Dempsey’s miserable record on educational disadvantage
national |
miscellaneous |
news report
Wednesday May 28, 2003 14:17
by Manus - LY
- Sligo
For the record, this is the action of the Minister for Education and Science on educational disadvantage since he came to office!
Cuts worth €36 million in education programmes were revealed in September 2002, cuts the Minister claimed would not affect pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds. They included:
> The School Retention Initiative cut by €6million. This scheme is designed to reduce the school drop-out rate.
> €5m cut from programmes aimed at attracting socio-economically disadvantaged school-leavers to third level.
> The Back to Education Initiative has been cut by €3.8million. This provides for adults returning to education.
Other educational cutbacks, as part of this package of €36million in cuts which are linked to disadvantage include:
> A cut of €6million in in-service teacher-training courses.
> A cut of €6.2million in IT research and development.
> Teacher recruitment and training has been been cut by €6.7million.
The student registration charge was increased last September from €396 to €670, an increase of 70%, a cutback worth in the region of €16million. Colleges have warned that they may need to increase the registration charge to €1,400 if they are to maintain the existing level of services in the face of cutbacks in public spending.
The Back to Education Allowance Scheme has been restructured. The Allowance is aimed at assisting those who are unemployed, are single parents or have a disability, to pursue approved second-or third-level education courses. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs has reversed some of the cuts but it will no longer be paid to those on long-term unemployment or over the summer months in certain categories.
The School Building Programme published in January 2003 saw hundreds of school building projects frozen at the architectural planning stage. Only 26 building starts at primary and secondary will begin in 2003. In order to fund a pilot programme for 20 selected schools to complete work on a devolved basis, the Minister takes €20m from the third level building programme.
In the book of Estimates published in November 2002, funding for building, equipment and furnishing of national schools was cut by 4%, funding for building, equipment and furnishing of secondary schools was cut by 10%, and funding for building, equipment and furnishing of third level institutions was cut by 33% i.e. a cut in third level building projects of €42million in 2003.
The Student Summer Jobs Scheme has been abolished. This allowed students in third level to work in their communities over the summer months to earn a maximum of €600 for a maximum of 200 hours.
The Minister has withdrawn the payment of the physical education grant to disadvantaged schools for 2003. The grant (worth €635) for supporting the teaching of PE and sports in disadvantaged schools was introduced in October 2000.
The Department of Education is also “reviewing” the payment and level of the Grant Scheme for Minor Works (also known as the capitation grant) to all schools. This annual payment (a lump sum currently worth €3,809) is paid to schools for minor repairs and maintenance works along with the payment of €12.70 per pupil.
There has been no increase in the “alleviation of disadvantage” subhead under third level education Estimate for 2003. €26million was allocated in 2002. This allocation remains the same for 2003.
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (33 of 33)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33Very good report Manus. Have you circulated this to all other media in Ireland?
And you think that the Labour Party really care about the disadvantaged?!
I for once agree with Bertie Ahern when he said recently that "The LAbour Party are a capitalist party drifting to the right".
The Labour Party were (and are) prepared to go into governemnt with FF. Never has the Labour Party ruled this out and there is absolutly no real coherent opposition to coalitionism within Labour. Labour are no different to FG/FF/PD. They only oppose fees because they know it is a vote winner - it is the middle classes that are the floating voters and it is the middle classes that go to college. Labour could not give a damn about extending access.
Labour are no friend of the workers, they are the party that supprt tax amnesties, careerist coalitions, bin tax, cuts, sanctions on Iraq etc.
Out of curiousity how have Sinn Féin faired on implementing their educational policy while they were in Stormont?
The decision to abolish fees was done so on the principle that education should be a right not a privilege. The assertion that the state should provide certain services to its citizens paid for through a fair and equitable taxation system.
If the party had refused to form a coalition with FG, the chances are there would have been no such abolition of fees.
