Education Committee: Public Service Performance Report

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I have lot of questions so I may have to save some for the
second round. I want to start by picking up where Deputy Jim O’Callaghan left off. He mentioned equality budgeting, performance budgeting and well-being budgeting and I was struck
by the fact that there was no specific reference to the well-being framework. That framework
was updated as recently as June of this year. I understand that as part of the summer economic
statement, SES, we now report on well-being budgeting. Looking specifically at the areas
of knowledge, skills and innovation, the indicators there are reading and mathematics performance and life-long learning, which would be pertinent, as well as subjective well-being or
the reported subjective well-being of school age children. Are we saying that this is not yet
integrated into the performance reporting of the Department? I understand that the Department
of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform has issued a direction
that we should be building that into our reporting in the SES.

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: First, on well-being, as Mr. Mac Fhlannchadha and Ms Murray said
earlier, we put questions to children and pupils within the system in terms of their own wellbeing. Obviously we would take the broader view that the promotion of education contributes
to their well-being. I will ask Mr. Whelan to come in on well-being and on the Department
of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform view of the brief we
were given on the initial PSPR and how that will evolve and change in light of the feedback we
are getting.

Mr. Tom Whelan: As part of the template we were asked to fill in on performance reporting, we were just asked to provide the equality budgeting. I am aware of, and have sat on various working groups on, the well-being initiatives and the performance around the well-being.
As yet, we have not been asked to put that into our Revised Estimates indicators, but it is an
ongoing process.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: Has the Department been asked to report under the wellbeing framework as part of that preparation for the summer economic statement?

Mr. Tom Whelan: Yes. The Department would have been asked to report on all the wellbeing and how we feed into the well-being. Our Department would have been involved in
reporting into that, yes.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: However, at the moment it is keeping that separate from this
performance reporting mechanism.

Mr. Tom Whelan: Yes, because we are limited to two pages by the Department. The Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform asked us
to fill in the equality budgeting and then our main indicators are published in the Revised Estimates. What is published in the public service performance report is a subset of that. What
we are talking about here is a report in 2022, so those indicators would have been set back in
November-December 2021. The well-being process has moved on a lot since then. We set targets a year in advance and they are reported the year after, and that is why we are behind on that.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I understand that. My related question refers to the sustainable development goals, SDGs. Has the Department received instruction from the Department
of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to begin reporting
under that framework as well? I put the same question to the representatives from the Department of Social Protection last week at the respective committee. They said they have received
instructions to report under the sustainable development goals. Have the officials present received a similar instruction?

Mr. Tom Whelan: I am not directly involved in that, but the Department has been feeding
into that information on the sustainable development goals.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: One of the things that was aired last week was that we get a
performance report on the one hand and then we have this separate mechanism for reporting on
the well-being framework and a separate mechanism to report on the sustainable development
goals. As a committee member trying to analyse performance reporting, it would make eminent
sense if one process spoke more coherently to the other. That is a comment more than a question, but the officials may wish to come back on it.

I have a specific question on school transport issues. Our office, like the office of any
Oireachtas Member, has been inundated with correspondence on this. It happened in previous
years as well. One of the huge frustrations we experience is we have these parallel but overlapping services. It might be that the Ukrainian kids are getting dropped to school on a school bus
that has ten empty places. It might that there is a bus coming from the direct provision centre.
It might be that there is a bus coming to service the need of a child with a disability. Then we
have the regular school transport bus. Again, it feels like we have parallel processes that are not
talking to each other. There was a bus where a child with a disability was travelling with siblings, but the first cousins next door could not get on the bus and the bus was travelling empty
up the road. It is incredibly frustrating for a public representative. It is incredibly frustrating
to parents who see a bus travelling around the countryside with empty seats and their children
are travelling to that school. Have we any plans to streamline this process so we are actually
thinking about filling buses and providing the maximum benefit to the children who are attending our schools?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: We do not have anybody here who works in the specific area of
school transport, but if there are specific cases we are happy to convey them back and ask the
colleagues to follow up with members via the secretariat.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: It is one of the things the Department of Public Expenditure,
National Development Plan Delivery and Reform requests from the Department of Education
as indicators, is it not?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: I am sorry, but I did not catch that.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: The Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform asks Departments for metric that need to be clear and simple,
without sector-specific jargon and initialisms. I note school transport is listed on that as some
of the key outputs from the public service performance report. There is No. 4, for example, and
No. 6 at post-primary. Thus, it appears within the report, does it not?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: They are in terms of the global numbers, but I was saying we could
follow up for members if there is a specific case. The Minister has stated publicly there is a
school transport review mandated under the programme for Government and she is hoping to
have that finalised fairly shortly.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: The programme for Government was written in 2020. I
remember being in the room for it. Now we are in 2023.

