Dáil debates

Tuesday, 1 December 2009

12:00 pm

Photo of Brian CowenBrian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

Regarding the first part of the question raised by Deputy Gilmore, I was simply setting out the position that these matters are dealt with in that way. A diplomatic note was sent to the Murphy commission but it was not followed up thereafter, which is unfortunate. Had the Department of Foreign Affairs or another Department been asked to pursue the issue, perhaps a solution to the problem could have been brought about or we would have been able to confirm the necessary information was made available. I make that point for the purposes of the factual situation, as outlined to me. The Director of Public Prosecutions acts in that way when dealing with outside bodies and other such agencies, so, using the diplomatic route is not unique to the current situation. I would like the commission to have any information it may seek.

On the other issue raised by the Deputy, namely, the patronage of schools, we have had discussions on it in terms of the evolving policy emerging as a result of different models of management and patronage which established themselves in Ireland over many years by different organisations which have been involved in education. It is true that in respect of Catholic schools ex officio bishops of the diocese are patrons of the schools. The schools chose the patron, not the other way around. There is no executive function for patrons in respect of the management of schools. It is dealt with through codes of conduct, boards of management and so on.

In respect of any child protection or other issues which arise in schools, they are dealt with at board of management level. There is no executive role for a patron. There is a view that child protection services would be compromised in some way as a result of the current position. The patron has an ex officio role, arising from the fact that the bishop of any diocese is the patron of the Catholic schools of the diocese.

I will not enter a discussion about who should be a bishop in any particular diocese. Arising from this report are issues as to whether a person continuing in ecclesiastic office is in the interests of the institution concerned, a matter which must be considered. We know one person is considering the situation and is talking to priests and other people.

My basic point is that there is no question of an executive role for patrons in schools. It is an ex officio position which is historically held by bishops of dioceses, a situation which continues. While patronage of schools is an issue which is broadening, that is the situation as it currently stands.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.