asked the Minister for Education if his attention has been drawn to reports of a recent survey carried out by the INTO into the standards and conditions obtaining in national schools throughout the State; and the action he is taking to combat the deplorable conditions outlined in that report.

In accordance with circulars and guidelines issued to chairmen of boards of management of national schools in August 1977 and May 1981, grants are available for improvements which the school authorities may have carried out on their own initiative. Such improvements would include the installation of sinks and running water, the provision of floor covering and furniture, the replacement of doors and windows, the installation of water-flushed sanitation, the provision of adequate heating and lighting, the improvement of playspaces and, in certain instances, the making good of minor structural defects which have arisen otherwise than by neglect of maintenance. Maintenance is a responsibility of school management.

As recently as last month my Department again circularised all chairmen of boards of management regarding the carrying out of improvements and it is hoped that the authorities of any school in which conditions are unsatisfactory will make the necessary arrangements to have the required improvements carried out during the summer holidays in accordance with the guidelines issued to them.

A sum of £27 million towards the cost of the national school buildings programme has been allocated in the current year. It is understood from the Commissioners of Public Works that work is in progress on 63 new schools and 76 extension schemes and that contracts have been placed, but work not yet commenced, in the case of two further new schools and six extensions. An additional 86 new schools and 113 extension schemes are at various stages of planning by the Commissioners of Public Works.

While first priority in this programme must be given to the provision of school accommodation for pupils for whom no accommodation exists, a high priority is also attached to bringing unsatisfactory or substandard schools to a satisfactory standard, either by replacement or by reconstruction and extension where necessary.

Is the Minister satisfied with the position which was revealed by the INTO survey in which it was alleged that 581 schools had to get water from nearby wells, that some 30 per cent of our schools are overcrowded and so on — they give a long list of disgraceful defects? If he is not satisfied, does he accept that repeating the issue of a circular to school managements, which so far has not improved the situation, is hardly likely to do so now? What concrete steps is he going to take to ensure that the deplorable Dickensian conditions shown up in the recent INTO survey will become a thing of the past as soon as possible?

As the Deputy will recognise, the existing number, locations, and physical characteristics of national schools are not an overnight occurrence but the product of more than a century of educational history. If we place the matter in perspective, the Deputy will agree that successive Governments have arranged for substantial programmes of new school buildings and improvements to existing buildings over recent decades. There has been substantial progress made towards the objective of ensuring that all children attend schools which fully reach present-day standards.

We recognise that there is still a number, happily a diminishing number, of schools that would not meet these standards. For that reason the action to which I referred in my reply has been taken in recent years, namely, providing a much more free and discretionary system of financial support for schools which wish to remedy any of the defects which have been listed. A number of schools have availed of the provisions of that scheme. So far as more specific action is concerned, I have already had discussions with the INTO on these general matters and have had preliminary discussions with other interested parties. I will be following up those discussions to encourage remedying these defects.

Does the Minister accept the accuracy of the INTO survey which showed that 288 national schools do not have any drinking water and that 581 have to get water from nearby wells? If so, does he not agree that one of the problems involved is obviously the grant aid system, which is a partial grant aid system, and that the work needing to be done, in some cases work of a very extensive nature, cannot be done because the local schools do not have the money to complement the partial grant made available by the Department, and which was the subject of a circular? In view of the relative ease with which he and his colleagues managed to make resources available, at least on paper, throughout the country wherever it suited a particular whim——

I am afraid, Deputy, we are moving into a new area. That is not relevant to the question you asked. I would ask Deputies to stay with their questions. Other Deputies have questions down. The Minister has given a fairly comprehensive reply to the question. Other questions will have to be tabled.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, you may feel that the answer was comprehensive. It was, in terms of the volume of words involved. I want to know what the Minister intends to do about the 581 schools where they have to draw water from a well, and the 288 schools in which there is no drinking water for the children.

I should like to comment, since the Deputy chose to introduce some extraneous political comment.

(Cavan-Monaghan): He wished to know what the Minister intended to make available.

That does not arise on this question.

(Cavan-Monaghan): It is very relevant.

The Chair does not accept that it arises on the question.

I am sure the Deputy recognises that, in some of the cases to which he refers where schools draw water from wells, the local population do likewise in the sense that they are in areas where——

Equally backward.

Is the Deputy suggesting that instantaneously and overnight any Minister for Education can conjure up piped water schemes out of the ground?

It does not have to be next week.

I have been answering the Deputy's question. He chose to introduce a partisan political note implying lack of action on the part of Ministers for Education, including myself. If I wanted to be partisan I would ask why the Deputy and his Minister for Education did not solve this problem miraculously. We can all make a political football out of it.

We were in office for seven months. The Minister's party dominated Irish politics for years. The Minister should answer the question he was asked.

I gave a fairly comprehensive answer which was couched deliberately in non-partisan terms. The Deputy chose to introduce an extraneous partisan note by implying that money is being spent in some areas which could be spent in these areas. The whole nature of the reply, which I hope the Deputy will accept, made it quite clear that it is not a lack of financial support, through the Department of Education, which is holding up improvements. As the Deputy well knows, in cases of financial hardship special arrangements have been made.

(Limerick-East): The Minister stated that £27 million was being allocated in 1982 for improvements and the building of national schools. Is he aware that £30 million was allocated in 1981? Is he further aware that the Commissioners of Public Works succeeded in organising themselves to spend £20 million only of that £30 million? Is the Minister aware that the problem is not the actual allocation of money, but the organisation of the building programme by the Commissioners of Public Works who were not able to take up the allocation made by this House? Has the Minister any plans to reorganise national school building and improvements so that the allocation made by this House can be used for schools all around the country?

I should like to make two comments. First, I should like to point out that most of the items which would be relevant to the question would fall under the heading of improvements, and so forth, to existing schools, rather than the overnight construction of new ones. Secondly, I cannot resist pointing out that, if there was a shortfall in spending in 1981, it would have occurred during the period in office of the Government which the Deputy supported.

Deputy Mitchell to ask a final supplementary.

Will the Minister assure the House that any improvements being carried out will be carried out on a fair and objective basis and will not be carried out by way of repayment for political favours to any Deputy in any constituency whether or not through witnessed agreements?

That is grossly insulting.

The Minister deserves the insult.

If the Deputy has any evidence of any such instance relating to the schools covered by the question, I will be delighted to receive such evidence and have it fully investigated.

6.