming the internal quality.

The third component of the legislation provides for a change in the governance structure of all the institutions. Historically, the regional technical colleges were attached to the vocational educational committees. The model of governance was not dissimilar to that of the old vocational educational committee schools or institutions, with a large number of county councillors on the boards. Modern recommendation and practice is that the composition of the board of governors should be representative of the internal academic staff, including senior and middle academic staff, students, including graduate and undergraduate, and personnel from the wider world.

In the technological university legislation there is a definition of the composition or description of a technological university such that it is not a broad-based university like UCC, for example, which has a medical school, a law school, a philosophy school and other sections. UCC covers the full spectrum. However, the technological university will be focused narrowly on converting research into commodities that can be manufactured and distributed and which can create wealth, profit and employment for the region in which the technological university is located. This is all in the documentation but there are requirements within the composition and the activities whereby they must have a structured relationship with large-scale industry and enterprise in the region in which they are located. We do not need more universities of the type we currently have but we need to advance the institutes of technology to a higher level of wealth creation, in order that they can commercialise research and apply research to activities and commodities that can be sold abroad or at home and that will create employment.

The timetable will go out for consultation and we should have it back by Easter. I believe we can get it enacted between Easter and the end of the June session, because we now go into the middle of July. That is my optimistic expectation.

When will it happen? They must merge first and they cannot merge until the legislation is enacted. They can do a good deal of preliminary work but mergers of any kind are always slow because we are dealing with human beings and it takes time to integrate. I envisage there will be a stage that will take them into this time next year, if not beyond, to get to the point where a merged entity will seek to start the journey to get up the ladder for qualification.

I will anticipate the Deputy's final question. Three groups have indicated that they want to travel that road. I have already described the position in Dublin involving the Dublin Institute of Technology. The institutes of technology in Cork and Tralee have indicated their position and they have embarked on exploring the possibility of a merger with the intention of going the full journey. Likewise, with the institutes in Carlow and Waterford.

Despite the increased numbers of people going to third level and doing postgraduate and Ph.D. studies etc. there is still some evidence of difficulties. This has been provided by industry, industry bodies and large companies which have located here. They continue to find it difficult to find candidates with sufficient information technology and language skills and so on. Does the Minister agree that this gap exists? What can we see in the numbers that indicates the Minister is setting about addressing the gap?

I will ask my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, to deal with that because he has taken a strong personal interest and he is knowledgeable about the area.

There is no question but that questions are being asked within certain sectors in industry on whether there is the potential to scaleup skills in industry. This relates to indigenous industry and the multinationals which have chosen to locate here. The hope is to address the dearth of skills that is occurring. We should be aware that this is not an issue unique to Ireland. It is predicted that by late next year there will be almost 1 million job vacancies in the information and communications technology sector throughout the European Union. Not long after the formation of the Government the Minister, Deputy Quinn, and the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, came together to establish our national ICT skills strategy. Every time we have looked at empowering people to develop their skills, whether the unemployed, those already in education or those in employment, it has been predominately in that area. A unit has been established in SOLAS to determine exactly what skills shortages are occurring now and what will occur in the medium term and long term.

We are trying at all times to address the areas which have been notified to us as those where shortages are occurring. The predominant challenge is in the area of information and communications technology. We are now considering the development of a digital education strategy in our Department. In fact, before Christmas we launched the public consultation phase. We hope to begin allowing children the opportunity to do two things: first, to have greater enhanced use of technology in their learning in all subject matter; second, to begin to develop their own technological skills. Let us consider the wonderful work taking place in the CoderDojo movement throughout Ireland. There are certainly some questions to be asked about whether this can be mainstreamed into the public school system. I believe elements of it can be.

Let us consider the MOMENTUM programme from last year. Some 6,500 training places were provided to people who were unemployed. There was major collaboration between industry and the entities, both public and private, delivering the MOMENTUM programme. The needs of industry were considered in the design and development of the curricula and industry offered job placement opportunities to people who were studying on the MOMENTUM programme.

A report released by Accenture Ireland last year on the skills challenge highlighted a specific point in this regard. I believe it is a salient point and one industry should reflect on. It certainly ties in with what the Minister, Deputy Quinn, said earlier about getting IBEC before the committee to consider the apprenticeship model. The point was those in industry, as well as being consumers of talent, must play a more proactive role in creating talent. That is something industry should reflect on.