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: We are aware of that, but as I said that is work that has been ongoing.
The Minister has spoken publicly about the school transport review and obviously the kind of
issues the Deputy is raising will be taken into account as part of that.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I will pick up on that last point. I raised the point at a previous meeting that I am not sure the Department is keying into the idea of what the industry would
call scope 3 emissions, which are the emissions external to the school. We are focused on solar
panels and the energy efficiency of the build stock, and that is entirely appropriate, but we are
not looking, particularly in new school builds, at the potential of that scale of investment within
a community to be the linchpin of an active travel network. I have seen too many instances of
new school builds that are predominantly car dependent in terms of access to the school. That
is more of a comment than a question.

I want to take a closer look at the school books scheme. Budget 2023 provided more than
€50 million for the free school books scheme at primary level. That is very welcome and it was
hugely significant in all sorts of ways, particularly as a cost-of-living measure. I have a nagging concern, however. I worry about the school books mediating the curriculum, for example.
When there is a reliance on a school book to dictate the terms of the curriculum, the independence of the teacher and his or her responsibility to mediate the curriculum are undermined.

We can say that responsibility still rests with the teacher, and it does, but as a former teacher,
I can remember the pressure of sending home workbooks that did not have chapter 6 done, for
example. The question is then asked why chapter 6 was not done. It could be that the teacher
decided not to cover the topic in question or wanted to do something in a different way. That
creates a pressure.

What performance metrics are we applying to this spend? Are we just encouraging schools
to go out and buy books that they do not necessarily need? Workbooks are something I am
particularly worried about in that kind of scenario, as opposed to textbooks. There is also a
concern around the concentration of the benefit of this scheme, either to larger suppliers or the
publishers. I am particularly worried about that in the context of moving to secondary school.
We must consider this spend and its ability to contribute to a local economy in the round. Otherwise we will have, as we are already having, smaller school book suppliers getting squeezed
out of the market, particularly as larger schools look for efficiency in the administration of the
free school book scheme. There have already been overtures from book publishers to supply
directly to schools and that exacerbates the issues I was talking about of textbooks that are not
needed and of the impact of the textbook in mediating the curriculum.

There is a significant spend here and it is one that is welcome in the round. It has been
strongly welcomed by parents in particular and I am one of that cohort. I had three sons going
to school this year and I did not need to sort them out for books, which was welcome in our
household. Are we keeping an eye on the spend to make sure we are taking those other factors
into account?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: I ask Mr. Mac Fhlannchadha to address the point the Deputy raised
about teacher autonomy and the role of the teacher vis-à-vis using the textbook and other school
resources in the classroom.

Mr. Pádraig Mac Fhlannchadha: The primary guide for teachers is the school curriculum
or the specifications that have been provided. The intention is always that textbooks would
be one of a number of resources that can be utilised to support teaching and learning in the
classrooms. Effective teaching involves the use of a wide range of resources, as appropriate, to
deliver whatever the objective is for particular lessons or for whatever content—–

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: Does Mr. Mac Fhlannchadha accept that teachers often feel
a pressure from the textbook?

Mr. Pádraig Mac Fhlannchadha: They may do so but teachers have professional autono-
my as well. They are supported within the system and they are encouraged, as professionals, to
exert their autonomy in making decisions. The curriculum is decided but they are autonomous
in deciding how the curriculum can be delivered in a manner that best meets the needs of the
children in their classrooms. As the Deputy is aware, the needs of the children will vary in accordance with the profile of the children and the context.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: Are we taking into consideration that the benefit of this measure is concentrated on large suppliers and publishers in particular?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: I will address that point. Our colleagues involved in the work on
the roll-out of the schoolbooks scheme have met representatives of the publishing industry and
the suppliers, both large and small, on that. The first year of the roll-out was 2023 and it was
announced in 2022.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: Are they hearing the same things? I am hearing that the
smaller suppliers are getting squeezed out by the bigger suppliers even in terms of the volume
of books they have to store and arrange for the schools but particularly because of how the payment scheme works; they have to take on a large debt to receive it back from the Department.
The parents used to come in and buy on a more piecemeal basis. There was revenue coming
in through the door on a more constant basis whereas now many of the smaller suppliers do
not find themselves in the position to spend the money upfront to receive it back from the Department or they find the administrative burden such that they are squeezed out of the market.
Perhaps that is just a byproduct of increased efficiency, but are we at least thinking of it? That
is the question I am putting forward.

