Departmental Budgets
1. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the way in which the projected overspends of his Department will impact the budgets of other Government Departments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40817/26]
Will the Minister give us an update on the projected overspends of the Department of education and how they will impact on the budgets of other Government Departments?
What I have is a question relating to overspends in my Department, which is the wording of the question.
That was incorrect.
I will respond to it as it is written, and I am happy to engage. I know what the Deputy is raising.
That mistake was not on my side.
The latest fiscal monitor published on 6 May showed that the end of April gross voted expenditure amounted to €36 billion. This is a €2.9 billion or 8.9% increase compared with April 2025 and reflects the implementation of the priorities set out in budget 2026, and the significant uplift in expenditure to support programme for Government commitments. Compared with the profiles set out by Departments for their planned spending over the year, this was €0.6 billion or 1.8% below profile.
For my Department’s Vote, end of April gross expenditure of €593 million was €39 million or 6.2% behind the profile set out. The public expenditure group comprises eight Votes, which are my Department, superannuation and retired allowances, the Office of Public Works, the State Laboratory, secret service, Public Appointments Service, shared services office and the Office of the Ombudsman. None of these were over profile at the end of April. Ensuring that public money is spent efficiently and that taxpayers see clear outputs and outcomes from public spending is a core priority for my Department and for Government. The Government agreed a medium-term fiscal structural plan in December last year. It sets out expenditure ceilings to 2030 and provides significant uplifts in expenditure over the coming years, with gross voted spending to reach €147.3 billion by 2030. In April, Government agreed that additional funding of €646 million will be provided to the Department of Education and Youth in 2026. To accommodate this reprioritisation and to deliver on the 2027 ceiling agreed under the medium-term fiscal plan, other Departments have been asked to deliver a levy focusing on efficiencies and reforms, which will total €446 million from 2027. This should be considered through the lens of an overall uplift of €7 billion for expenditure in 2027. It will not impact the 2026 allocations.
The delivery of reforms and efficiencies supports adherence-----
Deputy Farrell to respond.
That was not the question I submitted, but I understand it is what the Minister has been told. I do not know if we should skip this question. I might just ask my question and if the Minister cannot answer it is not on him, which is totally fine. I accept that he was not aware. It is a bit of a mess, like this mess. My question relates to overspends in the Department of education and specifically how this will impact on other Government Departments, including Transport, justice and housing. My concern is that this will leave communities worse off in the long run, which is something we do not want to happen. My core question really concerns what looks likely to be cut. Of what those Departments felt was so important to get funding for on budget day, what is no longer deemed necessary? I am aware the Minister was not aware of the question.
The wording of the question is as it is printed on the question paper, which I have to respond to factually.
I know.
I am happy to respond to the question on education that was raised at the budgetary oversight committee too. First, it is being done in the context of the Estimates process for budget 2027. Transport is at 1.4%. Housing is at 0.1% and justice is at 0.7%. We have specifically provided a carve-out for housing for obvious reasons and similarly for justice pay so we do not affect front-line areas. This is obviously in the context of a growing budget. I see this differently, through the lens of driving efficiencies, advancing reforms and enhancing productivity across these areas of public expenditure. I think we can improve outputs in the context of an efficiency and expenditure levy. New priorities emerge in the context of expenditure and that is why we were right to provide that additional funding to the Department of education. That is within a new and agreed fiscal framework. In the context of budget 2027 we will engage with the Departments through the Estimates process. However, each of them has an objective now to drive those efficiencies across these respective areas.
To be clear, the question the Minister received is not the question I was asking. I thank him for the answer, but the issue is that if you look at it in the context of what he is saying here and what is being done, things do not really add up. In January, the Minister said that the Government's massive expenditure on consultancy services was adding cost, delay and significant fragmentation to infrastructure delivery. However, we now hear he is spending €25,000 on a consultancy firm to try to garner public support for his infrastructure plan, all against the backdrop of cutting spending across other Departments. It seems like cuts for everybody except the Minister's Department. If the Minister wants to run an advertising campaign, he should use the policies he has. I do not understand spending €25,000 on a consultancy firm. Does the Minister think his Department should be spending €25,000 on a marketing campaign?
The Deputy is misrepresenting what that is. It is independent research and analysis to advance the objectives set out in the accelerating infrastructure report where there are three or four recommendations or actions in respect of driving public acceptance of infrastructure in the country. It is important because that is an issue across communities where people have concerns. It is about how we build better public acceptance of that. They are doing a piece of work in that context. When you take a €275 billion infrastructure plan over ten years, it is important that we implement those recommendations and actions in the context of the evidence base being built out. In the context of the efficiency levy, it is important that all Government Departments, in as much as they are looking for more, also drive a greater focus on efficiencies and reforms. That is what we are seeking to do across government and that is why we are doing it in a context of the levy we have introduced.
