Statement on Firhouse Schools

Statement on Firhouse Schools

Thanks to the many dozens of people who have been in touch with me in recent days – and, indeed, over the last 18 months – regarding the siting of two schools in the Firhouse area. Vigorous campaigns have been organised by local residents and by two school communities. Other local organisations including Firhouse Carmel FC have also made representations.

This has been a difficult process for all concerned. I appreciate the many individual emails and letters I have received on this matter, and the trouble local people have taken to outline their concerns on both sides of the debate.

I am unhappy with many of the processes involved since this issue was first raised. Regardless of this, though, I have involved myself in attempting to resolve the issues as Mayor and as a Councillor, representing Firhouse directly since May’s election.

There are a number of legitimate concerns on both sides of this debate. There is also considerable misinformation and some false claims. There have been simply too many emails over the past 2 weeks in particular to which I have been able to respond directly. Instead, I have decided to try to address the issues in a statement. As many people are raising similar questions with me, I thought a “frequently-asked questions” format would be appropriate. Some of the questions are direct quotes from emails I have received. Others cover the representations in a more general sense.

I appreciate that many people may feel this is a straightforward issue. However, for me as a Councillor, it is complex and detailed. Many people on both sides of the issue are aware of these complexities. Others are not. Therefore, apologies in advance for the length of this post, and for going over what for many will be old ground. None of this is a legal or official interpretation, but my own words.

Who are the schools in question?
The schools are Firhouse Educate Together NS (ETNS) and Gaelscoil na Giúise. Both are primary schools. Firhouse ETNS is a multi-denominational school under the patronage of Educate Together. Gaelscoil na Giúise is a multi-denominational school under the patronage of An Foras Patrúnacha.

Do these schools exist? Are they open?
A number of emails have spoken of possible or hypothetical schools. These schools already exist and have operated since September 2013. Both schools currently have Junior Infants and Senior Infants classes.

Who decided these schools should be opened?
The decision was taken in 2012-13 by the then Minister for Education, Ruairi Quinn, and his Department. This was on the basis of work done by the Dept of Education in determining where there was a need for new schools. This study was based on population statistics, the pattern of school enrolments and a study of different patronage options. The Dept decided that two new schools were required in the Firhouse area. They asked South Dublin County Council to identify a site for these two schools, with the preferred option for the two schools to be located beside each other (a “campus arrangement”).

Who proposed that these schools should be located on green space in Firhouse?
The Dept of Education, under procedures revised in 2008 and 2012, asked South Dublin County Council (SDCC) to identify and seek to acquire a site for these schools. SDCC planners engaged in a study of lands in the area in 2012. Several of the sites were ruled out. In 2013, they proposed to locate these schools on the green space in question, a patch of green space located adjacent to Firhouse Community Centre, between the Killinniny Rd and Ballycullen Drive. The proposal was in two phases – Phase One, to locate two small temporary schools on the site, and Phase Two to extend this to two larger schools.

Weren’t these plans rejected by Councillors? What consultation took
place?
Not formally. The Council first met with Councillors. Some Cllrs stated that they did not agree that there was any need for new schools for the area (I attended these briefing meetings and raised questions, but broadly accepted the need for new schools). SDCC staff also met at this stage with representatives from Firhouse Community Centre and Firhouse Carmel FC. SDCC then put the proposal out to “Part 8” consultation. There was significant local opposition to the proposals. Councillors such as myself (I was Mayor at the time), in respect of the opposition, asked Council officials to investigate alternative sites. Council officials then deferred the “Part 8” (Phase One of the plan) – it is now back on the agenda.

What happened with the schools?
Both schools had been established with a view to beginning in September 2013. Without the Phase One “Part 8” agreed, they were unable to begin in the proposed temporary accommodation. Instead they tried to source alternative accommodation somewhere else in the area. Firhouse ETNS secured accommodation in the upstairs of Tymon Bawn Community Centre, near Aylesbury. Gaelscoil na Giúise secured accommodation in the upstairs of Firhouse Community Centre. Both schools still operate from these Centres.

