Seanad debates

Wednesday, 26 September 2012

3:50 pm

Photo of Susan O'KeeffeSusan O'Keeffe (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, to the House.

Photo of Ciarán CannonCiarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank my former colleagues of the Seanad for affording me the opportunity to address them on the issue of school transport.

School transport is a significant logistical operation managed by Bus Éireann on behalf of the Department of Education and Skills. In the region of 114,000 children, including more than 8,000 children with special educational needs, were, on a daily basis last year, transported to schools throughout the country. This network involves approximately 4,000 vehicles covering over 82 million kilometres annually. Members will appreciate it is a serious and logistical operation.

I am aware that this scheme has been the subject of much comment and debate recently in various parts of the country as a consequence of changes this year to the post-primary school transport scheme in particular. Essentially, the changes implemented last year and this year derive from a value for money review of the school transport scheme which was finalised in 2010 and from decisions of the previous Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government to implement a number of recommendations in that report. Before I outline the changes in more detail for the benefit of Members, I would like to stress again today that these changes are being implemented at a time of serious, long-term economic challenges. It has been, in the period since we assumed office, and will continue to be necessary for this Government to make tough and unpopular decisions. The reality also is that we have little or no scope to reverse earlier Government decisions.

This year's school transport budget of ¤170 million is ¤1 million less than that provided in 2011. Under the four year national recovery plan, this figure will be further reduced to ¤167 million in 2013 and ¤164 million in 2014. These are minimum required levels of savings and are like every other area of expenditure liable to revision. The reality is that in the 1997 to 2011 period, the budget for school transport increased from ¤50 million to almost ¤180 million, an increase of 260%. This massive increase in the school transport budget, while was heavily influenced by factors such as safety and transport provision for children with special educational needs, is significantly greater than the inflation rate or the rate of increase in the overall education budget during the same period. Given current circumstances and the fact that this is a significant expenditure area, it was simply not possible to exclude such an area from serious evaluation and from the impact of essential reviews in expenditure. The aggregation of the primary measures implemented in 2011 and 2012 and the post primary transport measures now being implemented arising from the value for money review will be an important element in achieving these savings.

On a positive note, the changes to the operation of the scheme also aim to ensure a modernised and streamlined application and administration system managed by Bus Éireann, which will be simpler and more transparent for families and schools. I accept that, because of the rural nature of the school transport scheme - which this year will again provide transport for approximately 13% of the overall primary and post-primary school-going population of some 840,000 children - the impact of the changes will obviously be significantly more visible in some rural communities.

In essence, the changes to school transport are in line with the general approach of the Department in relation to the planning of school infrastructure, which is based on children attending their nearest primary school and, in turn, attending their nearest post-primary school. At primary level, the "closed school rule" has ceased. While children who were attending this school of amalgamation retain their eligibility, from this school year all new primary children applying for school transport are assessed for eligibility based on their attendance at their nearest school, having regard to ethos and language. Similarly at post-primary level, the use of the catchment area system as a means of determining eligibility ceased for all new pupils entering a post-primary school this year. From the commencement of this school year, school transport eligibility for all new pupils entering a post-primary school is being determined by reference to the distance they reside from their nearest post-primary school or education centre, having regard to ethos and language.

As at primary level, children who were eligible under the former catchment boundary area system will retain their transport eligibility for the duration of their post-primary education cycle, provided there is no change to their current circumstances. In other words pupils in first, second, third, fourth or fifth year last year may complete their education in the school they are attending and may retain transport eligibility to that school for the duration of their time in that school. Siblings of these children and other children who are not attending their nearest school, be it at primary or post-primary level, may apply for school transport on a concessionary basis only in accordance with the terms of the relevant school transport scheme. Senators may recall that from the 2011-12 school year the distance criterion was also applied at primary level and that a number of children who were availing of school transport under the closed school rule, CSR, had been deemed eligible, although they resided less than 3.2 km from their school of attendance. From the beginning of the 2011-12 school year, therefore, the distance criterion of 3.2 km applied to all pupils availing of transport under the primary school transport scheme.

It remains the position that eligible primary and post-primary children holding valid medical cards and children with special educational needs will be exempt from paying the school transport charge. In addition, this year, to support families affected by the ceasing of the closed school rule, the primary concessionary charge of ¤200 was reduced and equalised with the new primary transport charge of ¤100. I attended a number of meetings last year in Listowel, Galway, Donegal and other locations at which I met with parents of primary school children, some of whom were anxious to access transport on a concessionary basis. They were being asked to pay ¤200 while children accessing the service on a non-concessionary or eligibility were being charged ¤50. I committed at that time to those parents to exploring the opportunity of equalising that charge.

I committed at the time to exploring the opportunity of equalising that charge and, thankfully, in last year's budget year we were able to do that. This means that ineligible children, those who do not meet the requisite primary distance or those who may not be attending their nearest school, may now get a concessionary seat at a cost of ¤100 per annum, rather than the cost of ¤200 that applied in the past, where there is spare capacity on buses once all eligible children have been catered for. I wish to emphasise that the changes to school transport at primary and post primary level are, and will continue to be, applied equitably and fairly on a national basis.

Given the very difficult fiscal position facing the country, it is imperative that parents, schools and the general public recognise that the main objective of the school transport scheme is to support the safe transport to and from school of children who would have difficulty travelling, for reasons of distance, to their nearest school if transport is not supported. While it is, always has been and always will be, the prerogative of parents to send their children to the school of their choice, it is simply not reasonable in these difficult times, or at any time I argue, to expect that the State would be available to provide transport on a school of choice basis.