Public Services Provision
2. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the action he has taken to protect public service provision in light of recent levies put on other Departments to make up for overspends in the Department of Education and Youth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40991/26]
My question is related and asks the Minister what he is doing to protect public service provision in light of the levies he has put on other Departments. We keep hearing about efficiencies and reform, and we are all for that, but it is quite vague. There has been strong criticism of his budgetary process from the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council. Has he taken on board its criticisms and what changes will he make in light of that?
The Government agreed a medium-term fiscal structural plan in December last year. This sets out expenditure ceilings for the period to 2030. It provides significant uplifts in expenditure over the coming years, with gross voted spending to reach €147.3 billion in 2030. As set out in the plan, the ceiling for 2027 will increase to €125.5 billion. This is an uplift of €7 billion over the 2026 expenditure ceiling of €118.5 billion. Delivery of the plan over the medium-term horizon will require enhanced expenditure control, reducing and avoiding in-year decisions with carryover costs for subsequent years and robust oversight mechanisms. In April, Government agreed that additional funding of €646 million will be provided to the Department of Education and Youth in 2026. To accommodate this reprioritisation and deliver on the 2027 ceiling agreed under the plan, a levy has been introduced across other Departments, which have been asked to deliver efficiencies and reforms totalling €446 million from 2027. This should be considered through the lens of an overall uplift of €7 billion for expenditure in 2027 and will not impact 2026 allocations. The delivery of reforms and efficiencies supports adherence to the expenditure ceilings set out in our plan. It reflects the need to moderate the rate of expenditure growth across Departments to facilitate the decision to reprioritise and provide additional investment to the education sector within our wider fiscal framework out to 2030. The scale of the efficiencies to be found ranges from 0.02% to 1.4% on the 2026 current funding across all other Vote groups. The distribution of the levy has been designed to protect certain areas, which are the social protection Vote group non-pay allocation, Department of Health pay allocation, the specialist disability services subhead in the Department of Children, Disability and Equality, the Justice, Home affairs and Migration group pay, Housing, Local Government and Heritage group non-pay and pension funding across all Votes.
My Department wrote to Secretaries General following the Government decision, informing them of the need to identify efficiencies and reforms, and that this would form a key element of the Estimates engagement for budget 2027. Each Department will now have to determine how the levy will be applied across the Vote group and identify the efficiencies and reforms required to ensure this.
I appreciate that, but this is what the Minister has been saying publicly for the past number of weeks. What I am seeking to address with him is strong criticism of him and his Department in terms of their budget allocation process.
For example, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council points out that the Minister's Department got the allocations and estimations in terms of what we would spend on doctors and nurses in the last three months of last year wrong and that every year his Department does not base its budget allocations on what was spent the year before and often reducing them back to an unrealistic level. The council said:
The budgetary allocation was too low from the start. Delivering planned services on budget becomes nearly impossible if funding was never sufficient. That responsibility lies with the Department of Public Expenditure.
It went on to accuse the Minister and his Department of "bad budgeting". The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council doing that is very serious, so what is the Minister doing to address this? The council made recommendations to him on what he should do. Are he and his Department listening to the council and taking what it says on board? Are he and his Department going to change their process or will they continue to just blame the Departments when the independent body is clearly saying the responsibility lies with them?
We take everything the council says seriously in the context of its independent role. I am also conscious of what it says on the medium- to long-term horizon about how we manage overall expenditure to ensure it is on a safe and sustainable path. I do not think the council is arguing for a much bigger overall allocation. The Deputy is giving one side and reflecting one side in that context. On the Department of education, the allocation going into 2026 was a 10% allocation, which was far in excess of the overall expenditure growth rate, because of the need to respond to the specific necessities around education within our society, and Government prioritised that over other areas. When it comes to the Department of Health, it is on the back of exponential growth in health expenditure in recent years. There is a need in that Department, and indeed in other Departments, to focus on how we can improve the overall outputs, efficiencies and reforms in the context of the growth in spending in the last five years so we can achieve our overall ambition and objective, which is to moderate current expenditure so we can have the fiscal space to ramp up investment in infrastructure.
I thank the Minister. What we are lacking here is any clear information from him or the other Ministers about what is actually going on, why this is happening, what he and his Department are going to do correct it in terms of their budgeting process and where these savings, efficiencies and reforms are going to come about. A senior economist at the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council said:
A better and more transparent approach would be to:
Estimate the cost of existing services based on actual year-to-date spending—not original allocations, as is the current approach
Publish estimates of the change in cost of existing services, decomposed into its causes: demographics, pay, and price pressures [Then we would have transparency around this.]