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: I was going to say that an evaluation of the implementation of the
scheme will be undertaken. That will be done in conjunction with our colleagues in the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. It will inform
the future implementation and also look at things such as the cost and efficiency of the scheme
and take account of the kind of points the Deputy is raising as well. It will evaluate how the
roll-out of the schoolbooks has worked at primary level in practice and take account of the kind
of issues that the Deputy raises and the various stakeholders involved in the supply of books
and other classroom resources.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: When are we likely to see the outcome of that evaluation?

Mr. Gavan O’Leary: I do not know that we have a date for it. The work is ongoing but I
do not have a date for its completion.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I am looking for a ballpark date. Are we talking about this
year or next?

Mr. Tom Whelan: The review is ongoing. The circular and the funding for the next school
year usually is planned to go out in February and March, so we are looking to have that completed before the next circular for—–

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: The evaluation will be completed before February or March
next year.

Mr. Tom Whelan: Yes. That will inform the circular and the funding

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: My first question is one I put to the witnesses’ colleagues
from the Department of Education this morning. The witnesses have detailed some of the work
they do around equality budgeting. Have they had direction from the Department of Public
Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform with regard to reporting under
the well-being framework and also under the sustainable development goals, SDGs? I believe
that Departments have been instructed to begin reporting under those metrics as well. Do they
see their role in terms of allowing Members like me to have a better helicopter view of exactly
what it is we are doing with the money we spend? Has the Department considered trying to
integrate that into the performance reporting?

Ms Deirdre Lillis: Ms Duffy heads up our evidence for policy unit and will speak to that.

Ms Trudy Duffy: I thank the Deputy very much. In July 2023, we received a request from
the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to:
start looking at the SDGs. Obviously, as a Department, we are involved in the delivery of a
number of the SDGs at the moment in terms of the participation rate of youths and adults in
formal and non-formal education, the proportion of the population achieving fixed proficiency
in literacy and numeracy skills and persons aged 25 to 60 who are over the third level education qualification. We are, therefore, already reporting and prepared to report on some of those
metrics.
We are on the interdepartmental group on well-being and we are well positioned, once we
are asked by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and
Reform, to move on reporting on those areas. At the moment, we are reporting to the Central
Statistics Office, CSO, on the lifelong learning rates and the research and development personnel.
In terms of green budgeting, again, our finance unit has started tagging our subheads in their
applicability for green budgeting. We also have indicators in general inclusion. What we are
doing at the moment is conducting a full review of all our indicators across the Department.
We are actually looking at what we are reporting on at the moment, whether we are reporting
on just outputs or on the value we get in terms of the actual impacts. We are conducting that
review at the moment. We hope it will be finished in time for the Revised Estimates Volume,
REV, discussion this year.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I thank Ms Duffy. That was a very helpful answer. That
tagging process is a really interesting idea. We do not want to end up in a situation where all
these parallel reporting mechanisms are being done and it creates more regulatory burdens on
the Department. Speaking as a Member of the Oireachtas trying to oversee spending, we are
just getting this piecemeal picture. If that tagging exercise was applied to the SDGs and the
well-being framework, it would be really useful to me as a Member of the Oireachtas.
There was a report on lifelong learning in the performance review this morning with the Department of Education. It is not referenced by the Department of Further and Higher Education,
Research, Innovation and Science. Does the Department of Education have the direct responsibility for lifelong learning or does it lie with the Department of Further and Higher Education,
Research, Innovation and Science?

Ms Deirdre Lillis: We certainly have the tertiary piece of that. We may be reporting under
part-time participation rates or—–

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: It is one of the areas because generally across the board in
terms of education at both primary and secondary and tertiary level, Ireland performs really
well. We have a track record of which we can be really proud. We would always like more
investment and to have more places and future long-term funding and all those things, but we
perform very well by an international comparison in terms of education. The one area in which
I would like to see improvement is lifelong learning. We are middle of the pack in lifelong
learning participation rates. There was some reporting on it during the earlier session but not
in the documentation I have in front of me. I was wondering whether the Department reports
on that.