4:00 pm

Photo of Susan O'KeeffeSusan O'Keeffe (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind Senators that group spokespersons have eight minutes, other Senators have five minutes and I will ask the Minister of State to conclude not later than 5.50 p.m.

Photo of Ned O'SullivanNed O'Sullivan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to share my time with Senator MacSharry.

Photo of Susan O'KeeffeSusan O'Keeffe (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of Ned O'SullivanNed O'Sullivan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is a timely debate and I welcome the Minister of State back to the House. We were colleagues together during the last Government term and I wish him well in his endeavours.

The school transport budget is a big ticket item, even though it has been reduced as the Minister of State has accepted, and unfortunately it appears set that there will be further reductions in it in the years ahead. It is a big operation. As the Minister of State said, 110,000 plus students, including 8,000 special needs students, avail of the service and there are 4,000 vehicles on the road which clock up 82 million km every year.

This scheme was the brainchild of a previous Fianna Fáil Government in line with our party's commitment to equality and cherishing all the children of the nation equally. Without it, there would not be access to second level education, particularly at current levels. I compliment everybody involved in the operation of the service from the administrators to the bus drivers who in many cases are the friendly face of the system for the pupils.

The value for money report recommended certain changes which it is accepted were enshrined in the national recovery plan. The then Fianna Fáil Minister, Mary Coughlan, prepared that and proposed a gradual phased changeover to the new system. This Government, as in many other instances, has implemented fully, almost slavishly, Fianna Fáil policy even though it berated that policy in opposition. It is on record that the current Minister, Deputy Quinn, was highly indignant about the then Minister, Mary Coughlan's, proposals even though the ones that are now being implemented are far more stringent.

It is interesting that we are having this debate now given that the schools started back in September and we are starting to witness teething problems with the changeover, of which the Minister of State will be aware, and every Member present will have some case on hand of families and communities that are upset about the operation of the system under the new regime, and that is the way it will be. There is a commitment that the operation of the system will be reviewed this side of Christmas. The Minister of State might clarify that in order that we can assess the level of the problems.

A key change is the move from the catchment area system at second level, which has been in place for a long time. No more than any other system, the system in place was not perfect and there were a number of anomalies in it which caused problems for families and communities and this system will probably prove to be the same. There will be problems and anomalies in it as no system is perfect.

The idea of attending the nearest school in theory is the right one. However, it will create problems for people on a number of levels, the detail of which I will not go into. I want the Minister of State to be as flexible as he can be in the way in which the programme will be implemented, particularly in areas where county boundaries are being broken and where families are being forced to send their children out of the county for the sake of a kilometre or two. That is a problem in many respects, whether it be in the area of one's cultural identity, county loyalty or the colour jersey one wears. People are more comfortable in their own county. Therefore, that is an aspect that needs to be examined.

The idea of siblings not being able in the future to attend the same school as their brothers and sisters will be upsetting for families. There may be a tradition of the children in a family attending a certain school and in most cases parents will dig deep into their pockets and pay for their children to attend the same school rather than attend a different one. There is also the question of subject choice. The nearest school may not necessarily be the most suitable school for a pupil. One pupil might be particularly gifted academically and the nearest school might be one where the main ethos is focused on technical subjects and so on and vice versa. These are all areas that will have to be examined.

I noted on reading a Dáil debate on this area that a Fine Gael Deputy raised an interesting point. A particular bus could be passing a student's door but it would be the wrong bus for that student and he or she would have to travel a considerable distance in a rural isolated area on winter days and nights to avail of the proper bus. I hope in the promised review that these matters can be ironed out.

The minimum number of students required to run a school bus service has increased from seven to ten. There should be flexibility around that requirement, especially in the more rural areas because essentially this is a rural problem. I do not think school transport is a major issue in Dublin city, although it may be, but the correspondence I receive on this issue is all from people in rural areas throughout the country.

The cost of school transport is increasing. This is happening when people are facing increased charges in terms of septic tanks and property taxation and increases in PRSI have been mooted. The Government effectively has doubled primary school transport costs. That was not envisaged in the previous Government's programme. The costs are sizable. The maximum cost for one family has increased from ¤110 to ¤220, which is a significant ask for parents. There is a ¤50 increase in the second level transport costs which brings the cost up to ¤350. The only way it can be paid is in one lump sum or in two instalments. I ask the Minister of State to reconsider this. Could the payment of two instalments of ¤175, which is a significant cost if it applies to more than one or two children in a family, be phased in over a 12-month period to give people an opportunity to meet the cost, bearing in mind the cost of school books and other costs.

I have heard reports that the administration of special needs transport is getting blocked up. There is a blockage in the pipeline. A number of colleagues on both sides of this House and in the other House have told me that the processing of applications for school transport for students with special needs is taking an inordinate amount of time. The Minister might examine that area.

I agree with the Minister of State that traffic safety must be paramount. We read horror stories every year of accidents involving young children stepping off buses where there is inadequate lighting and there are other such problems. The buses must be safe and must be run properly. That is the most important issue. I appeal to all parents to make sure that their children stringently observe all the rules of the road.

Photo of Marc MacSharryMarc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator O'Sullivan for sharing a little of his time. As a former business person and one who knows business, I know the Minister of State appreciates the need for common sense. I have written to him about a case, that of the Gilgarrow family in Sligo, concerning school transport. A child in that family attends Coola school even though the closest school is Ballymote but because historically the family attended that school, that child can continue to do so. A sibling of that child is travelling in the same direction but it will not be possible for that child to do so without paying ¤350 despite the fact that the family has a medical card and that there is a spare seat on the bus. Effectively, the Government is saying to that family that one child can travel on the bus to school but that a parent will have to transport the other child by car in that direction, even though there is a spare seat, the person has a medical card and there is also a scenario where there is another child at home with diabetes who requires a routine to be followed in terms of medication.