Only then, set and publish estimates of savings targets (following negotiation) ...
The economist has given very specific advice on what the Minister and his Department need to do to correct this. We need that information and that transparency, so why are the Minister and his Department not providing it? Why is it just the same talk of how we are doing levies, efficiencies and reforms? We do not know what that means, what impact it is going to have and what the Minister and his Department are actually doing to get under the bonnet to fix this budgeting process.
What we did very seriously in budget 2026 is ensure most Government Departments are within profile and that their allocation is successfully delivering across what was set out in the budgetary context. The issue with what the Deputy has presented is just taking ELS as it is today and saying you are going to add more avoids the need to drive efficiencies within the current base of spending and the need to drive reforms within the current base of spending so we improve the qualitative outputs that come from that. By just looking at-----
Nurses' and teachers' pay is fixed though.
Looking for just additionality in the context of a current expenditure track for a particular policy area does not allow for an overall better evaluation of how we can get more for the current base of spend. That is how we have changed how we have approached overall expenditure policy. We are looking at the total expenditure rather than just looking at ELS and adding more. In the medium term that will improve the overall sustainability of our expenditure-----
It will not drive down wage growth.
-----but also improve efficiencies and strengthen the focus on reform. That is my priority in the months ahead.
International Bodies
3. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if he will report on his visit to the Bilderberg conference in Washington DC in April 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40659/26]
I thank Deputy Farrell. The annual Bilderberg conference is a forum to foster dialogue between Europe and North America on major issues facing the world, with attendees from industry, finance, government, academia and the media. The meeting was first held in 1954 and has been regularly attended by Irish Government Ministers on many occasions in recent years.
I was invited and attended this year’s event, held in April 2026, in my capacity as Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation. This year’s meeting was held in Washington DC and the agenda included a variety of topics such as AI, Arctic security, digital finance, energy diversification, Europe, global trade and the Middle East. While in Washington I also met the US Chamber of Commerce. Both engagements and events provide an important opportunity to engage with the international political and business community on Ireland’s foreign direct investment potential. IDA Ireland reported that in 2025 a record 323 investments, which was a 38% increase over 2024, were achieved and this is expected to create over 15,300 new jobs. Total employment in IDA-supported firms reached a new high of over 312,400 people last year. This underscores the economic value of FDI and engagement with the international community.
There is additional information about the event on the official Bilderberg website, which includes information on the organisation’s history, governance, steering committee, meetings, agendas, attendees and press releases.
The issue here is that in the spirit of the Bilderberg conference, which is a secretive conference, the Minister has not given me a full breakdown of exactly what he did and what he was discussing. It is only through a freedom of information request we have an insight into what he got up to. We also need to see it in the context of the time. When fuel protestors were out on the streets demanding the Minister's Government intervene just so they could make ends meet he was in Washington DC spending $760 a night of taxpayers' money on a luxury five-star hotel. While working families up and down the State were unable to afford to fill their tanks with fuel he was spending money on business class flights to the tune of thousands of euro and in total the trip cost the taxpayer €6,800. During a cost-of-living crisis why on Earth should taxpayers fund that type of trip while still not being aware of exactly what was being discussed?
The Deputy and her party fully understand, in the context of the party's participation in the Executive in the North, the importance of international engagement, foreign direct investment and engagement with the business community. As I said, the role in the context of the attendance at Bilderberg and meeting the US Chamber of Commerce is always to promote Ireland, to engage with many people who invest here and also political leaders in Europe and elsewhere. It is important, as an open, trading economy that we do that. I fully participated in the Cabinet meeting held on Sunday which obviously had advanced the discussions relating to our response and the important interventions we made. The Deputy's approach here, in undermining international engagement, is not fair.
I did not ask the Minister about his discussions with the US Chamber of Commerce. I asked him specifically about the Bilderberg conference. The focus on militarisation was absolutely clear from the agenda, which included discussions on the transatlantic defence industrial relationship, the Middle East and the future of warfare. As he is the Minister for public expenditure I find it concerning he would foster a close relationship with bosses of military companies, which is not in our national interest. I am concerned about the threat to our neutrality from this Government. The Minister will know there are no minutes or media coverage recording what was discussed in these sessions, so I would like to know what was discussed. The public paid nearly €7,000 for this trip and we have a right to know exactly what sessions the Minister attended, who he met and what he discussed.