Can’t these schools stay in these Centres, at least for a couple more years?
The simple answer is no. The accommodation in these Community Centres is totally inappropriate for schools, in particular given that the pupils are currently infants. As a teacher, I understand that even if the Community Centres could continue to house these schools, the accommodation is totally unsuitable. However, given that the schools are still growing – both will be taking on a new stream next year, and each year after that – the Centres cannot accommodate them regardless.

What did you do as a Councillor to try to seek that these schools be accommodated elsewhere?
I did a number of things.
1. I raised the issue in person with former Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn, and subsequently wrote to him;
2. I supported, despite concerns, the change in the Ballycullen-Oldcourt Local Area Plan to provide school zoning at Gunny Hill (see below)
3. I held meetings with planning officials to seek to advance the potential of the Gunney Hill site and the Victory Centre in particular
4. I sought updates on the situation at meetings of the Council and in my daily dealings with management.

What is the Gunney Hill site?
This is a privately-owned site at the top of Ballycullen, near to Hunterswood, and across the R113 from the Lidl supermarket. Many people have suggested that the schools be located there as an alternative. The schools themselves, and myself, have been open to that idea.

Why isn’t the Gunney Hill site being used? Wouldn’t that solve this issue?
Because the Dept of Education have said “no.” They have said that they will not countenance purchasing the land here for these schools. This has been their repeated message all along, as recent as November 18th.

Can’t the Councillors force them to use the Gunney Hill site instead?
No. This is where the reality of power and the cumbersome system of planning and educational provision are relevant. Councillors, myself included, have zoned this site for school purposes. But the Dept of Education are the ones who make the decision on where they will purchase the land. They have stated that they will not be purchasing the land for these schools. They outline their reasons in a letter on Gaelscoil na Giúise’s blog. Among these are that the school is too far away from the catchment area in Firhouse, and that they wish to reserve this site for a new school if/when further development happens in Ballycullen.

Can’t you put pressure on them?
Councillors already have, to no avail. The Dept have confirmed all along that they will not be purchasing the site.

Can’t you “call their bluff?”
I have heard the statement being made by other political representatives, that the Dept of Education are bluffing and that if Councillors reject the proposals at the site adjacent to the Firhouse Community Centre, the Dept of Education will be forced to reconsider. Nothing in my experience as a Councillor, and nothing in my experience in education in general, leads me to believe that this will be the case. I may not like that the Dept of Education has this particular power, but I accept that as a Councillor making a decision I am required to recognise the reality of this. I also recognise that by continuing to pursue this site despite all the evidence showing the Dept aren’t interested, the chips used in calling such a bluff are the children of these schools.

What about the Victory Centre?
This is a former church-type community facility off the Firhouse Road. It has been closed in recent years. I and another former Councillor suggested this as a possibility for school accommodation. This site was investigated. It was found not to meet Dept of Education standards or requirements. The building would need to be demolished for a school or schools to be built at the site. The ownership of this land and the Centre is being contested in a lengthy court battle. The Dept of Education have again ruled out pursuing this option for these schools.

What about other sites?
In total, the Council investigated 16 sites in the overall area. A report is given on the SDCC site about each of these sites. All but 2 are ruled out for a variety of reasons – not being available due to development, flooding issues, lack of services (roads etc), etc.

What about the Old Bawn Crossroads Site?
This is the only site other than the site adjacent to Firhouse Community Centre which Council planners and the Dept of Education have put forward. It is a triangle of green space diagonally-opposite the Old Mill pub. It is a small site, and would only be able to accommodate one school – as part of any such plan, a second school would be located at the site adjacent to Firhouse Community Centre.

For me, this is not a good option. Traffic and road safety issues are very significant here. The tightness of the site would require an unusual and likely very expensive build, including underground car parking facilities and an enclosed play area on the roof of the school. I do not support the proposal to locate a school at this site.