I referred earlier to the ICT strategy. We are ahead of target in identifying and producing the type of ICT graduates we need for the future. The numbers will have doubled by 2015. The date originally set for the doubling of numbers was 2018 but we will have reached the target by the end of 2015. The number of people who are now taking up computer science and ICT subjects in general at third level has increased by 50% in the past three years.

With the increase of 25 points there has been a significant increase in students, boys and girls, taking honours mathematics. There is a very real and effective response from primary to third level but the challenge remains and will remain for the foreseeable future. We are doing our level best to respond to it.

Is it not the case that, for students who go down that road and come out with an IT qualification, the standard is not sufficiently high to meet the needs of modern industry?

According to the people I have spoken to in the industry ICT skills are not the issue. In fact those skills compare very favourably internationally. The level is not so high in generic skills, such as communication and teamwork. The heads of most of our universities recognise this is a challenge and they are liaising and collaborating with industry to see how best they can incorporate those skills into the provision, not alone in IT but across all third level provision. The model for industry both among multinationals and indigenous industry is collaborative. A team of people is set a challenge to innovate a particular product or service. Our third level colleges have not got their heads around how to reproduce that. The National University of Ireland, Galway, NUIG, has developed an interesting model for a master’s programme to respond to the medical devices sector which employs 8,000 people in Galway city. It brings together medical, engineering and marketing graduates to work together as a team to develop new devices for the medical devices industry. They complete their master's at NUIG but work in that collaborative model all the way up to the point where the device can be marketed commercially. That is the model that industry needs and we need to see more of that at third level.

I agree with everything Deputy Cannon has said. That is why we are trying to change the Junior Certificate. The only area of collaboration at junior cycle is on a team of 15 or 11 to win a match, or in a musical or dramatic production, none of which is measured in the examination. In every other activity one is a sole trader and hides one’s essay as it is being written to prevent anyone else seeing it. That is why we have to change.

The Minister has visited the Young Scientist Exhibition. I go every year and visit the stands for the local schools and discuss their projects. It is very evident that this is a great opportunity for young people to learn how to work as a team and to be inventive and innovative and so on. I have noticed over the past couple of years that projects have come only from the Lucan side of my constituency. There have been none from Clondalkin. Those that come from Clondalkin are rarely from the schools in disadvantaged areas. Those schools have made huge progress in terms of sending students to third level education and it is surprising not to see them getting involved in the Young Scientist Exhibition. Is that reflected in other constituencies? Something needs to be done about it. I should raise it with British Telecom, the organisers of the Young Scientist Exhibition but I thought it worth mentioning to the Minister.

Two schools stand out in the exhibition which has been running for 50 years. It started in Albuquerque in New Mexico where two lecturers from UCD saw a high school science fair and brought the idea back here. Synge Street, a famous school in Dublin’s inner city is in the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, DEIS, space and has a cohort of students from new immigrant groups or families in that area. As Dublin suburbanised many people whose parents went to Synge Street now go to schools such as Drimnagh Castle. The sole factor behind that and the current Olympic star, Kinsale Community School, is the leadership of the science teacher.

This work is outside the curriculum but it does mobilise enormous energy. Two years ago I met a teacher in the Cork region who had for the first time brought a team from her school to the exhibition. There were 2,000 entrants and 500 teams got into the showcase in the RDS. The teacher was a graduate of Kinsale Community School. She became a science teacher and carried the same culture into her new school.

The Minister mentioned Synge Street. It has a tradition, which is a factor but I think it is more complex than that. Many of the communities the Minister mentioned are present in Lucan too. There is disadvantage, many immigrants, and DEIS schools. I do not like to single Clondalkin out but there is a problem. Much of Clondalkin has a Revitalising Areas through Planning, Investment and Development, RAPID, programme area. There is serious, widespread disadvantage. The schools there are fantastic. Approximately ten years ago, when the Labour Party was last in government and abolished third level fees, Collinstown Park increased the number of students attending third level by 500%. The former Deputy, Brian Fleming, was the principal. There are excellent, innovative teachers there but for some reason it is not entering the Young Scientist Exhibition. We want people from disadvantaged backgrounds to take up science and mathematics and to have careers in engineering and so on. This issue needs to be addressed. It would be interesting to survey how many schools from RAPID areas go to the Young Scientist Exhibition.