I ask the Minister of State to examine that case; I know he has details on it. I appreciate that there must be rules and a threshold. However, for Government to work effectively, there must be some element of common sense and discretion. As a former businessperson, the Minister of State will appreciate that and perhaps he can examine the case. There are many similar to it. Taking a literal interpretation of the rules means that needy cases are overlooked. As well as a literal interpretation, there is an interpretation of the spirit of the rules. In the case of the Gilgarrow family in Castlebaldwin, County Sligo, discretion is warranted.

On a matter not related to school transport, I ask the Minister of State to investigate reports that Bus Éireann is adjusting services to rural areas. I refer specifically to the north west of the country, where the Dublin route calls on Rooskey, County Roscommon, and Dromod, County Leitrim, and the reports that the service will no longer call to those villages. This move will further marginalise the north west, rural Ireland and the communities dependent on these services. The route between Sligo and Dublin is crucial to community life in these smaller villages and connects them to employment and services of the larger centres. I do not recall the route numbers but I ask the Minister of State to examine the matter. While everyone appreciates that savings are necessary, we must be conscious of preserving the soul of Ireland, which is rural Ireland and parts of the country that do not have the critical mass for services. If services must be pared back to make savings, we must do so where there is a critical mass of other services such as in Dublin, Galway and the larger cities.

4:10 pm

Photo of John WhelanJohn Whelan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to share time with Senator John Kelly. I appreciate the courtesy of Senator Jim D'Arcy, who allowed me to speak first as I have to attend another meeting at 5 p.m. I welcome the Minister of State again after a previous discussion on this matter on the Adjournment, responding to Senator Pat O'Neill and me in July.

I welcome the thoroughness of the policy as set out by the Minister of State. Senator Ned O'Sullivan made a constructive and fair-minded assessment. No one wants to tear up the rule book or put policy in the bin. It is well intended and has been introduced to good purpose. We must have planning and cost control and I do not seek favouritism or ducking and diving around the rules. This is primarily an issue that affects rural Ireland. If people cannot get the school bus, there may be no alternative. There is no 46A bus going down boreens. An increasing number of families are finding it difficult to keep a car on the road, never mind two cars. The husband or wife may have to head off to work in the car and there may be no option to get the child to school. The buses are going by the door and the brother and sister can get the bus but another child may have to get a lift ten miles in the opposite direction. There may be no alternative school bus route or service. There is no saving to the taxpayer or the Department. If the purpose is planning, cost saving and value for money, proximity to the school cannot be the only metric underpinning the policy. Other factors must be taken into account. It would be foolhardy to have a single measure of eligibility. It is an absurdity that two children from the same household can get on a bus with empty seats while another child must be driven to school in the opposite direction. That is the first problem that needs to be addressed in the review.

The Government will ask schools to consider amalgamation and rationalisation in the interest of the best use of resources. Heywood community school is the amalgamation of four secondary schools. They merged in good faith and the parents, encouraged by the Department, bought into the project. Now they are being told it is no longer the nearest school. Children from the Swan national school, Newtown national school, Wolfhill and Raheen are being told to go to Castlecomer and Portlaoise, which are ten miles and eight miles, respectively, in the opposite direction. There is no school bus to these locations. It is not the intention of the Department to undermine the enrolment policy of a perfectly good, popular and well run viable school, but persisting with this policy will strip out 30 to 50 children annually. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to do the maths on that point. Within a number of years, the viability of the school and the enrolment process from primary schools will be undermined. How can the principal and board of management go to primary schools in the catchment area of Heywood community school in November for the traditional information and enrolment evenings without being able to assure the parents that eligible children will have access to the school bus? The concessionary ticket is not the answer because it leads to travelling on a wing and a prayer. If there is a seat, the child might get one. I ask the Minister of State to exercise his political prerogative to examine and review the policy and its operation on the ground. While it might be working for the majority of people, it is affecting hundreds, if not thousands, of families nationwide. It puts undue distress and hardship on rural families.

Photo of John KellyJohn Kelly (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. Senator Ned O'Sullivan called this a timely debate and it is only now we are seeing the repercussions of the blunt instrument introduced. I contacted the Minister of State about a number of cases. One involves a woman who came from Galway to a rural part of Roscommon and enrolled her twins in a school in Glenamaddy. She did not have children in secondary school before and was not aware of the rule that children must go to the nearest school. She was not told of the rule when she enrolled the children and, at the eleventh hour, when she required a bus ticket, she was told that, even though she has a medical card, she would be charged because she was not sending her children to the nearest school. She accepted that it was not the nearest school but her endeavours with Bus Éireann to get some discretion brought into the equation led to nothing. An official from Bus Éireann phoned her and offered to call down and hear her story. When he called down, she was not there and he returned to Galway. When she subsequently spoke to him on the phone two days later, his answer was that the child was not going to the school nearest to the family. She explained she was aware of this, yet the official from Bus Éireann came from Galway, 60 miles each way, to measure the distance. That is pure nonsense, where one arm of the State can be milking it for travel expenses while this woman is expected to pay ¤600 that she does not have.

Another case involves a distance of a few hundred metres and a child with special needs. The child is going to a school and the psychologist has written to the special educational needs organiser suggesting the child is in the most appropriate school, but the letter seems to carry no weight.

I have other examples also. There are still empty seats on buses that could facilitate the children in question.