All the attendees at the conference are published on the Bilderberg website, as is the specific agenda across many topics. As I have said it was AI, Arctic security, digital finance, energy diversification, Europe, global trade and the Middle East. It is attended by public representatives - members of government - from parts of Europe and the US, industry leaders and also by members of the media. The wider organisation's meeting agenda, respective press releases and what is discussed are set out. It has been attended by many members of Irish Governments in the past. As I said, it is important, as an open, trading economy that we engage with business leaders and members of government from across the world. It provides an important forum to do that.
Public Sector Pensions
4. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to provide an update on overpayments made by the NSSO to former Government Ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41064/26]
Have all former Ministers either paid any money owed or set up repayment plans with the NSSO with regard to the pensions overpayment issue?
The National Shared Services Office, NSSO, a body under the aegis of the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, provides HR, pension, payroll and finance shared services to Government Departments and offices. As part of its remit, it transacts HR, payroll, pension and finance administration for public and civil servants on behalf of 54 client public service bodies.
In relation to pension and additional superannuation contribution, ASC, contributions for Ministers, Ministers of State, former Ministers and officeholders, a review into the application of the relevant pension schemes and additional superannuation contribution rates was carried out by the NSSO. The review identified 82 individuals where there was an under-deduction or over-deduction of pension and-or additional superannuation contribution. The NSSO has reached agreement with all current Ministers and Ministers of State in relation to payment of pension contributions due. Agreement has also been reached with the majority of former Ministers and other officeholders impacted by the review.
The NSSO is fully committed to ensuring that all moneys owed to the State are fully recouped, with 83% of the moneys owed now paid or in an agreed recoupment plan. It has informed me that there are a small number of outstanding cases where those impacted have yet to commit to a recoupment plan. Engagement is ongoing, with the latest correspondence issued from the NSSO this month.
These matters related to pension and ASC contributions and, in cases such as these, the NSSO adopts a consistent process of engagement to ensure the moneys owed are recovered. The NSSO works with each individual to address the error identified. An independent external audit of the NSSO retirement and pension processes is being overseen by the chair of the advisory board of the NSSO, and I have been told it is nearing completion.
To be honest, I assumed the Minister was going to tell me that they had all engaged in a repayment plan. Am I correct that 17% have not engaged in a recoupment plan? I have raised this with the Minister numerous times, and I know he is in agreement with me. However, it is outrageous that 17% would not engage in a recoupment plan. This is a time when, as we were just discussing, people are struggling to make ends meet. Ordinary workers who go out and work every day of their lives cannot pay their bills or their rent. We now have a situation where former Ministers did not engage in a recoupment plan to pay money back into the State coffers, when they know this is the middle of a cost of living crisis and they know they were not due this money. We have been talking about this for months on end. I find it shocking. I genuinely thought the Minister was going to tell me they had all engaged in that recoupment plan.
As the Deputy knows, given its remit, the wider work of the NSSO is done independently of me. I am not aware of who the current or former Ministers are. The NSSO is trying to progress the remaining number. They all should and must enter into a repayment plan. The NSSO said that the latest correspondence has issued this month. There needs to be full repayment, and I have said that consistently. All current Ministers and Ministers of State have entered into a repayment plan or have fully repaid it, or have been repaid themselves where there was an over-deduction in certain instances. It is important that the remaining number of former Ministers and Ministers of State enter into a repayment plan. I know the NSSO is determined to do that. I am not privy to the correspondence with specific individuals, except to say that the NSSO is progressing work to ensure that people enter specific plans.
Is the Minister aware of how many former Ministers are in that 17%? My God, this has to undermine public trust and public confidence. If anybody is overpaid anything, they are pursued with legal letters and threatening letters when these things happen through no fault of their own. They are pursued very quickly and in a very difficult way for many people who are not used to dealing with this. We are talking about people who were in a position of power, making decisions over other people’s lives, who now feel they are a class to themselves, and who feel they do not need to engage in the recouping of this money. I understand that the Minister is not aware of each individual case, and that it is done in an independent way. However, can the Minister tell us how many people are involved? This means it is going to be difficult to maintain essential public confidence in public life.
The total number of individuals was 82, which included current and former Ministers of State, officeholders and a small number of civil servants. Some 17% of that is what remains. We know that the cohort relating to current Ministers has been accounted for. I do not have the specifics. What I have been told is that the aggregate miscalculation was €359,000, and that 17%, or €62,000, remains. The vast majority of what was owed has been repaid or is in a recoupment plan. Of the 82 cases identified, 63 are now closed. The NSSO is repeatedly finalising this. Although I do not know, there may be individuals who are getting advice or getting it checked to see what is owed. I do not know the specific interactions that are ongoing because I am not familiar with the individuals, and it is confidential information for any individual. I know the policy and direction of the NSSO is to ensure that where anyone owes anything to the State where there has been an under-deduction, that is fully repaid. It is pursuing and engaging with all of the individuals with respect to that.