What is being lost at the site adjacent to Firhouse Community Centre?
Approximately 2 hectares of green space will be lost at the site if the permanent schools are built. The site is owned by South Dublin County Council. Much of it comprises a hill close to the Community Centre itself. The remainder is a flatter patch of ground, including a section which is currently used as a pitch by Firhouse Carmel FC. The non-pitch space is used mainly for football training and the holding of a yearly mini world cup tournament. People also walk their dogs etc at the site. The frequency of use of the site is contested. The school site is approximately ¼ of the green belt between the Ballycullen Rd and Firhouse Community College; it is approximately 1/10 of the green space in the immediate area (including Parklands etc); it is less than 5% of the overall green space in the Firhouse area.

Aren’t Firhouse Carmel FC losing pitches?
No. The Part 8 (the temporary accommodation or “Phase One”) will not affect any existing pitches. The next phase of development would require one pitch to be moved and realigned. Significant works will be required to properly drain and fix this pitch. The Council planners have committed to funding these works from the sale of the site to the Dept of Education.

Won’t this proposal result in increased traffic?
The simple answer is yes. There is no way you could build two 16-classroom schools anywhere in Ireland, and not have increased traffic flows. The same concerns apply to all of the other sites to be considered in Firhouse. This is a legitimate concern of local residents. However, I will be making the case that planning conditions need to be put in place to minimise traffic dropping children to school; different opening hours for the two schools; different entrances; strong engagement from the off with Green Schools programmes to encourage and promote walking and cycling to school.

The location of the site in the centre of Firhouse means that almost all houses are within a 1km radius – meaning far more opportunity for walking in particular. Both schools are cognisant of this as a major concern and are committed to minimising traffic flow.

What’s the difference between a Part 8 and a Section 183?
A Part 8 is a process whereby the Council agrees to develop something on its own land. Councillors are informed, a public consultation occurs, and Councillors then vote for or against. The majority of the Part 8 process for this site took place in 2013 but no vote on the matter has taken place.
A Section 183 is a vote of the Councillors to dispose of (sell) land to a third party, in this case the Dept of Education.

What happens if the proposal for 2 schools at the site is passed on Thursday?
If the proposal is passed, work on the Part 8 can begin in the next few weeks. This would result in temporary school accommodation for the two schools and would secure their future. Separately, a Section 183 will be brought to December’s Council meeting for the agreement of Councillors. If this is passed, the Dept of Education will then own the site. They will then lodge a planning application for the building of these schools which will provide full details of all works. Residents and all concerned can make submissions during the planning application. SDCC will then decide to grant or refuse permission based on planning practice, the County Development Plan, etc. If residents or others are unhappy with this outcome, they may appeal the decision to An Bord Pleanála.

What happens if the proposal for 2 schools at the site is rejected on Thursday?
The schools will be thrown into limbo regarding their future. They have no accommodation, temporary or otherwise, from September onwards. In theory, the Council could seek to pursue another site. My political belief is that no other site is an option for the variety of reasons expressed above. The green space will remain as is. The schools, without the certainty of a permanent site, may be forced to close.

Is there a need for these schools?
Simply put, yes. Population in the area is growing. The birth rate is increasing. More parents are seeking multi-denominational schools or Gaelscoileanna for their children. Even if someone thought there wasn’t a “need” for the schools, they already exist. I believe it is the task of everyone concerned to ensure they are appropriately accommodated and have certainty for the future.

Can’t existing schools in Firhouse cater for everyone?
The three existing schools in the immediate area – Scoil Carmel, Scoil Treasa and Holy Rosary – are fantastic schools. I know more than most given my work as a teacher close by in Tallaght. However, all 3 are under Catholic patronage. At present, all three schools accept all children who apply, meaning children of all faiths and none are enrolled in the school. There is no guarantee, with the projected increase in the number of children in the wider area, that they will be able to continue this policy. The enrolment policy of all 3 schools, like all Catholic National Schools (including the one I teach in myself), is to firstly cater for Catholic children in the parish. Their enrolment policies are available online. There is a legitimate worry that these schools will not be able to cater for all children as they can at present, and that non-baptised children locally will be forced to leave the area. This difficulty is already being grappled with in schools elsewhere in Dublin and is a likely scenario for the coming years. This is in addition to the fact that some parents would prefer the Educate Together ethos or a scoil lán-Gaelach.