I suggest that the Chairman invite Colm O’Neill, the CEO of BT Ireland to meet the committee. The Department has funded this and it is part of the corporate social responsibility activity for many BT personnel. It is not confined to the week of the exhibition. The personnel are involved in administering it in their own time for which they do not get paid. There is no Young Scientist secretariat to manage the operation. They do it themselves. The Chairman might find it very useful.

An additional €26 million will be removed from post-graduate grants in the Estimates next year. Will the Minister comment on that and the impact it will have?

It is the follow-through of a budgetary measure adopted in 2012.

I asked the Minister to comment or to give any view he may have on the impact that has on access to postgraduate courses.

I will tell the Deputy where my head is at the moment. It is the same for people who decide to become secondary school teachers and the education colleges which are clustered around six centres. There is no distinction made in our funding for certain types of teacher. Three years ago the Independent News and Media group ran a campaign to find out how many qualified mathematics teachers there were in the country. We do not know. The nearest we can get to the figure is that the Teaching Council tells us the first subject listed when a teacher registers. The Teaching Council Act was enacted in 2001 and will go live in a week’s time. When it goes live, the Deputy will probably be petitioned by people with hardship stories. We virtually sent out officials with hot-water bottles to ask why they will not sign up and register with the Teaching Council.

The vast majority of teachers are paid with taxpayers' money and they will not get a cheque in the post the following week. There are still numbers of teachers who will not sign up. The members should not be surprised if Joe Duffy has an agony programme about teachers who served the community very well and have been cut off. That will not stop members tabling parliamentary questions but that will be the reason behind it. I am thinking aloud when I say that we could say to the third level colleges that we need more qualified science teachers and maths teachers. We could say to those colleges and universities providing a course which is the successor to the higher diploma for secondary teachers that we will only fund them if a certain percentage of their graduate students are studying to be mathematics teachers or converting their science degree to qualify as a mathematics teacher. As the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, said, it goes back to what we need in the education system, what skill sets are required by industry and what we are providing by way of teachers. Most other governments and countries have a manpower policy in the world of education. They endeavour to tailor the qualifications of the cohort of teachers coming into the system to meet the needs of the student body. We do not have this. It is not needed in the primary system because teachers teach children in the collective round. However, in the case of subject teaching at secondary level the qualifications of teachers need to be aligned with the needs of the curriculum. Historically we have not done this but we will need to do it.

We will deal with programme D - capital services.

New schools have been announced for many areas, including in my constituency which is a growing area and places are needed for children at both primary and secondary level. However, existing schools have done much of the heavy lifting over the past years. They have set up prefab classrooms and taken all-comers. Catholic schools have catered for all nationalities. They may have had a priority band status one rating but they are being left behind as new schools are established. Is there any hope for such schools? I know economic times are difficult and we must cater for the additional capacity. Will the Minister send out a message of hope to those schools who continue to wait for some progress and improvement?

I would love to be able to do so. If Deputy Ryan can bend the arm of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, I will certainly do so. The decision to prioritise has been difficult. At least I have been up front in telling those affected. Our biggest necessity is to provide additional capacity in the system to allow for the demographical changes. However, that has not stopped us taking action in some cases where there is a clear need. I refer to Loughrea where the physical fabric of the existing school was so decrepit that it was not worth repairing. Existing schools will benefit this year from 28 major projects under the stimulus package. I am not certain if this affects some of the schools in Deputy Ryan's Dublin North constituency or in Fingal. Once the new schools provide capacity it will enable us to use the capital programme to continue to upgrade existing schools.

For example, I refer to the situation in Swords which I have previously brought to the attention of the Minister. Loreto Swords is the only school in Swords providing single-sex education for girls for which there is quite a demand. Because of a lack of laboratory facilities the school at present cannot offer students the opportunity to study science. This is linked to our previous discussion about the need for science education. Such issues need to be addressed in the context of an improving economy.

I am aware of the problem at Swords. We will try to do something. I suggest the Deputy gives Deputy Brendan Howlin a kick.

We will take that advice on board.