Question No. 5 taken with Written Answers.
Special Educational Needs
80. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Minister for Education and Youth the total number of applications made to date to the National Council for Special Education from parents seeking a special class or special school placement for their child; the number of applications made since the deadline of 1 October passed; the status of the roll-out of new special class and special school places to meet that need; the number of those children who do not have an offer of a school place on 25 May 2026; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40992/26]
The Department of education and the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, continue to work closely with school patron bodies, school management bodies and schools to confirm new special classes for the next school year 2026-27. The NCSE began sanctioning new special classes in January of this year, which is several months earlier than was the case in 2025. The NCSE advise that 7,860 verified notifications were received by 1 October. The vast majority of the notifications are for the 2026-27 school year, but some are for beyond that. In addition, we recently announced inclusive special classes as part of a new approach to supporting students with additional needs. This is one of the many ways the Department is actively engaging to meet the increased demand. As of 28 May 2026, 546 new special classes have been sanctioned, including 47 inclusive special classes, which is 32 at post-primary level and 15 at primary level.
I expect schools opening new special classes to move forward now with the admissions processes for these new classes. In addition to providing additional special class places, four new special schools are being established. These schools will be established in Balbriggan, CityWest, Bray and Monasterevin.
Data continues to be reviewed and analysed by the NCSE, which continues to engage with families. It is the experience of the NCSE that some families who contacted them may decide not to apply for a special education place. This may be where a place is not in a particular school of choice or where the student is already being supported appropriately in their existing placement. The Department and the NCSE will continue to closely monitor the need for further special class and special school places nationwide as part of forward planning for the 2027-28 school year. The NCSE continues to engage closely with schools and families to track the placement of children and young people and determine the current remaining level of need for specialist places at local level.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit. It is reassuring to hear that the Department tracks the numbers and the placements. It would be more reassuring if it would make those public and provide them to Opposition politicians when they ask questions on them.
I will ask again in relation to the figures. The last time we were here the Minister of State indicated there were 7,860 notifications to the NCSE before 1 October, that about 75% of those children were already in school and that he was dealing with around 2,000 new applications. Based on 546 new classes sanctioned, the Minister of State has 3,276 places to address that need. How many children do not have an offer of a school place at this stage?
We have the additional capacity that is being brought on between 2025 and 2026 and we have over 1,000 special classes opened across the country. We have new capacity and then there is additional capacity which is from the movement of students from primary into second level and from those leaving education. Just to reassure Deputy O'Rourke of the figure prior to 1 October, the NCSE and Department of education are continuing to liaise with families who being notified and contacted on an ongoing basis. We are ensuring we have places at primary, post-primary and special schools. That work has been intensifying right through the last number of months, into this week and beyond. We are working meticulously. I could not use any other word. There is engagement between the National Council for Special Education and the Department with families and with school communities to ensure we have appropriate school places for September 2026. That work is ongoing.
There are a couple of things there. We do not have the figure for the number of children who do not have an offer. We do not have the figure for the number of children who were notified to the NCSE after 1 October. I presume the Minister of State does have those figures but is not making them publicly available. That raises very significant concerns. Based on my estimation, we are talking about hundreds of children without an offer and thousands of children in inappropriate school placements - nearly 4,000 based on the applications prior to 1 October.
It is the Minister of State's formula of words that he "encourages" schools to go now and begin their admissions policy. Is he tracking that at all? Of the 546 classes that have been sanctioned, how many have their admissions completed or ongoing? Does the Minister of State know?
I can assure Deputy O'Rourke that we are tracking. We are opening the special schools and we have engaged with the special classes. Yes, of course we are tracking the admissions policies because the admissions policy is the enabler from the sanction of the special class, the physical building, the teacher and the two SNAs, and also to ensure there are students in it. It is being tracked at all times.
We are constantly asked about numbers. The Minister and I are acutely aware of the need to make sure children have school places and we are working extremely hard on it. We are across this, day in, day out, right across the Department and the NCSE. I assure Deputy O'Rourke that the NCSE is meticulously working with families and with school communities. When sanctioning takes place, it is then on to the admissions policy to enable that class to be populated by students and to ensure they are in for the school year. The vast majority of those that have been sanctioned have the admissions policy up and running and most of them have it completed at this stage.