--
I'm sick of Labour being portrayed as a left wing party. Rabbitte is sounding as an alternative, but in truth he supports the idea of a 'role for private operators in the provision of public services'. This is a Blairite policy.
I'm also sick of Rabbitte's speeches. He is not a good public speaker. All his criticisms are based on personality. Next time you hear him notice how he brings everything back to the personality or the personal traits of the Taoiseach or a minister. Not a very political opposition.
Manus (aka Magneto) where do you stand on coalition?
I suggest you move to another country or take a break from listening to current affairs for the next couple of years, as Pat isn't going to go away.
By the way, the party is strongly opposed to privatisation, as was indicated by the large number of motions to that affect at our recent annual conference
Manus/Magneto: "...the party is strongly opposed to privatisation, as was indicated by the large number of motions to that affect at our recent annual conference"
Then why were they rejected. Stagg (a so-called left winger) even called for one to be rejected.
A motion in favour of 'private role in public services' was passed.
Submitting motions is one thing, Having them passed is another.
This is a thread about Education. Just as it was wrong to launch attacks on the SP on the previous Education thread it is incorrect to attack Labour on this one.
Several things are for sure:
1. Labour, SF, SP will oppose fees both in aand outside of the Dail.
2. People can if they wish find grounds for attacking Labour , SF, SP including even their participation in elections.
However making such attacks will not advance a campaign against fees or disadvantage in general. If you want to attack Labour, SP, SF on other issues why not start up another thread?
...care to answer my question. I know that on paper parties can have very decent policies but when in government many do not implement their policies. I´m just wondering whether this happened in the Stormont Assembly regarding education?
Anyone from Sinn Féin out there?
Labour will not oppose fees inside and outside the Dail.
Their idea of opposing fees outside of the Dail is a media interview on the steps of Buswell's hotel.
Labour's education spokesperson even said that Labour will not support 'illegal' activities on the fees issue. Labour therefore oppose occupations, civil disobedience such as non-payment of fees etc.
At all times the Labour education policy is concerned with the interests of the economy. They see education as something that is to be linked with 'the need for foreign development and economic growth'.
Even their opposition to fees was on the basis of it not being good for capitalism.
http://www.sdlp.ie/Archiveeducation.htm
Labour Party members already have taken part in illegal activities outside of the Dail on this issue. LP members also took part in direct actions against the Gulf War. I am not a LP supporter but I recognise and welcome the role these people have played.
I dont know what is motivating you but what do you think you are acheiving by making these attacks on Labour?
I dont deny that there were LP members that engaged in some 'illegal' activities. The piont is that the LP as a whole are against this- and would not support their members doing these activities. Labour are against any form of Direct Action as it is against the bourgeois law.
I am raising these points so that people do not get illusions in the LP.
The LP has strongly opposed the re-introduction of fees both inside and outside the Dail, Pat has stated that if FF/PD were to reintroduce them, if LP were in Govn. again they would abolish them for the second time.
Young members of the Party have been active in marchs through out the country and has taken part in direct action at Govn. buildings over the year!
Labour Youth passed a motion at last years youth conference supporting members who took part in non-violent direct action and the actions of actions and activities of the ploughshares movement!
I am a member of the LY, i take part in many direct actions, in so doing i have felt particularly supported by LY who passed a motion to support such activity, but also by many individuals with the the Labour party itelf. The Labour spokesperson on education LY position. it was really encouraging actually after the motion that more than the usual suspects within LY faced the line of riot police in Hillsborough,during the Bush visit when the IAWM had long since gone home for their diner. this is beside the point however, because oppositon takes many forms, so just cut out all this pathetic trolling and get constructive.
above should read Labour spokesperson for education is aware of LY's position
Lets get our facts right. Anyone who was around at the time knows that Niamh Breatnach abolished fees to win middle class votes in DunLaoghaire. Guess who put up a fight against this move, yep Rabbittes former boss, Proinsias De Rossa, who believed it would not benefit the children of working class people, though he's obviously changed his mind.
