David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to raise issues regarding Garranbane national school, Dungarvan, County Waterford. It is probably best if I just read out a letter I received from the school principal, signed on behalf of the school's board of management, because it best outlines the issues facing the school.

Dear Mr. Cullinane,

The Board of Management and the school community of Garranbane National School require your assistance in approaching the Department of Education [and the Minister] on our behalf, to request that they grant full funding for the development of a safe school at Garranbane.

On the 16^thMay 2012, under the Prefab Rental Replacement Scheme, Garranbane N.S. received a grant for a standalone extension consisting of 4 x 80m², 2 x 25m²and 2 x 16m²permanent rooms. Since then there has been several setbacks in proceeding with this build.

Initially Waterford County Council refused planning, this was as a result of objections lodged. An Bord Pleanála finally granted conditional planning permission to the school in 2013. The total cost of the project [...] is proposed to be €1,385,769.16. This greatly exceeds the Department of Education approved funding. The overrun in costs is due solely to the imposition of the conditions as set out by An Bord Pleanála.

The total funding approved [...] is €718,226.00 [which means the shortfall] is €667,543.16.

The BOM, staff and parents are very concerned, as in four years there has been no progress on the build and to date we have not received funding. We are situated in a unique hazardous unsuitable site for any school, on the fork of a road on a hillside between the N25 and a narrow local road the site of many traffic collisions. Our school currently presents numerous health and safety issues.

- In June 2014, the school was informed that there were major exceedances of lead in the water supply, even after a five minutes' flush. As it was the BOM belief that major work was soon to begin on the school, an external temporary drinking water tap was installed on the school grounds and no other structural work was done to the pipes. This single tap provides the only drinkable water on the school grounds for a population of more than 200.

- Asbestos hazards were found present throughout our school, in a report published in 2003, thus warning signs are posted throughout the school [...]

- The main building was built in 1939 containing two classrooms. The enrolment at that time was approximately 100 pupils, our current enrolment is 196 [...]

- The sewage system that was installed at that time does not function adequately to cope with the increase in enrolment [...]

- Several of our prefabs have leaks in the roofs and mould, mildew and mushrooms growing around the corners of ceilings. They are draughty and cold in winter and overheat in summer and yet children are expected to work in these conditions.

- One of the larger prefabs has several holes in the floor, where the floor has collapsed and which has had to be patched up temporarily to avoid injury.

- The staffroom catering for 14 adults and visitors is a converted cloakroom, extended in 2004 by the Board of Management.

- There are no cloakroom facilities in the main building. All coats are kept in small classrooms which makes movement around classrooms limited with such large pupil numbers, causing dampness/mildew, again [...] unsatisfactory for all children but especially those with asthma/chest conditions.

- Toilet facilities are inadequate and out-dated. In the main building 6 toilets cater for 100 children. Continuous problems with blockages [...]

- The school is not accessible by wheelchair.

- All footpaths, playgrounds and pavements are cracked and broken [...]

- The school is situated on a hillside and the forty-two steps up to school have no hand rails presenting a safety issue for all school users especially special needs children.

The Minister will be able to understand from the letter all the problems with which the school must deal daily. I am sure he would not want it thought that any of them-----

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Tá an t-am caite.

David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----relates to him in such circumstances.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will not have time for the response.

David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Minister to outline the situation.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Cullinane for raising this issue. He is absolutely right that this project has had a very troubled history. I have had discussions with his constituency colleague and my ministerial colleague, Deputy John Halligan, about the situation. The school was selected for inclusion in the Department's prefab replacement scheme in 2012, as Deputy Cullinane said. The approval was for four mainstream classrooms and four ancillary spaces to be delivered by way of a stand-alone structure on the site. The commensurate level of funding for a project of this scale was sanctioned.

The project was devolved for delivery to the board of management, which appointed a consultant to design and deliver the project. This was therefore a devolved project intended to speed up the process but, as the Deputy knows, the difficulties then ensued. A critical role for the school authority in a devolved building project is to ensure both adherence to the scope of the approved work and the cost control for the approved spend. Failure in either area inevitably leads to delays. External matters outside the board of management's control, such as the need to obtain planning permission and all that this may entail, will also impact the timelines for delivery of the project, which is exactly what happened in this case.

While there were issues with adherence to the approved scope of the works, the planning permission process was particularly difficult due to the nature of the site and with traffic management issues on and extraneous to the site. This resulted in at least one request for further information from the local authority to the board of management that the Department is aware of. Overall, this process took much longer than is usual and further difficulties were to ensue in that the planning permission granted was subsequently appealed to an An Bord Pleanála by third parties.

An Bord Pleanála eventually granted planning permission but attached onerous planning conditions to a range of issues including site works, traffic management, pick-up and set-down areas, car parking, etc. The school's proposals to deal with these issues were to be agreed with the local authority before the project could proceed. This involved another piece of significant work for the project. For example, another range of surveys were required to be carried out on the site such as geo-technical surveys, the cost of which were met by the Department. Interactions were also necessary with the local authority to develop and agree the proposals.

When proposals were ultimately agreed with the local authority, the cost estimate for the project almost doubled from the original cost approval. Accordingly, the Department sought details of the proposals in question and spent some time obtaining satisfactory explanations. In the meantime, the school tendered the project, seeking additional funding based on the tenders received. In the absence of satisfactory responses to the cost escalation, the Department was not in a position to approve the funding uplift. That tender process is now out of time under public procurement procedures and is defunct.

Having received satisfactory explanations for the cost overrun in more recent times, the Department is now prepared to allow the project to be retendered and it has informed the school of this in writing, with clear instructions on how to properly complete the process and the junctures at which it must interact with the Department throughout the process to ensure that it runs smoothly.

The matter is now in the hands of the school. The Department is committed to the delivery of the project and strongly urges the board of management to focus its energies and resources on putting the retendering process in train as quickly as possible so that the project can go to site as early as possible in the new year.

In the intervening period, the school may apply for emergency works funding to deal with any access issues it might have at the school, provided this work will not be aborted when the main project is delivered. This is a matter for the board to discuss with its consultant, bearing in mind that the rate and pace of delivery of a large-scale project for the school rests firmly with the board of management.

David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister's reply. I wonder about the timelines involved. I received this letter from the school on 12 December, and it does not mention that the Department got back in contact with the school to let it know that it could re-tender. Maybe this happened after that date. I will refer back to the school to find out, but contact would be welcome. I assume this would still cause a delay, but the question then is the difference between the actual cost and the initial cost. Is the Minister saying that when a school retenders, it can now do so for the actual cost of carrying out the works, which I think is €600,000 more in this case?

Is that the position? I am seeking clarity on that point.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not have the exact date on which the school was informed, but on 24 November the Department was satisfied that the information on the scope of the works outlined was necessary and it was in a position to re-tender. I am unsure what time elapsed after that until the school was notified.

The Department has excluded nothing from the scope of the works being re-tendered for. The scope is the same as for the original works. Obviously, as the tender proceeds, the Department will have to be satisfied with the way in which the tendering process is being conducted and so on, as I outlined in my earlier reply. However, nothing has been deleted from the project that would undermine its value to the school community.