Can’t this proposal be deferred?
To defer this proposal yet further leaves both schools in limbo and continues to prolong the difficulties already experienced for all interested. I believe a decision should be made now.

Won’t house values decrease?
No. This would not be a factor in my decision-making. However, a recent study shows that house values close to a school increase significantly.

Are you happy with the public consultation on this matter?
No. I am unhappy with the statutory processes and informal consultation. I believe a result of the failures in consultation is the level of misinformation and false statements being made. I have met with other Independent Councillors to seek to advance new ways of ensuring public consultation is done better on projects such as this. Regardless, as a Councillor I have a decision to make. I feel adequately informed to make that decision.

You were elected by the people of Firhouse to represent their views. Why are you voting for these schools given the level of local opposition?
I was elected by all the people of this ward to represent their views and also to stay true to the political beliefs I articulated. A large number of residents living close to the site – and some living further away – have expressed their objections. However, a large number of parents, grandparents and others living in Firhouse have expressed their support for this. In fact, up until two weeks ago, the majority of people I would have heard from on this issue would have been supportive of these plans. That proportion has changed in recent weeks. I accept that objecting local residents have genuine and real concerns regarding loss of a part of their green space and increases in traffic. I do not accept some of the other arguments being advanced. My balanced view as a Councillor is that the benefits of these schools being situated at this site, which for me is the only achievable option, outweigh these concerns.

How well do you know the site?
I know the area myself from playing football in the Community Centre for a couple of years. I have travelled to the site on several occasions over recent weeks to look at the activity there. I have also read all of the reports and attended two years of briefings on the site acquisition, Part 8, etc. Of course, I do not know the site as well as local people. I do not live in Firhouse.

How will you be voting?
I will be voting in favour of the Part 8 for temporary accommodation, and in favour of the option to develop both schools at this site.

What are Councillors actually voting on?
The vote Councillors will take on Thursday is;
1. To express a preference for one of two options – Option 1; disposing of land (selling it to the Dept of Education) for two schools on a site adjacent to Firhouse Community Centre; or Option 2; disposing of part of this site for one school, and another site at Old Bawn Crossroads for another school. Councillors may vote in favour of Option 1 or Option 2, or may reject both.

If Option 1 is voted for, the actual legal document to sell the site to the Dept of Education (a Section 183) will be brought to December’s meeting of South Dublin Council, to be voted on by Councillors. If Option 2 is voted for (which I believe is highly unlikely), then a Section 183 for the Old Bawn Crossroads site will be voted on at Thursday’s meeting, and a separate Section 183 for part of the Firhouse Community Centre site will be brought to the December meeting. If neither Option is supported by Councillors, then nothing will change.

2. To agree a Part 8 proposal for the site at Firhouse Community Centre for two temporary 4-classroom schools. The purpose of this proposal is to allow temporary accommodation for the two schools in question – Firhouse Educate Together NS and Gaelscoil na Giúise – for up to four years. In essence this would allow accommodation for these schools while the proposed permanent accommodation goes through the planning process (which may take many months, depending on appeals, etc). This proposal also incorporates a permanent car park which can be used by both schools and others.

Dermot

A big thank you - and a few changes

An overdue thank you to the voters in the Templeogue-Terenure Local Electoral Area who gave me a great mandate on May 23rd in returning me to South Dublin County Council. I topped the poll with 2,826 votes - well over the quota of 2,391 - and was thus elected on the first count. It was an extraordinary achievement for an Independent candidate.

You can see the results at http://electionsireland.org/result.cfm?election=2014L&cons=5030 and view a fantastic animation of the counts at http://www.clairebyrne.ie/counts/animation.php?count=south_dublin_templeogue-terenure .