There is no mechanism in place to deal with discretionary cases; that is my biggest problem. From my dealings with legislation in my previous day job down through the years, I noted discretion was always provided for in social welfare legislation. There was always provision for a ministerial decision if all else failed. There is a need for ministerial intervention on this issue, just for this year. I ask for a moratorium on the heavy-handed approach that applies this year. Families should be fully informed for next year. This certainly did not happen this year. I sympathise with those families who were caught in a trap and did not realise what they were doing when they bought uniforms for children and enrolled them in a certain school only to be told that the school is a meter farther away than another. I would like to hear the Minister's response.

4:20 pm

Photo of Sean BarrettSean Barrett (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. I note from his speech that the cost of the school transport scheme is ¤170 million per annum and that some 114,000 pupils are availing of it. If my arithmetic is correct, this amounts to an individual cost of ¤1,400 per year. I know schemes other than that of the Department with a different limit and in respect of which the catchment area is half suburban and half rural but I do not believe anybody pays ¤1,400 per year per pupil.

When we discussed this issue last year, it was said that special disability cases are included, thus increasing the average. However, I would have believed that in an open market, parents who want to send their children to school would not even pay half that sum. It is the subject of a court case in which it has been argued the service should have been put out to tender. There is no verdict in that case, if I recall correctly. Irrespective of the law courts, it would be interesting for the Department to ask whether there would have been savings had there been competitive tendering. Some two thirds of the contracts are passed on in any case ? it may be an even higher proportion at this stage - to the independent operators. Given the high cost, we must ask whether there are alternative ways in which the service should or could have been provided.

I note Bus Éireann is suing a rival in court on foot of an allegedly libellous document sent to Senator Norris. Senator Norris is not present today. Is the case a good use of public funds given that CIE itself needed an extra ¤36 million the week after the Dáil and Seanad went into recess in July? Mysteriously, it discovered it was short of the money. One has a constitutional right to criticise public policy. One must also bear in mind the rights of Members of the Oireachtas and that the director of the company being sued chose to communicate with a Senator, Senator Norris, on the matter. I am sure Senator Norris will be in contact himself.

The service is valuable. It operates in a society that now has far more cars per household than when it began. It has increased in cost dramatically, from ¤50 million to ¤180 million. There was an increase of 260% between 1997 and 2011. Can the Minister enlighten us on what the value-for-money study stated on the potential to continue serving the children of the nation in a lower cost way?

The Minister of State referred to not diverting money that should be invested in schools to school transport. The Minister of State and Minister face the consequences of a very rapidly rising birthrate. To be spending money on buses when we actually need school places and tuition for the increased numbers that will be in our schools in four or five years is ill advised. We need buildings and teachers for the pupils. This should be the emphasis.

In all times of economic crisis, people say, "Never waste a good crisis". Is this the time to do a root-and-branch analysis of the school bus service? Since 1932, the Department responsible for transport has tried to stop a large, independent bus service from getting into operation. After 80 years of trying, the wrong people own 80% of the buses. There must be a message there for those responsible for transport policy in general and for a major customer in the transport sector such as the Department, which must purchase school bus services. We will be in a better position when we know the result of the court case. We will know whether the proceedings indicate that there should be competitive tendering for the service. I would be concerned about the cost.

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to share my time Senator Brennan. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit ar ais go dtí an Seanad. I thank him for outlining once again in detail the application of the school transport scheme.

The last sighting of the dodo was in the 1660s in Mauritius. We know nothing about the national recovery plan to which Senator Ned O'Sullivan referred; it, too, is in the ether. It had all the tactical nous of Trapattoni in the European championships. We will leave it at that.

Since the scheme was introduced, it has been of great benefit to hundreds of thousands of children and this has enabled them to attend school regularly. Mr. Neil Kinnock said he was the first member of his family to attend university. The US Vice President, Joe Biden, or someone else stole this line. I was the first member of my family to avail of the school transport scheme. We had to walk before the scheme, in our bare feet. The scheme is of immense importance and we need to maintain it.

As the Minister has outlined, the allocation for the scheme in 2012 was ¤169,693,000. In 2013, the allocation is to be ¤167,435,000. In 2014, the allocation is expected to be ¤163,751,000. This is a huge envelope and the money is not in the system to add to it.

Is it possible to have greater value for money through management, for example? There is a virtual monopoly in the management of the school transport system although much of the work is done by private operators. I refer to the monopoly of Bus Éireann. I would like the Minister to consider this.

All Senators should congratulate the Minister on succeeding in protecting so much of the school transport budget in the current financial circumstances. If I am correct ? I believe I am ? there was a serious proposal at official level to do away with the school scheme.

The Minister of State is to be richly congratulated. I have heard him speak passionately, both in public and in private, on the school transport scheme and his commitment thereto.

Nevertheless, the financial circumstances require some savings to be made. Most are gained by tightening the criteria. For example, children are only eligible for school transport to their nearest school. This will cause problems.

I know of a family of four or five children who live on a hill within a hen's throw of a school. They pass it on their way to a school miles away. Tá dhá thaobh leis an scéal. We must be balanced. There will always be difficult cases and I do not know how they will be handled. That is up to the Minister of State. I do not know whether many of them can be handled. For the sake of efficiencies in the pot of money available to us, we must encourage families to attend their nearest schools. This is the new reality.

I am delighted that we have been able to reduce the concessionary charge to ¤100 from ¤200. It had been coming for a long time and a great deal of work was done. It is a good move forward.

I do not envy the Minister of State his task. I almost supported Senator MacSharry in respect of the Sligo situation that he outlined until he stated that there were many like it, at which point he lost me. If the Minister uses his discretion to look after one situation, it will be the old stroke politics. We are long past that.

4:30 pm

Photo of Ned O'SullivanNed O'Sullivan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did I hear the name of the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, mentioned in terms of stroke politics?

