Síle de Valera (Clare, Fianna Fail)

To answer Deputy Gogarty's questions first, I am a little confused by his questions because I made it clear in the Joint Committee on Education and Science the week before last that I would not initiate a general review of the catchment boundaries. People may say that such boundaries were introduced in the 1960s when times were very different and that a change was needed but we must examine the reasons for their implementation.

The boundaries were implemented because of the introduction of a very different education system where post-primary education was available to all but it also refers very much today in that these boundaries are in place to ensure there is a proper strategic approach to planning and accommodation throughout the country when it comes to school buildings. In terms of school transport, therefore, people may believe that changes in boundaries might alleviate some problems that may exist but many more Members would complain of difficulties with people not being eligible under the new system. Obviously it would have consequences for any change but the main reason for having the boundaries in the first place is to ensure proper school planning and accommodation.

We must ensure also that the boundaries protect declining schools, so to speak, as well as rural schools because if poaching were allowed to occur in those situations, we would see the decline of certain schools. The boundaries exist to protect those schools in both rural and urban areas. The question of teachers also arises. These boundaries are in place to ensure we have the right teachers and the correct structures for education. That is the reason I do not propose to change the boundaries system at present.

Deputy O'Sullivan referred to demographic changes but as I explained to her in the joint committee, certain changes have been made with regard to the demographics and all the other issues to allow for the provision of new schools or the closure of others in exceptional circumstances. That provision is not ad hoc. If we did not have such a system we would descend into an ad hoc situation and neither I nor the Deputy would want that.

With regard to the question of Pallaskenry, I had the opportunity of answering that question last year and also the week before last on the Adjournment. I have also answered many questions that were put to me by Deputy O'Sullivan and others in the committee and my decision on that matter stands. There is no reason to extend the debate on that matter because my decision is made.

See this speech in context