asked the Minister for Education if she intends to cut back on the number of remedial teachers; and, if so, the reason for her decision.

The appointment of remedial teachers in national schools will continue to be sanctioned within the limits of the financial resources available. While priority will in general be given to schools where pupil numbers exceed 300, other schools on the basis of their particular circumstances will also be regarded as eligible for the appointment of remedial teachers to them.

In so far as second level schools are concerned, no change is contemplated in existing arrangements in relation to remedial teaching.

Surely national schools are critical to the development of the entire educational system? Now the Minister says that the truth of the matter and the answer to my question is that the remedial teacher situation in national schools will depend on finance. Is that not what the Minister is saying? If that is so, there is no finance and the whole system of remedial teachers has broken down because of that.

I do not accept what the Deputy has just said. I repeat that schools on the basis of their circumstances will also be regarded as eligible for the appointment of remedial teachers to them. Each application is fully and carefully examined by the Department's inspectorate, applications are placed on a priority list in relation to assessed needs and available posts are allocated in accordance with the list.

Is the Minister saying that the system continues apace and has not been interfered with by the present Government and it is a matter of priority that finances will be made available for remedial teachers?

That is not a question.

There is no point in the Minister throwing her hands up.

It is not a question, it is a statement.

The Minister is avoiding the answer to the question. The Minister as a matter of priority should make finances available for remedial teachers at primary level.

A question, Deputy.

Is the Minister making national school education the Cinderella of her Department once again?

That is a separate question.

Arising out of this very serious issue, how many schools are there of fewer than 300 pupils? I have to suggest that a significant proportion of national schools——

This is a general question about remedial teachers and any supplementary questions must be confined to that matter.

I am asking the Minister if, in view of her attitude towards remedial education at national school level, primary school education is now the Cinderella of the area.

I would like to answer that question by pointing out that the restrictions on the larger schools in the appointment of remedial teachers as announced by the previous Government is not——

Well, think again.

——being proceeded with and that the appointment of remedial teachers to national schools will continue to be sanctioned, as opposed to the policy of the previous Government.

Will the Minister avail of the opportunity to assure the House that she will be concerned to have the matter of remedial teachers treated with top priority? That is all the House is asking her to do.

It already is being treated with priority by this Government.

We are not going to have a debate on this. Deputy De Rossa has been trying to get in.

What criteria does the Minister intend to use in deciding on the allocation of remedial teachers if schools have fewer than 300 pupils?

The Department's inspectorate use a wide range of criteria in arriving at their decision about the appointment of remedial teachers.

What are the criteria?

I would be glad if the Deputy would put down a question on that to me.

I have one brief question. Am I to understand that this House has guaranteed this evening that there will be no change in remedial teaching in second level education?

I was the author of that question and I have a certain copyright. I have asked only one supplementary question.

Other Members of the House invaded your domain.

Yes, I have asked only one question. I was prompted to pose this question——

Out of courtesy to Deputy Andrews and because he put down the question I am giving him a final supplementary.

The Minister has not answered my question.

I was prompted to compose this question arising out of a statement the Minister made in the newspapers about——

Are you prefacing your question?

Yes, I am prefacing my question. Will the Minister agree with me that she made a statement recently to the effect that all was well with remedial teachers and that the present system would continue as it was before? Will she agree with me that that is not the situation now and that she has now qualified the present Government's position in relation to a very serious and fundamental problem?

The remedial teaching system will continue as before, unlike the plans of the last Government.

That is ridiculous.

The Minister should withdraw that.

The Minister will answer Question No. 15.

On a point of order, arising out of what the Minister said and the unsatisfactory nature of her answer, it is my intention to raise the matter on the Adjournment with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle.

The Chair will communicate with Deputy Andrews.