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is payback time for the Senator who I slagged about the national recovery plan. The Taoiseach addressed the other issue perfectly well. The criteria were open and transparent.

Photo of Ned O'SullivanNed O'Sullivan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe the Senator.

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for attending the House and congratulate him on his handling of the school transport service.

Photo of Terry BrennanTerry Brennan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ba mhaith liomsa freisin fáilte a chur roimh an Aire ar ais go dtí an Seanad. I acknowledge and welcome the decision that eligible primary and post-primary children who hold valid medical cards and pupils with special educational needs will continue to be exempt from paying the school transport charge. Some 140,000 children were transported to and from school by bus last year. The figure might increase this year. The figure included 8,000 children with special educational needs. This was a major transportation of children, as is acknowledged by many families.

Does the Minister of State believe that the service is as effective and efficient as it should be? What changes can be made to improve the service, if possible? Gabhaim comhghairdeas leis an Aire as an obair iontach atá á dhéanamh aige do scoláirí óga ar fud na tíre.

Photo of David CullinaneDavid Cullinane (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an tAire Stáit. We must accept that providing school transport for 130,000 children every day is a large logistical challenge for the State and requires a significant investment. However, I cannot join one of my republican colleagues in the Seanad, Senator Jim D'Arcy, in commending the Minister of State for cutting the budget for school transport by ¤17 million. Such a cut will have an impact on some people's ability to avail of school transport. We are discussing children.

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One could cut ¤17 million and still have ¤3 million left.

Photo of David CullinaneDavid Cullinane (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The republic with which I want to be associated, a republic that cherishes all children equally, has a free education system. An element of this involves ensuring that children can get to school by funding a transport service through progressive taxation. If there is no money, as Senator Jim D'Arcy stated, we must consider raising the necessary amount through increased taxes on those who can afford to pay more. In a republic, one would end the practice of subsidising private education to the tune of ¤30 million per year and use that money to ensure equity and access in the system. Philosophically and politically, we must approach this situation from the point of view of equality. We must recognise it as a children's rights issue and ensure that those rights are vindicated by the State.

Not unlike other Senators, I corresponded with the Minister of State prior to and during the summer, in my case because of a number of issues that arose in Waterford following changes to post-primary school transport. The changes were introduced by the previous Government but one change, the abolition of catchment areas that resulted in a child being required to attend the closest education centre, only came into effect this year, leading to significant confusion. Families were unaware of what was happening. They enrolled their children in schools and applied for transport, yet no one had informed them of the changes. This was a critical fault. Someone dropped the ball. I do not know whether it was Bus Éireann, the Department or someone else. Surely there should have been communication following the making of applications, particularly when people in the Department and Bus Éireann knew that the scheme was going to be changed. It might have solved the problem for some of the families affected.

Many families received letters stating that their children would not be eligible for post-primary school transport. Like many Senators, I was inundated by calls and representations from parents. I downloaded the eligibility criteria from the Department's website. According to that information, the Department will measure the distance from a child's home to the nearest education centre, yet the letters to some families claimed that the measurement was from the nearest post office to the school. That measure was not mentioned anywhere on the website. If it is the case and if there is a rationale, the information should be included in the eligibility criteria to which people have public access on the website.

The Minister of State might correct me if I am wrong, but he stated that only 1% of the students who applied for concessionary transport were denied. The fact remains, some people were denied school transport.

For those people who availed of concessionary transport, there was an obvious difficulty with people using medical cards, for example. Ordinarily, if such people qualified for school transport, it would be free, but they were being asked to pay because they were availing of concessionary transport. Although the Minister of State may be considering changes, if a person has a medical card, he or she should be entitled to free transport whether a place is availed of in the first instance or there is a concessionary transport place.

I accept there are challenges and it is a big logistical project to be delivered by the State. I also accept that in a republic we must ensure that children have access to school transport in a fair system. I agree with previous Senators about the lack of flexibility and discretion in the scheme. In certain circumstances, there are only a few metres in the difference and a child may want to attend the same school as siblings. In my county there is a short distance between Portlaw in County Waterford, the nearest education centre in Carrick on Suir and the centre which most people would have attended in Kilmacthomas. That does not make sense and people should be able to attend school in their own county rather than the neighbouring county. Pupils should be able to attend a school with their siblings and friends and where their parents had attended. A bit of discretion in the scheme would go a long way and solve many of the anomalies which surfaced this year and caused problems for many parents.

4:40 pm

Photo of Pat O'NeillPat O'Neill (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is welcome to the Seanad. As the Senator who raised the matter on the Order of Business, I have a few points, although most of the Senators have dealt with the issues. The changes to the scheme are too blunt and there is not much of a humanitarian or practical aspect to them. There will always be difficulties in change.

I gave examples before and do not wish to repeat them but the nub of the matter concerns people with medical cards. Some 8% of people on the school transport scheme were receiving benefit under the medical card scheme, and as Senator Cullinane noted, perhaps 1% are affected in having to pay ¤350. I have given examples where people live on a road where a bus to Kilkenny city passes the door. When a child applied for a ticket for the bus, the parents were told he could not go on the bus with his sister and that the nearest school was in Thomastown. The parents in question would have to drive the child two miles every morning in order to get a second bus. That is impractical, and if a bus stops outside a house to collect one child, another child should be allowed on the bus, whether the cost is ¤350. That is why the scheme should be reviewed.

This also limits parents' choice of schools. There are six educational centres at secondary level in Kilkenny city, and there is a large catchment area in the adjoining villages within five or six miles. If somebody lives just outside the criteria for Kilkenny city, the children are instructed to go to places like Thomastown, Castlecomer or Ballyhale. There is nothing wrong with those education centres but if a pupil's brothers or sisters are attending Kilkenny city schools, and the parents have attended schools there, there should be a choice in schools.

