Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

I have the honour of replying to Deputy Naughten on this matter, but I do so on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin. Were I to follow Deputy Naughten's advice, my foothold in the Department might become only a toehold.

The Minister wishes to outline to the House the current position regarding the allocation of funding under the permanent accommodation scheme. Cloontuskert national school is accommodated in a three-classroom school which was built in 1998 and there is a prefabricated unit adjacent to the main building. The school has an enrolment of 89 pupils and staffing of a principal teacher, three assistant teachers and a permanent learning support-resource teacher.

The Department of Education and Science has moved towards a model of devolved funding, responsibility and authority for building projects to school management authorities. Devolution of funding to school management authorities allows them to have control of their projects and assists in moving projects more quickly to tender and construction. It can also deliver better value for money.

The permanent accommodation scheme was originally introduced as an initiative on a pilot basis for 20 schools in the 2003 school building programme and due to the positive feedback from schools, it was extended in the school building programmes of 2004, 2005 and 2006.

While appropriate for many schools, the Department is aware that the devolved permanent accommodation scheme is not necessarily suitable for all national schools seeking to refurbish their school building or to build new accommodation. It is not the intention of the scheme to leave schools with massive fundraising requirements. However, in some cases, the school site or building can be problematic. In others, the extent of the required work is too extensive for the funding available under the scheme.

The scheme is not structured on the basis that the Department funding must be supplemented by local fundraising. It does, however, allow a school to supplement the funding from local resources if it so wishes. The critical element is that with devolved authority, the school must set the scope of works to match the funding allocated. A school can make choices within the budget allocated and setting the scope of works is the critical first step.

Clearly, where a school has a known level of resources apart from the Department funding or knows its capacity to raise additional resources, it is open to that school to extend the scope of works to include additional facilities. However, if the scope of works is not set appropriately from the outset based on the budget available, there is a risk that the school will be faced with a funding gap when the project is at construction.

The choices to be made within this devolved scheme rest with the school and that is the cornerstone of any policy of devolution. The school authority is aware of the budget and must decide what it is capable of building with that budget. The time to identify a problem is at the outset before entering any contract. Schools can raise with the Department any site specific problems or unusual planning stipulations that impose additional costs and these will be examined. Otherwise, schools must reduce the scope of intended works so as to remain within budget.

A school does not have to accept the invitation to participate in a devolved scheme and can instead be considered for inclusion in the mainstream school building programme in line with the project's priority band rating.

This school was offered a grant of €100,000 under the permanent accommodation scheme in 2005 to provide an additional permanent classroom. The grant was subsequently increased to €150,000 at the request of the school authority, to include the provision of a resource room as well as a permanent classroom. The board of management accepted the grant offered and proceeded with the architectural planning of the project.

The scope of the project decided by the board of management of the school was for an extension of approximately 150 sq m, considerably in excess of the Department norms of 76 sq m for a general classroom and 20 sq m for a resource room. Construction work commenced in June 2006 and was completed in September. In June 2006 and again in August 2006, additional funding of €21,000 was approved to cover unforeseen building costs. The board of management then submitted a further application for additional funding. This application was examined by the Department's review group which comprises senior officials from the planning and building sections. They concluded that under the terms of the scheme, the school does not warrant additional funding. The school authority has been notified of their decision.

See this speech in context