We can hardly judge Labour by what the say in opposition, which is always more radical than when they inevitably go into government with a right wing party.
Will you confirm it now?
Just taking a rest, I can now confirm that I am not Manus.
It is widly known who Magneto is. All that I'll say here is that he is from Limerick. He knows who he is, and so do we.
Magneto is not Paul Dillon or Cian O'Callaghan as said previously by others.
Tell us.
A very interesting news topic once again filled up with pointless posts. We could debate educational disadvantage, instead we start bitching about who is who and the Labour party.
Apart from ignoring what the thread is about when you use Bertie as a source for your trolling argument about labour you just show yourself up to be another whinging tosser.
When every post thats put up results in moaning and bitching about whos more left wing than who or who said what 20 fucking years ago you just drive people away...or is that what you want.
Maybe you just need some fresh air & exercise.
Labour Youth supports the use of non-violent direct action as a legitimate means of proest. This is completely clear from the motions passed at our conference but also from the formal position that was adopted unaminously by our organisation at the time of the war, where we supported non-violent direct action at Shannon.
On the fees issue a large number of our members have enaged in non-violent direct action including a sitdown in front of the Dáil which blocked Kildare Street for about an hour and a half until the Gardaí dragged us away, a sit in at the Department of Tranport and more recently an occupation at the Department of Transport.
But we should really keep focused on the government's record of tackling inequality of access to education which, while the 42 million is very welcome, still leaves a lot to be desired.
I , for one accept that many in Labour Youth support Direct Action and have engaged in such, but I think Cian is missing the point. The point is that Labour as a party do not support such action. Do you think for one minute that direct action would be dealt with by the state any diffferently if Labour was in power? Do you think that Labour Ministers would support direct actions? Of course not!
You see, most of the Labour Youth keep missing the point, granted because many of the attacks on them are bitterly personal and sectarian. Its not that you are less socilaistic than the rest of us, its that you are in a social democratic or reformist party. It is an organisation that is based on the two principles
1. that you cannot dismantle capitalism or radically transform society, all you can do is manage it, curb its excesses.
2. Power is located primarily in Parliament, so the primary task of the left is to win more seats and get in to government.
Now if thats your politics thats fine, you are in the right party, but if you believe in the possibility of a socialist transformation of society, in the building of an explicitly anti-capitalist mass movement which struggles on all terrains of power, which is led by the empowered people themselves, not some parliamentary elite, then you're in the wrong party, so its time to make the break!
And please comrades, dont start screaming Leninist at Paddy, cos he ain't for the vanguard party thing either!
If the labour party are all for direct action why did they completely boycott Shannon on March 1st?
Labour Party members were there with GNAW face to face with the Gardai, Airport Police and Army.
Yes, the Labour leadership was wrong to attack DA. Just as the SP and SWP were wrong to attack DA. Just as Domnic haugh of the SP was wrong to spread scare stories about the need for medics and the possibility of the gardai firing into an unarmed crowd.
Just as Joe Higgins was wrong to call GNAW Virtual Warriors at the very moment we were face to face with the State forces, as 10 of us were arrested.
Magnet has not denied it. It seems that it's right that Magneto is a Limericker. I know who you are!
I'll out you if you dont admit that you are a Limerick man.
and quit wrecking my head with your ass wipe detective work.
"Yes, the Labour leadership was wrong to attack DA."
Labour did not just oppose the DA in Shannon they COMPLETELY boycotted all protests in Shannon that day.
If the Labour Party claims to be a democratic party I would presume this is the view of the majority of the membership and the DA heads are in a tiny minority.
Members of the Labour Party were there, face to face with the cops and army. Labour Party members are allowed to daisagree with their leadership.
No member of the SP or SWP disagreed publicly (or privately)with their leaders attack on DA and GNAW.