Huge thanks to my campaign team, my family and friends for their support not just during the campaign, but over the past few years. It is clear that my principled stance on the Council, my hard work in the local area, and the response to the establishment parties provided the basis for such a significant vote.

I spent the following two weeks wrapping up my term as Mayor of South Dublin, another fantastic honour. I have also spent this time speaking with other Councillors in trying to push a progressive agenda on South Dublin County Council. I signed up to the Progressive Alliance of Sinn Féin, Independents, Labour and the Greens on SDCC. The Alliance commits to policies around job creation and retention, provision of more social housing, tackling climate change, ensuring the protection of public services and promoting community and equality on the Council. 

In the time ahead, I will be seeking to work with other Independent Councillors and others on the left, in SDCC and elsewhere, to develop a more coherent approach to advance left wing politics both locally and nationally – something which will take both time and effort. With this in mind, I have also used the past few weeks to examine my own role on the Council and on external bodies. There are many changes in local government, some of which will mean that there are more Councillors seeking to be elected to fewer positions to statutory bodies.

After 5 years on the Dublin/Dún Laoghaire Education and Training Board (formerly County Dublin VEC), I have decided not to contest for the ETB again. I have enjoyed getting my teeth into education and youth policy and operations in the County, and have particularly been proud of my work on several school boards of management. I also served on the Youth and Sport Subcommittee of the ETB. There is a huge amount of work involved in the ETB and I think it is now time for someone else to be given a chance to serve.

I have stepped down after 3 years of involvement on the boards of Tallaght Community School and St Mark's Community School, work which I have thoroughly enjoyed. I thank the principals and boards for the ongoing work they are doing in the community. I will remain on the Boards of Management in Greenhills College and Coláiste de hÍde, both of which I chair, as well as St MacDara's CC, until the end of this year when they are re-appointed by the ETB. I will, of course, continue my work in education as a teacher and activist.

I have also decided not to contest for the Local Traveller Accommodation Consultative Committee for this Council term following five years of involvement on this important committee. I proposed the new Traveller Accommodation Plan as Mayor following a lot of work by that committee.

I do hope to continue my membership of the Dublin 12 Local Drugs Task Force if I am re-elected onto it by the Council.

At the Annual Meeting of the Council, I was appointed a Chair of one of the new Strategic Policy Committees of the Council. The new SPC Scheme is subject to changes but at present I will be Chairing the new Social and Community Committee of the Council, dealing with policies in areas such as sports, recreation, community grants, community centres and social inclusion. I am very much looking forward to this work and to working on the Corporate Policy Group of the new Council.

Some of you may have noticed that I have changed my Facebook presence from a personal account to a “page” – please be sure to follow that at www.facebook.com/VoteDermotLooney . I am continuing to tweet regularly at www.twitter.com/dlooney .

I am reviewing my Advice Centre commitments given the makeup of the new local electoral area and will confirm those details in late August. For now, please contact me by email should you wish to meet me.

On a personal note, I am looking forward to a break over the summer, to taking in more of the World Cup, and to seeing St Pat’s play in the Champions’ League! The past few months in particular have been extremely busy, so it will be good to take a couple of weeks off!

Looney launches local election campaign: “Some Independents are more for equality than others”

Cllr Dermot Looney, the current Mayor of South Dublin, this week launched his election campaign as an Independent candidate in the Templeogue-Terenure local electoral area. Looney launched his election slogan, “Standing up for our Community,” at the launch in the Cherrytree, Walkinstown.

Speaking at the event, Looney stated; “I am campaigning on an unapologetically left wing platform of defending public services and protecting the vulnerable. My record on the Council over the past five years is of principled decisions and hard work. In my term as Mayor I have prioritised services and funding for youth and sport, older persons and the environment.”

“In reality, this election campaign began just after the 2009 local elections. I have been stuck in on the local issues for five years, making sure to update residents with frequent leaflets, canvassing and the most active social media engagement in the area. The reception in recent weeks to our campaign has shown me that local people respect my ongoing work and are in support of my decision to leave Labour and stand on a principled Independent platform.”