81. Deputy Eoghan Kenny asked the Minister for Education and Youth for an update on the revised 2014 SNA circular, the workforce development plan and SNA redeployment scheme; when these will be published; the consultation that has taken place in creating these documents; if they will genuinely reflect the reality of the role of an SNA in a modern educational environment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39683/26]
I ask colleagues to excuse my voice. I must be spending too much time talking in here. I wish to ask about the update of the revised 2014 SNA circular, the workforce development plan and the SNA redeployment scheme. When will these be published along with all of the consultation that has taken place in creating these documents, if any has? Will they genuinely reflect the reality of the role of a special needs assistant in a modern educational environment and in a modern classroom?
I thank Deputy Kenny for his question. My Department is in the final stages of work on the first special needs assistant workforce development plan and associated documents. The plan provides a comprehensive framework for understanding and supporting SNAs, children with special educational needs and school communities. It will, through a co-created series of policy developments, strengthen, clarify and offer clear direction and consistency to the SNA workforce.
Significant research and collaboration have been undertaken in preparation of the plan. This includes significant engagement with focus groups of SNAs, students, school leaders and teachers as well as a national survey of SNAs. Published reports on each are available on the Government website.
The plan is also supported by collaborative working groups established for each of the five pillars of the work. Membership of these working groups include school management bodies; Fórsa, the trade union representing SNAs; school staff; the National Parents Council; and the Children’s Rights Alliance. The working groups examined every facet of the SNA role in 55 meetings with a view to enhancing support to children and young people with special educational needs.
The Minister of State, Deputy Michael Moynihan, and I recently met with stakeholder representative groups and SNAs in a day-long engagement to discuss this important work and look at any outstanding gaps that may be within these documents.
The key outputs from the plan will include a new circular on the role of the SNA, an SNA redeployment scheme and a review of the SNA employment contract. I very much value the contribution of SNAs and the role they play in schools across the country to make sure the overall well-being of students and pupils is at the forefront of everything we are doing. I am pleased to confirm that the drafting of the plan, the circulars on the SNA role and the SNA redeployment scheme are at an advanced stage. I intend to publish them in the coming weeks.
That is very good. In the next couple of weeks before the Dáil summer recess, we can expect that the redeployment scheme, the revised 2014 circular and the workforce development plan will all be published and available to be viewed by all SNAs, educational stakeholders and politicians right across the country, and of course parents as well.
Consultation has obviously been extremely positive, and that is to be welcomed, as is the fact we are now at the final stages. It is not before time at all in relation to the workforce development plan and the redeployment scheme. I do not want to go over again what happened to SNAs at the beginning of 2026. The significant issue remains. I completely understand, as do SNAs, that redeployment has to take place but it has to be given to SNAs before any sort of correspondence is sent out to schools to say that the SNAs within the schools have to be redeployed.
It is positive that these will be published. Can the Minister put it on the record that they will be published before the summer?
I thank the Deputy. I want to publish these documents within the coming weeks. They are at an advanced stage and they were codesigned with SNAs, stakeholders and advocacy groups. The Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, and I met with them all again recently. We did a day-long session looking at all of these documents to make sure we get this right. The new circular to replace Circulars 30/2014 and 71/2011 on the role of the SNA will be published. There will be an amalgamated circular published and a guidance document will be published for that as well. The redeployment of SNAs will be delivered by the NCSE and it will, for the first time, allow SNAs in posts that may no longer be required for reasons such as falling enrolments, reduced care needs and changing demographics to be redeployed. This is something SNAs have asked for as well. There has been significant engagement and it will be published. There is also an SNA hub online. It will be published there as well as on Government websites.
Very good. It is only positive that it will be published. It will give SNAs and school management right across the country greater clarity on how many SNAs they will be able to have in the school system. We also cannot lose clarity on the fact that we need to continue adding to our SNA workforce across the country. While I appreciate and fully accept that we have the highest number of SNAs we have ever had in our education system right now, needs are only growing right across our education system and the 4,000 schools we have nationwide. Needs are presenting far more than they previously were, which is only positive in one aspect because we are getting to the needs of children and providing them with the services. I am very hopeful - I am not asking the Minister to put it on the record but, rather, just to have it in the back of her head - that there will be a further allocation of SNAs in budget 2027.
I should have said at the outset that we have more SNAs now than ever before. There were 24,896 SNAs in our schools. We will have over 26,000 this coming September. I absolutely know, as a former teacher, the value and the role of the SNA. I do not need to tell the Deputy, Members of this House or indeed parents or young children and students themselves who need the support of SNAs working with the class teacher, the special educational teacher and the school community. We intend to improve their conditions around training and we have been listening to SNAs themselves, who come from a wide variety of life experience and have a wide range of qualifications. We want to make sure that in the documents we are producing now, which are codesigned with them and the school communities, we are enabling them to get access to the training and giving them the redeployment benefits they wanted and have long sought, which is equivalent to teachers across the country.