I accept that savings had to be made in the Department but a blunt instrument has been used. Departmental officials did not really consider the humanitarian side of this. The 1% of people in question do not have much of a voice and will not be on the street protesting, and I do not support protests at any stage. The only avenue available for these people is lobbying Members like Senators or Deputies or county councillors.

I know the Minister of State knows his brief well and may review the system next year. The savings could be found in other areas in the Department. The action in this area was not properly thought out, although I am not blaming the Minister of State. There are people in middle Ireland who do not receive any entitlements from the State and they are trying to educate their children the best they can. Those people may have children in university, meaning they are liable for registration fees. They may have a child going to secondary school and if they do not have a medical card, they may not have free transport and have to pay for a concessionary ticket. As Senator Whelan pointed out, the concessionary ticket process is hit and miss because if a bus is full, the pupil will still not get to the school.

I ask the Minister of State to review the scheme. I know the departmental officials formulated the process with savings in mind but we could reconsider this scheme. Perhaps we should include people's past records, including where siblings went to school, as well as a free choice in education. I thank the Minister of State for his attention.

Photo of Mary MoranMary Moran (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was not listed to speak in the debate but as I have raised the topic several times on the Order of Business and the Adjournment, I felt I should contribute. I concur with Senator O'Neill's call for a review of the scheme. Other Senators have argued that there can be no discretion but in the special needs area, we must show a little discretion. The Minister of State would be well aware of cases I brought to him. Department officials must consider special needs children cases, as all children do not fit in the same criteria.

I have mentioned the case of one child on several occasions. That child attends a special school in Dundalk and because the child lives 2.6 km from a pick-up point, the child's mother now has to drive the child. The child wears a back brace, suffers from dreadful epilepsy and has severe problems with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and concentration. The child is almost asleep before getting to school. Nevertheless, nothing has been done about the case and the mother this year has had to drive the child to a pick-up point on the roadside. I may be seeking some discretion but if the child could go normally on a secondary school bus, there would be no problem. As the mother noted, she has a concessionary ticket which is being paid for. She has said she would pay anything for proper transport.

The mother in question is a nurse and the father also works, meaning very often they have no means of arranging for somebody to stand at the side of the road to pick up the child on the way home. I ask that the Minister of State consider this case again. Last week, on the second day at school, the child was brought home and dropped on the side of the road. The bus driver informed the mother that the child could not be taken on the bus any more because there was no insurance cover for the child. The mother rang me in tears on the Wednesday and I contacted the Department straightaway. The child is being picked up for school again but the mother cannot let her colleagues in the health service down when there are cutbacks in the north east. The woman is distracted and upset, and this is unnecessary.

One of the reasons I stood for election in 2011, having never been involved in politics before, is to mention the case of my own son, who required wheelchair transport to go to school in Drumcar in County Louth. This was in the time of the previous Government and our circumstances demonstrated the completely nonsensical way in which people determine school transport. He required wheelchair transport and a bus with a wheelchair space drove past our house every day; however, when we tried to get him a place on it we were told that we could not get one and instead we had to drive him to school, with the Department reimbursing us at a rate of 33 cent per mile. That was the limit.

We had to pay the ¤158 a week to get him to and from school while he was in a wheelchair. It would have cost the Department nothing - not 33 cent a mile - to examine the details, see there was a space on a bus and put the child on it. It is argued that one cannot be concessionary and if the Minister of State makes a concession for one person he will have to make it for everybody. This is not the case with regard to disability. When one has a child with special needs and it takes one half an hour to dress him or her and another ten minutes to walk out and put him or her on a bus, no money would pay for the time in an extra half an hour in the morning. On behalf of the mother of the child with special needs I mentioned, and on behalf of all those with special needs, I appeal to the Minister of State to examine cases individually.

4:50 pm

Photo of Catherine NooneCatherine Noone (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and commend him and his officials for their work. I was interested to note that in recent years Bus Éireann's accounts have shown the cost per student has increased annually. In effect, it costs more to transport fewer children. The cost in 2009 was ¤1,266 per student, in 2010 it cost ¤1,392 per student, and in 2011 the cost was ¤1,526 per student. The number of students availing of bus transport has decreased by 20%, yet the cost has increased. I understand the counterpoint, that this figure includes 8,000 children with special needs who incur a greater cost because of their special needs and the special transport needed to be provided for them. It is great that this number of children with special needs is transported every day but the State has a responsibility to all children, and while I am not aware of specific instances such as that spoken about by Senator Moran, it is clear the service is not provided in all instances, which is very unsatisfactory. If savings were made elsewhere in the system, surely the average cost per pupil would stay level rather than rising overall. I am not sure that 8,000 children with special needs would result in an average rise of ¤300 per child nationally if the number of children using the service nationally is reducing by 20%.

As many of my colleagues know well, recent changes have been made to the school transport system and I will not go through the points already made by my colleagues as we are somewhat tied for time. Regrettably, as other Senators alluded to, the revised scheme may mean siblings of pupils enrolled in the same school for this school year may not be eligible for school transport, and these siblings could apply for transport on a concessionary basis. As many parents are now aware, changes in the post-primary school transport scheme were announced in the budget in 2011. One of the changes, which took effect this month, means the use of the catchment area system as a means of determining eligibility will cease for all pupils newly entering a post-primary school. Under the new system, school transport eligibility for all new pupils entering a post-primary school will be determined by reference to the distance they reside from their nearest post-primary education centre, and will take into account ethos and language. This will be applied in an equal way nationally.