“There is a great deal of anger and disappointment towards both Government parties and Fianna Fáil. Based on national polling and, more importantly, the reception on the doorsteps, I am hopeful that voters fed up with these parties will turn to a strong independent candidate. It is worth remembering that in this election, some independents are more for equality than others. I am the sole left of centre Independent and hope to attract support from across the local electoral area.”

“My hard work is illustrated by the fact that I have put down 399 questions on notice and motions at local area committee level since 2009. This is more than twice the amount of any other Councillor, and is almost as much as the five other Councillors running in this area put together.”

The new Templeogue-Terenure electoral area includes parts of Dublin 12 (Greenhills, Walkinstown, Perrystown), Dublin 6w (Templeogue, Terenure), Dublin 14/16 (Ballyroan, Knocklyon) and Dublin 24 (Firhouse, Ballycullen). 6 seats will be decided for the area in the poll on May 23^rd.

Campaign Launch - Welcome to the new-look site

Welcome to my new look website. I am relaunching the site as part of my local election campaign launch today. I am asking for your vote in the upcoming local elections on May 23rd. Please find more information on the "About Me" page.

If you read through the archive here, you'll find I was once an opinionated blogger - but that the frequency of posts has drastically diminished over time. Why? Simple. The move to social media. If you want to hear my latest news, or read my latest opinions, follow me on Twitter and Facebook. What I'm trying to do on this site is provide some more information than I can on social media - hence a page detailing over 500 motions and questions.

Let me know what you think! Dermot

Give Dubs their say on a Directly-Elected Mayor

I was honoured at today's Special Meeting of South Dublin County Council to propose the resolution on holding a plebiscite on a Directly-Elected Mayor for Dublin. And I was happy that, after a worthwhile debate, 19 Councillors voted in favour and just 3 against. You can read my speech at http://pastebin.com/Z7vaim4z .

I managed to catch the last few minutes of the meeting in Fingal on their webcast and caught up on the remainder on Twitter. It was regrettable that Councillors in Fingal in essence viewed themselves as gatekeepers to democracy and blocked the resolution to hold a plebiscite.

The plebiscite vote was passed by 50-0 in Dublin City Council. 23 Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Councillors voted unanimously tonight to put the vote to a plebiscite

In total, 92 Dublin Cllrs voted in favour, and just 19 voted against.

The quadruple lock of requiring all four Councils to pass this by an absolute majority was an invention of Minister Phil Hogan and his Government, who clearly have no appetite for giving Dubliners their say on this. It gave finality to a convoluted process in which Councillors were expected, without time nor budget nor staff resources, to formulate a structure, to consult publicly and to put forward detailed proposals on a directly-elected Mayor. The plans are not perfect but despite the protestations of some Councillors today they are quite detailed.

Dubliners are rightly angry that they have been denied a vote by this convoluted invention.

There is a straightforward way of proceeding which will give Dubliners the right to have their say and which will protect residents in Fingal and other authorities from a city centre focus.

The Minister could call the plebiscite, requiring that it pass by a majority of voters in each local authority area.

That would be democratic for Fingal, and democratic for Dublin.

There is nothing stopping him - legal or otherwise.

Will he and his Government have the guts to put it to the people? I doubt it.

This blogpost was edited to take into account the result of tonight's vote in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown.

Looney publishes expenses and remuneration for 2013

Independent Cllr Dermot Looney, a candidate in the Templeogue-Terenure electoral area in the upcoming local elections, has welcomed the imminent publication of Councillor expenses for the County for 2013. In 2011, Looney won a long campaign to secure the publication of all Cllr expenses. The publication of the “S142 Register” giving these details is due on the Council website in the coming days.

“I am again happy that this important information is being made accessible to the public,” noted Looney. “Following my election in 2009, I campaigned to have this information made readily available online in the interests of transparency and accountability. As well as releasing a full list of my Council pay and expenses since 2009, I am also the only Councillor to publish my expenses as a member of the ETB (formerly the VEC) and four of its subcommittees.”