My question probably does not refer to capital services. I received an interesting email from a group of parents from the Polish community inquiring about the possibility of setting up a school to teach the curriculum through their own language. Have such requests been received by the Department, given the increasing number of nationalities locating in Ireland? Cork has significant Polish and Nigerian communities and there are probably enough students to establish a small school if it is what they want. For example, some schools teach the curriculum through the medium of Irish.

To reply frankly to the Deputy, I have no proposals nor will I have proposals to do that. However, I am aware of the need for children who speak Polish at home to be able to access instruction in Polish language and grammar so that they learn to write Polish grammatically. I suggest the Deputy raise this matter with the Cork ETB to ascertain if classroom facilities can be made available. Other minorities such as the Koreans teach the language to their children by means of cultural programmes. There is no reason Ted Owens cannot make available space on Saturdays or Sundays for that provision. If I were a Polish parent living here I would want my children to be fluent in English but also fluent in Polish so that they would have the choice to study as undergraduates in Poland. They will need both a grammatical and oral command of their native language. That is the only way I can see it being provided. The parents will have to do it themselves, given our priorities. I would press the ETB Cork to provide a school facility at the weekends and at no cost.

I welcome the Minister, the Minister of State and their officials. I have in mind two aspects of the capital programme. The Minister has made significant progress in the investment in school extensions and new schools given the legacy he inherited. I refer to the number of schools in my constituency with a significant number of prefabs. I recall the Minister saying it was his priority to ensure that every child would have a safe, warm and suitable environment. I ask for an update on the progress as some schools in my constituency remain to be upgraded.

I refer to the issue of Gaelscoileanna. Lucan is one of the fastest developing communities in Ireland and there are significant demands on the primary education system. I have noticed in recent times there has been an increase in the desire for education through Irish. The two Gaelscoileanna in Lucan cannot meet the demand.

I am aware of the issue of prefabs in the Lucan area and in one school in particular. We are still trying to solve the situation in that school.

In regard to Gaelscoileanna, I am aware that demand is growing, specifically in areas where the population is growing. Divestment by existing patrons might be of some help in this regard, but it is not really a solution because it does not deal with the demand in terms of overall numbers. We will simply have to work within the existing capital programme to address the demand. It is as simple as that.

The major issue in the Gaelscoil sector is that we are seeing an ever-increasing number of such schools at primary level but no continuation for pupils at post-primary level. That is an issue the Department must address. In my constituency in Cork, for example, we have several primary schools which teach through the medium of Irish but only one such school at second level. Students who are taught through Irish up to sixth class are then faced with a situation where there are limited places available to them at second level. In fact, some of those places are going to pupils from primary schools where pupils are taught through English. Children who have been educated through Irish up to the age of 12 or 13 are placed at a disadvantage in not being able to continue their education through that medium. There must be a continuation of education through Irish from primary to second level. It is a significant challenge for the Department.

We will discuss that issue in detail when we deal with the enrolment legislation. It certainly is an issue of great concern and there are opinions on both sides.

I urge the Minister to exercise caution on that issue in general. Specifically, I have concerns regarding the agendas that might be at play on the part of particular movements within the patronage sector. I am not referring only to the Irish language movement here. In fact, I am on record as having criticised the ways in which Educate Together, to give another example, has sometimes pushed its agenda. When we are told about huge waiting lists for certain types of schools in certain areas, it is important to consider how reliable that information might be. Sometimes it is based on data which do not give a complete picture because, for instance, they incorporate an element of duplication or are not clear as to the reasons people might be putting their children's names down on a particular waiting list. There are issues to consider when it comes to the motivation of particular groups of parents.

The issue of greatest concern in Lucan is that there are two schools, in particular, in which significant numbers of the students are being taught in prefabricated buildings that are in a simply awful condition. They are conditions in which an adult would not be willing to work. Sometimes what we ask small children to put up with is at odds with what we ourselves would tolerate in terms of accommodation and so on. There is a question mark over whether there is a requirement for new schools in Lucan. Several principals of schools in the area have indicated to me privately that, in their view, there was no need for the school that was recently established. As I said, it is important to consider the agendas that might be at play. It is probably to be expected that people will tend to talk up the demand that is there for their own particular model of education.