School Staff
82. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Minister for Education and Youth to provide an update on the ongoing negotiations with school caretakers and school secretaries; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40993/26]
I wish to ask the Minister to provide an update on the ongoing negotiations with school caretakers and secretaries.
I thank the Deputy for his question. School secretaries and caretakers are at the heart of schools in this country and they are the key interface, as we all know, between students, parents, school leaders and other staff. Without them, our schools would be unsustainable, given the value of what they contribute, so supporting our school staff is an absolute priority.
My Department has been engaging with Fórsa and the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation over the past number of months under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission and the Labour Court in relation to a number of claims, including a claim for a comparable pension entitlement. The matter of comparable pension entitlement was referred to the Labour Court. The parties remain in process, and my Department remains committed to reaching a resolution on this very important matter. As with any industrial relations matters, where engagement is sensitive and complex, the matters under discussion are confidential until the process concludes.
I want to reassure the Deputy, from my perspective and that of the Government, of the value we place on our school secretaries and caretakers. It is absolutely imperative that we get this matter resolved.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. The reason I raised this issue is because we are coming towards the end of the school year. This will be our last opportunity at priority questions before the school year ends. At the start of the school year, school secretaries and caretakers reluctantly went on strike outside schools in pursuit of pension parity. We could all see - I hope Government could see it, and it surely knows it - the level of public support, particularly within school communities, that there is for school secretaries and caretakers. Their claim is a just one. It is for pension parity. The deep concern at this stage - and I take on board every word of the Minister's response - is that time is moving on and these individuals, in some circumstances, are making decisions about when they will retire and be able to move on. Time is of the essence.
I concur with everything the Deputy has said there. I met with the school secretaries and caretakers in my own constituency at the time. I know many of them. They are very familiar to me. They do not take going out on protests lightly. They did not want to be there. I heard that loud and clear and I recognise that a comparable pension entitlement and enhanced terms and conditions are, understandably, important objectives for our secretaries and caretakers. That is why my Department has been engaging with Fórsa over the past number of months under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission and the Labour Court with the support and input of the Department of public expenditure and reform. Parties remain in that process and my Department remains committed to reaching a resolution on all these matters. As with any industrial relations process, I cannot comment on it.
By way of background, the Deputy may be aware an agreement was reached in 2022 that provided for the assimilation of school secretaries to a payroll administered by my Department, which has provided significant benefits in respect of pay and access to leave. We are committed to ensuring that grant-funded school caretakers will be afforded the opportunity to avail of an agreement similar to that offered to grant-funded school secretaries.
In this, I want to make the case for the Minister to play whatever helpful role she can with the parties involved to try to move things on and bring them to a successful resolution. We are aware of some of the issues at stake here: access, for example, to a public service pension scheme versus auto-enrolment versus a third, bespoke model. I will make a strong case, and I hope the Minister hears it and can pass it on to her ministerial colleagues.
There is a real concern that there will not be any recognition of years of dedicated contributions, and that, for example, those people who have longer service, fewer years left on their contracts and are closer retirement will be disadvantaged. It is important that any pension scheme recognises the years of dedicated service that people have given. This cannot be about a future scheme for new people coming into the job.
Regarding secretaries and caretakers being given access to the single public service pension scheme, engagement, supported by the State's industrial relation bodies, has been ongoing. As with all industrial relations processes where engagement is sensitive and complex, discussions remain confidential.
My Department welcomed the commencement of the auto-enrolment retirement savings scheme, which is administered by the National Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings Authority, NAERSA, in January. Responsibility for employer compliance with the scheme lies with NAERSA. Revenue provides payroll data to NAERSA, which uses this to identify and enrol eligible employees. Employers were required to complete their profile on the My Future Fund employer portal using their Revenue online services credentials before January this year, to ensure that they are compliant with their obligations under the legislation. Employers are required to ensure that their payroll systems are capable of calculating and submitting contributions and that employee contributions are matched in accordance with the scheme's requirements. It is important to note that all employers, regardless of their status, are required to comply with the legislation underpinning My Future Fund. The Department has enrolled approximately 2,000 eligible secretaries since 1 January this year.
School Enrolments
83. Deputy Jen Cummins asked the Minister for Education and Youth her plans to publish the number of children awaiting appropriate school places on a regular basis. [37945/26]
I would like to have a conversation about the Minister's plans to publish information on the number of children awaiting appropriate school places on a regular basis. This would be similar to how the relevant Department issues the homeless figures every month. It is in order to show transparency as to where the Department of education is with regard to being able to tell everybody how many children throughout the country do not have appropriate school places.