It is clear that if this were opened up to a tendering process which invited Bus Éireann and private companies to tender for the school transport contract, we might see potential synergies emerge which are unavailable to us, such as between school and hospital transport or with regard to the cost of maintenance for a company with an international fleet as opposed to an indigenous or regional bus company. There are many possibilities. Bus Éireann is doing a reasonable job but there is room for imagination and greater use of resources. We need to open up this sector to competition. Bus Éireann has done a decent job but it can be done better. Given that we will spend ¤170 million on school transport this year, perhaps we should strive for greater savings and synergies across the board. This could be achieved by having an open and competitive tendering process.

I do not want to touch on the legal aspect of the court case concerning this issue, but regardless of whether there was a contract to provide school transportation for Bus Éireann, there should be no question as to there being an open, fair and competitive tendering process in the future. I do not know who would win such a tendering process, but this is precisely the point. Each player should be given a chance to offer innovative ideas, some of which I have heard in dispatches, which could be applied to the school transport system.

While there has been a fair bit of disruption to parents and pupils this year, with the changes made in the budget in 2010 now being realised for the first full year with some regrettable consequences, I hope we do not shy away from further changes. The biggest and most effective change we can make is in how we handle future school transport contracts. I am interested to hear the views of the Minister of State.

Photo of Martin ConwayMartin Conway (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like the Minister of State, I come from a rural constituency and we are contacted regularly by parents of children who use the school transport system. Funnily enough, this year has not been too bad and we have not had the same level of communication as we did last year. This means the Minister of State must be doing something right. The budget of ¤170 million was reduced by ¤1 million. Being realistic, this is less than 1% and is more like 0.5%. School transport has not suffered in the same way as other sectors in society.

The measures proposed are innovative but we could be even more innovative. We need to foster and encourage car pooling, especially in rural Ireland. One way to make this happen is by offering a tax incentive whereby parents would receive a small deduction in tax or a tax allowance if they can prove they car pool or sign up to a car pooling scheme which could be run by volunteers. Many retired teachers have contacted me to say they want to do something to help. They want to work a day or two a week to help get the country back in action. They have pensions and they are quite willing to give of their time. They are able, competent and professional retired public servants. I suggest a national car pooling scheme to bring young people to school could be co-ordinated and operated entirely by retired schoolteachers, initially on a pilot basis and, if successful, rolled out nationally. This would get people back to work, save money and reduce the budget of ¤170 million. Substantial reductions to the budget could be made if people were prepared to think outside the box.

Photo of Ciarán CannonCiarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As a former Member of the House, at times I was disappointed when a Minister would come in, deliver a speech, listen intently to arguments made for and against a particular issue, then deliver another speech and walk out the door. I will endeavour as best I can to respond to each presentation and apologise if my delivery stalls every now and again. Certain themes recurred throughout the contributions and I will deal with these once.

To respond to Senator O Sullivan, no case can be made that this Administration is in any way more stringent than the previous one in its application of the terms of the scheme which arose from the budgetary decision in 2010. We have been as flexible as we possibly could. The Senator mentioned conducting a review. My officials and I and Bus Éireann engage and communicate weekly as anomalous situations arise during the transitionary phase. I will explain what I mean by this. The review is happening as we speak. There is no need for us to state publicly we are having a review. It is ongoing and changes will be made if any issue needs to be tweaked or amended to make the scheme more flexible or equitable. Last year I committed to thousands of parents that I would reduce the concessionary charge on primary school transport from ¤200 to ¤100, and I did so in the most recent budget.

The issue which has arisen most often in the past number of weeks in the post-primary sector is the ¤350 charge that applies on a concessionary basis to families with medical cards whose children, if attending their nearest school, would be paying nothing. I am looking again - I am not making any commitments here - at perhaps being able to reduce that ¤350 down to a smaller figure. If I do so I will have to find that saving elsewhere in the school transport budget which may mean adding on an equal amount to the charge across the rest of the system. I suppose I am bringing a degree of social solidarity into the system.

I do not agree with the supposition that we should endeavour at all times to transport children within their own county. This is a small island of 4.5 million people on the edge of Europe. We can get a bit sensitive at times about our county loyalties. When children go on to third level education, nobody suggests his or her child should only go to university in Clare and not in Galway, for example. One cannot argue, in particular at a time of severe economic difficulty, that there is a more rational or logical approach to take than simply transporting children to their nearest school. It is fair, equitable and transparent. Everybody understands this is the case. With regard to the complaint by the schools that they were unaware of this, they were notified twice in the past year that this change was happening. It was on the Department's website since the middle of 2011, so principals and boards of management of all of our schools had ample notification that this change was about to occur.

Senator MacSharry raised the issue of those unable to accompany siblings to a particular school. There was an option in the value for money report. However, we made the system flexible by allowing children already in it to work their way through the post-primary school system and by allowing them to retain that eligibility to the end of their education. What we could have done was to say that as and from September 2012, every child in the post-primary system shall attend their nearest school. From a logistical point of view, that would have been far easier to do because there would not be this anomalous situation where a bus passes by a house to pick up a child's sibling but that child has to get into a car with his or her mother or father and travel in a different direction. That is happening but not to the extent people would argue, and I will deal with that statistic. The flexibility we have in the system, where we are allowing children to finish their post-primary schooling, is causing anomalous situations to arise. Once that phase is over and those children have worked their way through the system, those anomalies will disappear and from then on children will be transported to their nearest primary school and post-primary school in a fair and equitable manner.

In early January or February, parents will be able to log on to their computer, access a website, click on a map where their house is located and they will be automatically told what is the nearest school. They will be able to make a payment and the bus ticket will arrive in the post. We want to make it as simple, seamless, fair and as easy to understand as that.