When a delegation from the joint committee travelled to Finland we saw an education system that is based on a single model of education provision. There is a sense in which the choice within our system is in itself a driver of inequality which would not arise if we had one model of education delivery at primary level. Under such a system, schools would, according to my preference, be State-run and multidenominational, established in consultation with all stakeholders and catering for everybody, with the compromises that would inevitably involve. The notion that we must have a range of choices is often motivated by a need to confer advantage on a particular set of people to the disadvantage of another set. We must be careful in that regard. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the report to which the Minister referred. The issue I am pointing up is part of the broader enrolment issue.

I will not address the more philosophical issues the Chairman raised. Our post-primary school system is at least 150 years old and has resulted in a typical provincial town having three or four schools, all under the patronage of the Catholic Church, with nobody in the town being under any allusion as to the social status of the Ursuline school versus the Presentation school versus the Mercy school. They might not be able to measure it but, by Jesus, they could describe it. Until we find a solution to address that reality, it is not going to change.

On the question of capacity and demand, I have heard the point raised by the Chairman raised by others on more than one occasion. An example that comes to mind is when party colleagues in the Tallaght area suggested there was no need for an additional post-primary school at Kingswood Heights, where we have a site. This was coming from councillors who were formerly members of the vocational education committee and now the education and training board, who put forward an assessment of what was needed in the area. To put it simply, they were ill-informed. They were all of a certain age, their grandchildren had already gone through the education system and that was the end of it as far as they were concerned. There was a failure to take account of the numbers of new people who had come into the area.

The Chairman might find it helpful to visit the departmental staff in Tullamore who are using the geographic information system, GIS, or to invite them to appear before the committee. This system keeps track of every one year old whose parents register him or her for child benefit. Measurements are taken on an annualised basis, so we can see how many children there are aged one, two, three and four and thus anticipate the likely demand in the catchment area.

In the case of a relatively isolated area in rural Cork such as Clonakilty, for example, it is easier to assess demand and pressure and conclude that the existing two or three primary schools will deal with the extra demand that arises. When it comes to the travel distance and time factor, all things being equal, parents will generally send their children to a local school. In my own constituency of Dublin South-East, to give an example from a very different perspective, on Haddington Road, which is just over the Baggot Street Bridge, there is a demand for 169 places in junior infants this year in a three-stream primary school. These pupils are coming from all over and include the children of immigrant workers who are employed in financial services and the health sector. There are also the children of people who were originally from Ringsend, for example, and are now living, say, in Lucan. These people are sending their children to schools near where they grew up so that a grandparent can look after them while the parents are at work. The children travel into the city with their parents in the morning and are collected in the evening from the grandparent's house. It is very hard to match demand with capacity in those circumstances. When it comes to particular principals claiming that a new school is not necessary in a particular area, that might well be their honest view. It does not, however, fit with my understanding, having explored the issues elsewhere.

The other issues the Chairman raised could provide fuel for a lengthy debate. The bottom line, however, is that we must live with the existing infrastructure and patronage structure we have inherited.

I accept there is another side to the argument on the particular local issue to which I referred. I am also aware, however, of schools that have been set up recently and have hardly any pupils. One has to wonder what happened to all the demand that was predicted in those cases. I accept there is a need for additional school places. In Lucan some years ago we experienced a crisis in this regard, with emergency schools having to be set up. It was very much a case of demand being catered for only after it became evident rather than being planned for in advance. The situation is very much changing in that regard, which is welcome.

The specific issue of concern I have raised is where there is demand for a particular type of school. I am not saying it is always the case, but I have been written to by parents who reveal their motivation as being a reluctance to have their child mix with disadvantaged pupils in a particular school. They want a specific type of school to be set up simply to cater for their child. As a public representative, one hears that type of sentiment. I am making the point that we should bear in mind what might be going on behind the scenes in terms of some parents' motivation. I am concerned that this factor might be influencing some of the choices that are being made within the system.

It would be useful for the committee to have an opportunity to explore what is being done by the staff in Tullamore in terms of the GIS.

I am very willing to accommodate that.

Under which heading is the summer work scheme included?

My officials tell me it is under subhead D3, which is on page 58 of the documentation.

What is the allocation for this year?

Approximately €40 million.

I thank the Minister.

