Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

In the first instance, the ERST is the patron. It must be satisfied that it is making adequate provision for the school and its future needs. As I said, that is the responsibility of the patron and it will have to satisfy itself in its discussions with the congregation that it can do that. Neither I nor my Department are party to an agreement made in 2008. I am not aware of the agreement to which the Deputy refers and, as such, that is a matter on which I cannot comment. As already stated, I will write to the Christian Brothers to seek clarification on a number of points, including to what extent the contracts referred to in the letter I received are legally binding.

The Deputy asked about the status of lands owned by the Christian Brothers and their relationship to the State. He suggests that I have the power to force the transfer of lands to the State but that is not the case. The agreement by the orders after the Ryan report was voluntary in nature and the State did not have the power to compel the transfer of any particular lands. Selling lands is a matter for the congregations involved. I do not have the power to which the Deputy refers.

The issue of playing fields has been opened up again and the Committee of Public Accounts and Comptroller and Auditor General commented adversely on the way they had been withdrawn from an original proposal. The order has written to me indicating that it is open to considering an agreement that had been suggested by a previous Minister for Education, Ruairí Quinn. That will have to be examined in due course.

See this speech in context