Mr. Ferdia Kelly:

It is important that we keep Mr. Ó hEaghra’s point about volunteers in mind. They are representative of local communities and they are dealing with a complexity of issues. It is important that we recognise that. Boards of management are aware of local issues that affect parents. Great work is done by them. There is a danger at meetings such as this one that we can sometimes hone in on the negatives. Much positive work is being done in terms of the mass of 30,000 volunteers who support the education system at first and second levels. We must congratulate them and also encourage them to continue to look at how to reduce costs.

At the core of our submission is the fact that central government has a role to play. Schools have no source of funding other than central government or the local community, in particular, parents. It is a huge dilemma and a struggle for local management to reconcile.

I will deal with a couple of issues that were raised by various members of the committee. On the enrolment fee and voluntary contributions, we are clear and we send regular guidelines to schools reminding them that if they are in the free education scheme they cannot charge a compulsory fee of any type. I have a copy of the most recent correspondence we sent to schools four weeks ago. That point has been reiterated time and again. At the same time we remind parents that we need the support at local level to keep the school open. It is literally down to that nowadays.

Fee-paying schools have about 7% of the second level school population. The State contributes the salaries of teachers. No matter where those 26,000 children are, the State will be paying the teachers’ salaries. If parents can no longer afford to continue to send their children to such schools and they have to move into the free education scheme, the State will be paying much more. They will still be paying the teachers’ salaries but they will be paying capitation and other grants to keep the schools running. That must be remembered and kept in focus.

Everyone recognises that the national procurement service is a good idea but there are difficulties. I went to a meeting in March 2011 at which we spoke about the provision of electricity. I gather a competition was to be run. The primary schools are still involved in the same situation. I do not know whether electricity is measured in watts or ohms but not one competition has run yet. I am told it will be next March – two years on - before the aspiration can be fulfilled. Big questions arise in that regard.

We were asked about local suppliers. We are conscious about office supplies and stationery in particular. If three or four schools in a town switch to the national procurement framework then a local business will be gone overnight. We must get the balance right. We need to save money. We will save money, but we must recognise the balance between saving money and maintaining local businesses.

Reference was made by a few members to school transport. There is a danger, in particular with the new school transport arrangements that have been introduced since 1 January 2012, that parental choice will be restricted. We are getting more and more representations by the week from schools representing parents who have to contribute substantially higher sums of money to pay for school transport to a school of their choice.

As Mr. Moriarty said, we welcome the opportunity presented by shared services but it would be remiss of me not to mention that when setting up the education and training boards, the other education sectors should have a statutory right to representation on them. This would help to ensure the integration of all of the educational services within an area and allow shared services to operate in an integrated way because representation would exist at board level.