“My election as Mayor half-way through 2013 means that I have taken leave from my job as a teacher and taken a full-time wage from the Council. My first decision as Mayor was to cut my pay by €7,000 - €3,500 of the Mayoral Allowance for 2013 went into the Mayor’s Fund for community groups, and a further €3,500 has been cut for 2014.”

“In nearly five years on the Council I have refused to attend ‘conferences’ at home or abroad. Instead, over €20,000 foregone by me has gone to providing homeless accommodation, assisting Council tenants in need of window and door replacement, and funding mobility grants for the elderly and those who are disabled.”

“It is disappointing that almost €122,000 has been spent on these ‘conferences’ over the last five years, mainly by Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil Councillors. If I am re-elected in May, I will continue my pledge not to claim money for ‘conferences’ and to continue to oppose the junket culture.”

Cllr Dermot Looney – Remuneration and Expenses 2013
2013: Representational Payment €16,657.72; Mayor Allowance €17,900.02 (includes deduction for Mayor’s Fund) – total salary €34,557.74
Expenses €6,486.87; Home Conferences €0; International Travel €0; Phone, Broadband and Mayor Travel €4,727.14; VEC/ETB Expenses €1,053.82 (covered 2012-13); Other Expenses €0. Total Expenses: €12,267.83

Cllr Dermot Looney – Remuneration and Expenses 2009-2011
2009 (June-Dec): Representational Payment €9,731.10
Expenses €3,587.47; Home Conferences €0; International Travel €0; Phone & Broadband €300; VEC Expenses €283.64; Other Expenses €0. Total Expenses: €4171.11

2010: Representational Payment €16,797.26;
Expenses €6,306.65; Home Conferences €0; International Travel €0; Phone & Broadband €829.35; VEC Expenses €810.40; Other Expenses €0. Total Expenses: €7,946.40

2011: Representational Payment €16,723.92;
Expenses €6,486.87; Home Conferences €0; International Travel €0; Phone & Broadband €985.72; VEC Expenses €769.88; Other Expenses €0. Total Expenses: €8,242,47

2012: Representational Payment €16,723.92;
Expenses €6,486.87; Home Conferences €0; International Travel €0; Phone & Broadband €650.62; VEC Expenses €567.28; Other Expenses €0. Total Expenses: €7,704.77

Notes:
 
The “Representational Payment” is, in essence, a Councillor’s ‘salary;’ it is fixed at one-quarter of a Senator’s salary and is dependent on attendance at meetings. As it is subject to PAYE, PRSI, USC and other deductions. I receive approximately €8,000 per annum nett. The Mayoral Allowance in 2013 was paid in the six months from July-December. It is also subject to these deductions.

The main “expenses” figure – formerly the “annual allowance” refers to travel, subsistence and other expenses incurred in carrying out the duties of a Cllr. “Phone and Broadband” refers to the payments made for mobile phone and broadband usage. A travel allowance is provided to the Mayor in lieu of a car. “VEC expenses” are €40.52 for every meeting of the VEC or its Subcommittees that incurs more than 3 hours work. Expenses do not apply to Community School boards or meetings which take less than 3 hours.

Full details of attendance and expenses for all SDCC Cllrs are available at http://www.sdcc.ie/the-council/council-meetings/s142-register

Looney appeals to Archbishop - defer plans to merge Greenhills schools to consult parents, staff and community

Cllr Dermot Looney, Mayor of South Dublin County Council and the only public representative based in the Greenhills area, has called on the Archbishop of Dublin to defer plans to merge three local primary schools, and to take more time to consult with parents, staff and the wider community.

Principals in St Peter’s Boys NS, St Paul’s Junior Girls NS and St Paul’s Senior Girls NS were informed by phone last Friday that the Archdiocese would be closing all three schools and reopening two new schools on the site of St Paul’s this coming September. Parents were informed of this on Monday and there has been considerable anxiety with regard to the speed of the proposed changes and the lack of consultation.

