Mr. Noel Malone:

Sr. Marie Céline Clegg referred to the common application system. There are drawbacks and no principal is probably happy with it but then no system is perfect. Where there are drawbacks, they mostly relate to inequality in terms of a common admissions policy. In this country in the 21st century surely we can agree what are the fundamentals, having taken up any of the issues raised by all of us. We all want the best for our children. We want equal access and we want to give them the best, regardless of religion. Why can we not agree on fundamentals through the Department and the vehicle that will shape the future of our children's lives and have that widely accepted across the board? From that point on, we would probably achieve diversity, which we are all looking for, and equality.

Many of the issues that have been raised, including section 29, would become less important if all schools applied fair fundamentals. I am sorry they are not in place at the moment. The 25% provision is a particular problem for me. If I was in Hong Kong, my son would have right of entry to the school I attended in Limerick and a child living across the road from it would not. If people look at this in those stark terms, that will explain what 25% means in reality. That is a significant percentage.

I am in a DEIS school. In the context of the common agreed admissions issue, what would be better than DEIS kids attending all sorts of schools bringing their DEIS funding with them rather than putting them into a ghetto-type situation and giving them loads of resources. I wonder whether that is good value given the financial accountability in the State because very often one is compounding disadvantage upon disadvantage. Children should be given an opportunity to attend different schools and, through parental choice or otherwise, to explore other options and to bring the DEIS funding them to give them the extra edge they need.