Ms Trudy Duffy: We certainly track and report on it, maybe not in this report but in other
reports. I suspect that the education reflection this morning was based on the fact that the Department of Education has up to now been delivering a shared service in terms of statistics for
the two Departments. It has actually been taking on the reporting function to the OECD on
behalf of both Departments. I suspect that is how it came about.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: Ms Duffy is telling me it is a function of the newness of her
Department, essentially. I might be straying outside what we are supposed to be doing today
but there is huge frustration with the National Training Fund, NTF. I acknowledge there has
been a promise to look at the legislative provisions that surround the NTF but I know from
talking to employers that they are very frustrated when they see this money going to the NTF
and then not being used. There is also frustration from employees who would like to avail of
in-work training and things like that. It does not seem to be working quite in the way we would
like it to work. Have we any suggestions of how we can streamline this process? No politician
likes to see a big pile of money not being spent. Is there a way we can streamline this process
a little better so that it better discharges the function we want it to?

Ms Mary McGarry: The Deputy might recall that the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, referred
to the NTF in his budget speech and his commitment to looking at exploring new ways of
meeting the demands for the higher and further education sectors from the NTF and unlocking
that NTF surplus. The Deputy will be aware that we and our colleagues in the Department of
Enterprise, Trade and Employment did some work on proposal during the year. However, there
is an overall budgetary scenario at the moment because it is included within our ceiling. Our
Minister, Deputy Harris, has written to the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, so we are ready to work
with colleagues and explore the options for the framework of the NTF legislation and whatever
is needed.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: This is very much a spitballing question. However, if Ms
McGarry was to indicate the amount of work she sees involved in that process of reviewing and
then knowing the ability of the Civil Service to apply in an agile and timely manner, how long
would the Department put on that? Is that an unfair question?

Ms Mary McGarry: There has been a lot of focus on it in the past year and certainly in
the run-up to the budget. We are confident that we will build on the work that has been done.
When we are talking about metrics, the recent Comptroller and Auditor General chapter on the
NTF sought to look at the metrics and evaluate the investment that is currently made from the
fund across further and higher education. There is a lot of focus on it. We are in the hands of
overall budgetary frameworks and budgetary decisions for the country but it will not be from
any lack of want on the officials’ part and, indeed, our Minister is very committed to addressing
the surplus.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: I will move on to programme C. This is coming from someone who has a background in humanities, which is what I studied at college. Programme C
concerns research, innovation and science. I have a nagging concern in this regard. Many of
the metrics are performing very well, apart from postdoctorates funded by Science Foundation
Ireland, which is the one area that is lagging the most. I do not immediately see an arts, culture
and humanities spend within that programme. I know that given some of the current legislative
provisions we are thinking about, there are concerns among people who work in the humanities that if they do not raise their voices, they might get left behind as we begin to review this
area. As somebody with an interest in the humanities, when looking at this performance review,
where can I find reference to the humanities?

Mr. Paddy Howard: I want to be clear in regard to the particular indicators that are there.
We are currently involved in the development of a new research Bill that will create a new
agency that will, for the first time, put on a statutory basis the funding of all disciplines and all
kinds of research.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh: There is concern in that regard because the humanities feel
silent within that legislation.

Mr. Paddy Howard: To be clear about the provenance of this particular indicator, it grows
out of the kind of legacy position that there is only statutory provision. SFI has a role in respect
of STEM and those indicators were created in respect of that. Where a statutory goal was set,
obviously, it was something that needed to be reported on. We have kept that for now as it gives
a certain kind of historical perspective and all of that kind of good stuff. To be very clear, when
we have a new agency with a new remit that puts all disciplines on a statutory footing, we will
absolutely need to look at those indicators again.

There would be material published by the Higher Education Authority on PhD graduates in
general and one will find there the annual figure for what the talent pool is, which is approximately 1,500 per year, with 60% of them typically in STEM and 40% in arts, humanities and
social sciences, AHSS. We will consider how best to reflect that when we are considering the
performance metrics that we need in that new world with a new agency.

Dr. Deirdre Lillis: To step outside the performance measures, what we have asked both
Science Foundation Ireland and the Irish Research Council to do is maintain continuity. In that,
they will be maintaining levels of funding for the foreseeable future, which is to give comfort
to the communities that there will be no big shock in any of this. The programmes that are
running this year will almost certainly be running next year, maybe with a few tweaks, but the
balance of funding that is there at the moment for AHSS will not change. If I recall correctly, at
the moment it is funded through the Higher Education Authority to the Irish Research Council,
rather than showing up on the SFI side. We are very attuned to that concern. There is a lot of
goodwill between the staff of SFI and the Irish Research Council to maintain that, and they are
very conscious of that piece of the amalgamations.