The National Council for Special Education, NCSE, has verified that 7,860 children and young people notified to it by 1 October 2025 meet the requirements for special classes or special school places for the 2026-27 school year. Further children came forward after that date, and this will continue right up to September. Approximately 7,000 of the 7,860 children in question and young people have a diagnosis of autism. There is generally an adequate number of available places for children and young people with other diagnoses. The focus, therefore, continues to be on providing new places for children and young people with autism. That data continues to be reviewed and analysed by the NCSE, which will continue to engage with families.
It is the experience of the NCSE that some families who contacted it may decide not to apply for a special education place. This may be where a place is not in a particular school of choice of where a student is already being supported appropriately in his or her existing school. Data available to the NCSE shows that approximately 75% of the children and young people who came forward by the 1 October deadline are already enrolled in school. As in previous years, the priority groups for access to specialist placements for the 2026-27 school year comprise those without school places, namely young children moving into primary school, children moving from primary to post-primary, children moving from one area to another or those who need to be accommodated where previous placements have broken down.
Budget 2026 initially provided for 3,000 new places. There are over 2,500 places available through the normal annual movement of students from primary to post-primary and finishing schools. The additional funding for which the Department received approval from the Government last month will allow us to provide further new specialised classes and special school places over and above the 3,000 new places already budgeted for. The NCSE can confirm that there are 546 new special classes for the next school year. I will come back to that point in my supplementary response.
I am delighted that there is portal methodology and all of that. It will allow us to get a handle on what the picture is. In the context of children who have not yet got a placement, the question remains as whether the schools involved need new buildings. If they do, how long will that take? Where will the children involved be housed or educated while that is happening? Did the Minister of State have to use his powers under section 37 to ensure that schools open appropriate places? We still do not know what the number is. I could use the power of deduction. I am not great at maths, but it would be really helpful if we knew what that number was.
Why did the Minister of State refer to the number who applied as opposed to the number who do not have places? Anecdotally, there are children who do not have appropriate school places. Why are parents applying via the portal? I know they have to notify the Department, but is there a box on that portal that they can tick to indicate that they do not need a place and are fine or do they have to trawl through the whole thing, which creates a lot of difficulty? Would it be better to have a box for them to indicated that they do not need a place and are just letting the Department know their child has an additional need?
Over 80% of the 546 new special classes that have been sanctioned to date are located in existing buildings. We are working extensively on this. We are acutely aware of where additional accommodation has to be made available. That is a factor in how fast we can put a class in place. We take a number of issues into account when we talk about new special classes. These include the need in an area to have the class as close to the children as possible. Since 1 October, the portal has given us great insight into the level of need that exists. When parents indicate on the portal that their children have special education requirements, it behoves the Department and the NCSE to reach out and understand the need of the families involved. The important piece is the fieldwork and groundwork that are taking place between the special educational needs organisers, SENOs, and families to understand the need that exists and parents' concerns.
We used one section 37A procedure last year. We are continuing to engage with schools and school communities to ensure that we use the minimum number necessary.
It is good to hear that the Minister of State is using section 37A. It is important that all schools take their fair share of caring for children in their communities, particularly in areas where there might be a high number of fee-paying schools. If it is a fee-paying school that is located nearest to a child, the child also needs to be given a place. It is the same with every school. As we move towards a model where the local school is where the child goes, we still have a long way to go to get there. I am glad that the portal is creating options for parents to know what the situation is, because that was the whole plan the Department had. I am glad it is working out. I would obviously like more information, particularly as I am in opposition and am contacted by so many people. If the Department has a handle on this and is able to work with every family, it gives me great solace coming into the summer to know that every family will have a place for their child come September and that if a school building is not ready or there are glitches, there is a plan.
The Minister and I are acutely aware of the issue. The Minister has experience of this because in the previous Dáil, she held the position I currently occupy. When the numbers come through from the portal, we are acutely aware that we need to make sure that we have an appropriate number of places.
A total of 407 extra special classes were announced in 2025. We have 546 today. Between 2025 and 2026, we will have over 1,000 special classes across the country. We have inclusive special classes, with 15 at primary level and 32 at post-primary level, which are being welcomed in the community. It is important that the portal allows the parent or guardian to notify the Department of a child with additional needs. The NCSE has to work through that and engage with the families. We also have to engage with school communities. A huge volume of work is happening with in the Department and the NCSE at all times across the year. There are bodies in schools to make sure that we are doing the right thing. We have a lot of capacity this year. We are working through every family and every requirement.