Cllr Looney, a past pupil of St Peter’s, in which he also trained to be a teacher, stated that he and his family have a long involvement in the schools. “My three brothers and two sisters also attended St Peter’s and St Paul’s, while my mother served on both Boards of Management and Parents’ Associations in the schools. I chair the Board of Management of Greenhills College, to where many of the boys from St Peter’s move. As a teacher myself, as well as a local resident, I am deeply familiar with the issues faced by the schools in terms of demographic shifts, changes in parental choice and relationships with other schools locally.”

“No-one who is aware of the history and current status of primary education in the Greenhills area will be particularly surprised with proposals to merge the schools. I am a supporter of co-education and would welcome the long-term security given to children and their parents in Greenhills from a combined approach.”

“However, having spoken with staff and parents from all three schools, I am deeply concerned with the nature of the announcement and with the intention to proceed with a merger in a few months time.”

“I have been informed that parents and staff have had no say in the nature of the amalgamation and were informed by phone call last Friday that the Archdiocese intends pressing ahead with the new schools this September. This runs counter to the inclusive approach which is championed in all three schools and has resulted in significant anger locally. People in Greenhills and nearby areas have a long and proud history with these three schools and such a rushed approach would be disrespectful to the community as a whole.”

“There are a variety of crucial issues on which parents and staff – and in some cases the community at large - should have their say; whether the new school/s are vertical or split into junior and senior, issues of accommodation such as classrooms and toilets, the future of the St Peter’s site, the names of the new school/s, the formation of Boards of Management, etc.”

“In the circumstances, I believe it would be prudent to delay the proposed changes until the beginning of the 2015-16 academic year, giving the relevant Boards of Management and the Archdiocese itself the time and space to engage in genuine, binding consultation and planning with parents, staff and the wider community.”

Cllr Looney has written to the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, to the Director of the Diocesan Education Secretariat, Anne McDonagh, and to Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn to call for the deferral of the amalgamation plans.

Statement from Cllr Dermot Looney

I am announcing today my decision to leave the Labour Party with immediate effect.

On a personal level, this has been a difficult decision. I have been an active member of the party for most of my adult life and given more than ten years service as an activist, officer and, most recently, public representative. In that time I recruited and worked closely with a large number of new members, some of whom have left the party, and others of whom I will leave behind. I have worked in a progressive Labour group on South Dublin County Council and have enjoyed campaigning with many decent activists and representatives over the years.

However, on a political level, it has been clear to me for some time that the Labour Party is no longer for me, nor am I for the Labour Party. Over the last ten years I have done my best to advocate for policies and ideas rooted in the values of the left which brought me into politics. Over the last three, I have been dismayed at the failure of Labour in Government to advance these values and ideas, and am equally concerned at the long-term outlook for these politics in the party.

There is no one individual policy on which I am making a stand; there have been dozens over the lifetime of the Government with which I fundamentally disagree. Labour has kowtowed to Fine Gael’s economic agenda, presided over cuts across the public sector which worst affect those who are vulnerable, and implemented a series of demonstrably regressive budgets.

I have spoken with many local people who voted for me in 2009, or for Labour in the general election, who feel utterly sickened by Labour’s implementation of the austerity agenda. Their views match my own.  I stand diametrically opposed to government policy – and by extension that of the Labour Party – in areas as diverse as healthcare, local democracy, housing, state assets and taxation.

I believe that Labour has abandoned even the most basic of social democratic concerns in Government, and my decision to leave is based as much on the direction in which the party is headed as on its record in Government.

While I and others have argued for a change in direction, it is clear these arguments – even when made successfully via structures such as party conference – have had little effect. In my experience, Labour is controlled in effect by a democratic centralism which ensures power in the party is concentrated in the hands of a small few.

One can only rail against the inevitable for so long; in my own case, I have no distance left to run in the Party. Instead, I will be looking to continue a track record as a principled and hard-working Councillor by seeking election in May as an independent candidate in the “Templeogue-Terenure” Local Electoral Area. I will not be joining any other parties or groupings but hope in the future to play a constructive role in working with others on the left at local and national level.