Are members happy to move on? We are obliged to vacate the room by 3.45 p.m. at the latest. There are two further short programmes remaining - appropriations-in-aid and administration - and I propose that we take them together. In the Department's briefing material, they are dealt with from page 41 onwards. In the committee secretariat's notes, they are dealt with from page 19 onwards. Are there any questions on these programmes or does the Minister wish to comment on them?

Like all other entities within the system, the Department is under enormous pressure in the context of staff numbers. Mr. Michael Keogh, who is sitting next to me, is the assistant secretary with responsibility not just for matters relating to finance but also for those relating to personnel. Workloads are increasing and people who are retiring are not being replaced. In light of the moratorium, opportunities for promotion are limited. I am conscious of the need to maintain morale. The caricature of civil servants which still permeates parts of RTE - it is a bit rich when one considers the source - is a long way from the reality.

Are there any questions on comments? If not, we will wrap-up proceedings. Before I call on the Minister to make his closing remarks, does anyone else wish to comment on the process or the overall picture?

I wish to pose a question. I do not want to put the Minister on the spot but I will ask it in any event. We do not get the opportunity to question him very often. We are able to question him once every five weeks in the Dáil but, as a result of the lottery used, I only got to pose two questions, which is not sufficient. I will take that matter up with the Whips. There has been a great deal of discussion in respect of JobBridge and the teaching profession. I do not know whether the Minister wants to comment on this matter today or if he would prefer to discuss it at a later date. There is a degree of concern that some schools are using JobBridge as a way of increasing their teaching cohorts. I am of the view that the scheme was not designed to be used in that way.

There are two sides to the story. I was on both sides of the fence growing up. If one is seeking one's qualification or "pilot's licence" in terms of teaching, one must complete so many "flying hours". A similar issue arose with regard to construction apprentices who were made redundant when their employer's went bankrupt. Those individuals were left high and dry. They just wanted to complete their training and obtain their qualifications in order that they could go to Australia in search of work. They could not obtain - I use the phrase figuratively - sufficient flying hours. I am in favour of young teachers obtaining sufficient real experience in classrooms - that is, the necessary flying hours - in order that they can be probated and thereby progress in their careers. Many young people are pursuing teaching courses in order that they might emigrate and teach abroad. There is a worldwide shortage of qualified teachers and people can make fortunes in places such Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. A person who goes to Dubai can return home after three years with approximately €50,000 in cash and use it to pay off their loans, etc. They can then decide what they want to do thereafter. I am referring here to people in their mid-20s who are in a position to travel where they want. People who are willing to teach in schools in particular areas of England, including inner city London, are receiving bonus payments at present. There are providers of education in England who are employing Irish contractors for this purpose.

I am of the view that we can no longer consider education from a domestic, inward-looking perspective. People have the right to train as teachers. When they obtain their qualifications and complete their training - and once they have paid their taxes and so on - they should be free to do so. Probating trainee teachers and making them available to obtain experience in classrooms is good for them and for the schools in which they teach. It is also good for existing teachers. Is it good that they are being used as a cheap, yellow-pack source of labour? The answer is "No". However, the position is not black and white and there are arguments which can be put forward. I believe I am correct in stating that the teacher unions stated that they would not facilitate a limited number in this regard. When the social employment scheme was established many years ago, trade unions and local authorities objected on the grounds that it would displace existing workers. An agreement was reached whereby if local communities wanted to build community halls and if they were prepared to raise the necessary funding and use apprentice construction workers in a way which would ensure that full-time employees would not be prevented from doing their work, then they could do so.

There are models which can be used and, as already stated, we circumvented the difficulties relating to local authorities, etc. I am of the view that a similar exercise should be undertaken in the area of teaching. In some instances, the presence of an additional pair of hands would make it much easier for certain teachers to do their jobs. In addition, the relevant young person would obtain sufficient flying hours and be in a position to enter the labour market as a qualified teacher. That is my view. Is the system being exploited and abused? Of course it is but once such exploitation or abuse is reported in the context of MOMENTUM or JobBridge, the relevant firms or entities are debarred from ever again participating in those schemes.

If there are no further comments or questions, I will call on the Minister to make his closing remarks.

I think I just made them.

That is fair enough. I thank the Minister, his officials and members for attending. I also thank the staff of the secretariat for their work in respect of preparing briefing material for this meeting.

Barr
Roinn