Senator MacSharry mentioned the fact there are significant synergies and savings to be achieved in combining various elements of public transport in rural Ireland. He is correct; there possibly are. They are not as significant as some people might argue but there are savings to be made. The Minister of State, Deputy Kelly, has convened a group of experts from my Department, his Department and from the HSE to look at publicly provided transport across rural Ireland and the different entities which provide public transport for which we the taxpayers are paying to see if there are any synergies and saving which can be achieved. For example, in my community of rural east Galway, the school bus drops children every morning at school, as in most rural communities. On a Friday morning, the school bus returns to its base and a half an hour later another bus arrives and travels around the community bringing about ten elderly people into the local town to collect their pension and so on. There is no reason that school bus, having dropped off the children at 9 a.m., could not do that run. That is just one instance of savings. There are savings to be achieved and the Minister of State, Deputy Kelly, is working very closely with my Department and the HSE to see if we can achieve those savings.

Senator Whelan mentioned that principals did not have the opportunity to plan. I argue they did in that they were notified twice in the past year and it has been on our website since the middle of 2011. He mentioned a review, which is ongoing.

Senators Kelly and Moran raised the issue of special needs with which I will deal as best I can. There are very straightforward and compassionate procedures in place through the National Council for Special Education and our SENO system. SENOs play a major role in determining the school transport eligibility of children with special needs. An individual assessment is carried out. A blanket approach is not taken nor is there insensitivity or inflexibility. An individual assessment is carried out on every special needs child who uses school transport by a SENO who is professionally qualified to make a determination as to what school can be best resourced to care for the child's needs. The SENO will determined the nearest school which is resourced or can be resourced to care for that child's needs. Once the SENO makes that determination - I do not have any professional expertise to make that determination nor do any of my officials - we will then provide transport to that school for that child free of charge. That is the way it has been and the way it shall remain.

Senators Barrett and Noone and a number of others asked why we do not tender school transport out to a number of different entities. I do not have any ideological hang-ups about who should provide school transport in this country. I am responsible for safely transporting 114,000 children to school on a daily basis. If I may use the simile, I have an aeroplane in the sky every day with 114,000 people on it and I am not about to allow any entity to take the controls of that aeroplane unless I can be certain it has the logistical capacity and experience to be able to do so. Every report published on school transport in recent decades, including the value for money report in 2009, has arrived at one conclusion. I stress that at this point in time no other entity in this country is capable of delivering the school transport system, although there may be at some point in the future.

I have said to a number of operators in the private sector that my door is always open. If they come to me with a rational suggestion or plan which I can trust will get these children to school safely every day, my officials and I will spend a considerable amount of time looking at it. Nobody has come to me with such a plan and if they do, I assure Senators Barrett and Noone, I will listen intently to them.

5:00 pm

Photo of Catherine NooneCatherine Noone (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How can they as long as the court case is active?

Photo of Ciarán CannonCiarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not discuss the intricacies of the court because the judge has yet to make a determination-----

Photo of Catherine NooneCatherine Noone (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want the Minister of State to do so.

Photo of Ciarán CannonCiarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----but following the court case and irrespective of the outcome, my door will remain open to anyone who wants to make such a suggestion.

One should bear in mind that this is a huge logistical operation which takes place approximately 180 days per year. At this point in time, I trust nobody but Bus Éireann to do this. I am not saying that somebody will not come up with an alternative system in the future.

Some 85% of the children who are transported to school are transported by private operators. That is put out to tender every year by Bus Éireann. Last year Bus Éireann began a rolling tendering process of some routes because, as Senators will appreciate, there are 4,000 routes; therefore, it was not able to put out to tender every route. That tender produced a saving ¤2.8 million last year. It is not that we are not trying to extract the maximum possible saving from the system.

A former colleague of mine once said there is only one thing worse than a public monopoly and that is a private one. We need what we call a provider of last resort - in other words, a publicly provided transport system to which we can revert. If we are being taken for a ride by a private operator which we have contracted in to provide all of the school transport and slowly but surely its prices start to go up, we need to be able to revert back to some publicly supported system which might be able to intervene and perhaps convince the private operator that it is not the only show in town. We need to be very careful in this regard. However, I will say once again that my door will remain open and that I have no ideological hang-ups whatsoever in this area. It may be Bus Éireann in ten years time but it may be somebody else.

No one has presented an alternative to Bus Éireann to me or my officials or the Department in recent decades.

Like many of his colleagues on the extreme left of society, Senator Cullinane argues that there is a great golden pot of wealthy people waiting to bail us out of our difficult economic situation. That is not the case. Only last week, the OECD produced a study stating that Ireland has the most progressive taxation system in the EU; therefore, I am afraid the great golden calf that is supposed to exist is not there. We must provide a fair and equitable school transport system and find ¤17 million in savings. Senator Cullinane mentioned that it was ¤17 million this year. That is not the case. It is ¤17 million between 2010 and 2014.

Senator O'Neill mentioned the word "humanitarian". From dealing with my officials and Bus Éireann on a weekly basis, especially in the run-up to the school year, I guarantee there is no approach more humanitarian than that taken in that Department and section in Tullamore. These are people who interact every day with families who find themselves in very difficult situations. We always strive to accommodate any family we can within the terms of the scheme.

We are trying to devise a system that is easily understood, transparent, fair and equitable. Once we put that system in place and build good policy around it, what else do we do other than implement the terms and conditions of that system fairly and equitably throughout the country? At this point or any point in time, no one can argue that it is not fair and equitable to transport children to their nearest school. I do not accept the argument for transporting them to any school other than their nearest school. If parents decide for their own best reasons to send the child to another school, we cannot support that decision by providing transport. We could never afford it and we cannot afford it at this point.