School failed to get advice on financial problem, says TD

THE DEPARTMENT of Education has been criticised for failing to offer proper support or advice to successive boards of management at a national school faced with financial irregularities.

Waterford Fine Gael TD Paudie Coffey also criticised school inspectors for failing to closely examine the financial irregularities when an evaluation was undertaken at the time other than “a passing reference in their final report”.

At the primary school a former principal operated 19 bank accounts and held school money without the knowledge of the board of management. The principal adopted the annual accounts over a number of years “knowing full well the monies were neither accounted for nor reported to the board of management”.

Eventually more than €77,000 was transferred back from the accounts to the school.

Mr Coffey said that when specific questions were asked about the accounts the principal went on sick leave and never returned, subsequently retiring.

The Government backbencher said successive boards of management sought the department’s assistance “but received very little support or advice, and were left to their own devices to manage what had become a very difficult financial problem”.

He added that, while he was not suggesting any school funds were misappropriated, “to this day many questions remain unanswered regarding the operation of these private accounts and the management of school finances during this time”.

He said “this is not good enough” when millions of euro of taxpayers’ money went into the educational system. “We are entitled to expect thorough and adequate financial governance.”

Questioning the department’s standards of governance for educational institutions, he also outlined financial problems in two other educational institutions.

He warned that if breaches occurred in two colleges and a primary school in his constituency “we can be sure it is happening in others around the country”.

Minister of State for Education Ciaran Cannon said he was “disappointed” the support the board of management sought was not “in their opinion” made available. “I will undertake to ensure that this will not happen again.”

He said governance differed for various institutions, and at primary level there were 3,000 schools privately owned and operated “under a range of patronage arrangements”, mostly under the patronage of the local bishop.

Mr Coffey also highlighted the case of Waterford Institute of Technology (WIT), currently under investigation by the Public Accounts Committee, where spending in the president’s office had gone from €30,000 in 2000 to more than €600,000 in 2008.

He also referred to the De la Salle second-level college in Waterford city whose reputation had been damaged by racking up more than €500,000 in debts on school refurbishment projects that “had little educational benefit”. Management and governance were “so bad the Department of Education had to appoint an administrator to manage the college”.

The Minister said it was “simply not acceptable for scarce public money to be squandered on lavish expenses in public institutions”, and he insisted the department and the Higher Education Authority were committed to ensuring “efficient and effective spend of all resources”.

Action had been taken on WIT, an external review was almost completed and the Minister for Education had asked officials to consider what further steps might be necessary.

Codes of practice were in place for second-level schools but there were not formalised financial accounting procedures for certain primary schools. However, they were required to make their accounts available to the department if asked.

Mr Coffey said there was a need to reconsider the position of governance for primary schools. He acknowledged primary schools were privately owned but “millions of taxpayers’ money are being invested in private schools . . . to be expended on the education of our children”.

Mr Cannon said the autonomy and independence enjoyed by primary schools “brings with it a serious burden of responsibility for the board of management”.