asked the Minister for Education if she will state in relation to community and comprehensive schools (a) the scope of indemnity cover for teachers, students and members of the public in relation to personal injuries, loss or theft of personal property and damage to personal property, (b) the scope of indemnity cover in relation to property acquired by the school as gifts or through private fund raising, (c) the scope of indemnity cover for items stored in the school, e.g. perpetual trophies, (d) the scope of indemnity cover for equipment borrowed or rented by the school, (e) the nature and range of activities which are covered as school activities even if they take place during times when the school is closed, (f) the nature of cover provided to boards and teachers in relation to students off the premises through dismissal for disciplinary reasons or early closure of school, e.g. through failure of the heating system, (g) the nature of cover to board and staff in relation to an injury inflicted deliberately or accidentally upon one student by another student, (h) the stage of intervention of the Department indemnity; if the teacher or board has to incur legal expenses and await the outcome of a court case before the Department decide whether the indemnity should cover legal expenses and (i) the exclusions and invalidations in relation to cover as the comprehensive and community schools are not permitted to take out insurance.

The position in relation to indemnity provided to community and comprehensive schools, in lieu of their taking out insurance cover against liabilities which may arise, is as follows: (i) The State shall carry its own insurance against fire damage to the buildings of the schools and against occupiers' liability. (ii) The State shall indemnify the board and the teaching and non-teaching staff in respect of actions, claims or demands taken or made against them arising out of the discharge of their duties whether in respect of pupils or otherwise. (iii) The State shall carry its own insurance in respect of visitors, parents and other members of the public who have permission from the board or the Minister to be on the school premises in respect of such risks as may be incurred by them while acting in a normal manner on such premises. (iv) The State shall indemnify the board or the teaching and non-teaching staff against claims by visitors, parents or other members of the public who without permission shall be on the school premises where such claims shall be made in circumstances which do not disclose a default or wrongful act on the part of the board or the members of the staff against whom such claims are made.

The Minister did not cover all the items. What kind of cover is there in relation to an injury inflicted deliberately or accidentally by one student on another student? What kind of indemnity is involved in such a case in terms of the Department's policy?

The boards of management would be expected to take reasonable steps for the proper supervision of students at all times. In the event of injury to a student where such steps had been taken my Department are advised that no liability would accrue.

The Minister is saying that the Department are opting out of any liability. Does the Minister allow for accidents at school?

I will read the answer again. Boards of management would be expected to take reasonable steps for the proper supervision of students at all times. In the event of injury to a student where such steps had been taken my Department are advised that no liability would accrue.

To the staff and management?

That is correct.

In relation to out of school activities where teachers give their time voluntarily——

What part of the question is the Deputy referring to?

We are talking about exclusions and invalidations.

Yes, but which number is it?

It is (i). As regards extra curriculum activities, for example competitive games which I found to my disappointment was not covered in the programme for action, is there cover for these activities when they are out of school activities? They are considered an essential part of the overall educational programme.

As regards out of school activities, it would be very difficult to envisage a situation in which State indemnity would not be invoked in the case of a personal injury suit. Otherwise the exclusions and invalidations in relation to cover are as already indicated to the Deputy.

Does the insurance provide cover in the case of a child at school sustaining an injury due to a pure accident not related to the carelessness or negligence of a teacher or member of the staff?

Would the Deputy please refer to the question? There are many subheads to the question and if I am to give a satisfactory answer the Deputy should refer to one of those subheadings.

I am not sure which heading it comes under. It is a simple point.

I am aware the Deputy is a legal person. I regret that I am not. I am answering the questions and I would like to be able to help the Deputy but I cannot do so unless he refers to a particular part of the question.

Item (a) school indemnity cover for teachers, students and members of the public. If a student or a child is injured on school premises by a pure accident not related to the negligence of a member of the staff is any cover provided in these insurances for that child?

As a general principle the State would accept liability for personal injury to teachers, students or members of the public only where negligence on its part or on the part of its officers, servants or agents is proved. School managements are not responsible for private property and, accordingly, the indemnity would not apply in the event of loss or theft of personal property or damage to such property.

In other words there is no cover in those circumstances.

Did the Minister state that there is adequate cover provided for teachers in relation to students on the premises through dismissal for disciplinary reasons or early closure of the school?

In relation to part (f) of the question, the Department are advised that should an accident befall a student while on the school premises through dismissal for disciplinary reasons or early closure of the premises, the immediate circumstances of the action would most likely govern the question of liability. Sending home a student or otherwise would be regarded as too remote to render the school authorities or the teacher liable. It is unlikely that the question of indemnity cover would arise in such circumstances.