Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I cannot accept the Minister's rationale on this amendment. Other members have spoken about the need for a general education programme in schools on world religions, belief systems and philosophy. Such a programme would be very worthwhile. I also feel very strongly that we need to provide a moral and ethical education for all children in all State-funded schools, an ethical education based on civic morality. The State is remiss in outsourcing responsibility to provide an education based on civic morality to different religious groupings. There is an onus on the Government and the Minister for Education and Skills to ensure proper instruction on moral and civic matters and I would like to see it developed, as it is long overdue. However, the Minister is proposing to continue is a situation where increasing numbers of children are being separated from their peers in the classroom. That is not good practice. He is also talking about a situation where in many cases children are being removed from the classroom and sent to another room or the principal's office to fill in time while their peers are receiving religious instruction. That is not acceptable. He is talking about a situation where children are being excluded from their peer group on a daily basis. We should not allow that to happen in State-funded schools. The provision of religious instruction or faith formation should be discrete. Ideally, lessons should be held outside school hours or, at the very least, iat the end of the school day in order that parents would have the option of taking their children home.

The Minister did not respond to my proposal in amendment No. 181. It relates to the rule book covering this issue. It is Rule 69 in the rule book of 1965 about which I am particularly concerned. For the benefit of members, it is important to point out what that rule provides for. It states the religious denomination of each pupil must be entered in the school register and the roll book. I do not know why that should be the case in a State-funded school. Why is it the religion of a child or his or her parents anyone's business? Why should it be kept on the register and in the roll book? Rule 69 goes on to state "this information should be ascertained from the parent (the father, if possible)". I do not know why that should be the case. I am referring to the 1965 rule book, but we are saying it is the father, or the guardian of the pupil, where necessary, who should be asked to state the child's religion. The reference to "the father, if possible" indicates how archaic the rule is and the need to change it. It was drafted at a time when the diversity now evident in Ireland was not envisaged. It is utterly out of date and needs to be removed.

The section allows for religious instruction to be given during the school day. I propose that the teaching of religion be taken out of the school day and that we move in agreement to make that change in the amendment. What the amendment states is that "religious instruction shall take place as a discrete lesson at the end of the school day and shall not take place at any other time during the school day, nor shall it imbue or permeate education at any other time during the school day. This provision exists to afford equal respect and dignity to all pupils, regardless of religion, ethnicity or family background and to uphold their constitutional rights under Articles 44.2.3 and 44.2.4. Further, this provision exists to give effect to subsections (2) and (3)". My belief is that, as parliamentarians, we, the Minister especially, in his role, should be taking steps to ensure we afford equal respect and dignity to all pupils, irrespective of their background. If the Minister allows the current situation to continue, he is patently not doing so and disrespecting those children who are being removed from their peer group every day. In the eyes of most people, that is not acceptable practice. It is both discriminatory and divisive and unacceptable in this day and age. I appeal strongly to the Minister to at least consider amendment No. 181.