Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

I thank the Tánaiste and her Department for bringing forward this legislation. I say that despite the fact that the gestation period relating to it was extraordinarily long. I read the Tánaiste's speech with interest. She might in her reply indicate what section of the Bill specifically facilitates or assists the Catholic Church in its deliberations on the possibility of divesting of patronage in some of its schools. If there is such an explicit reference I welcome it because there is an intention and desire for that. The reference was in the first paragraph of the Minister's speech. Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, the largest patron in terms of numbers of schools in the country, has expressed an opinion that he would be much happier with 50% of the schools for Catholic education rather than the 92% he currently possesses.

The Minister refers to a new model of patronage which this Bill proposes, with the new model of patronage being the kind of idea which informed the debate articulated by many people, including the former secretary general of the INTO, who wanted a community school. In this context we are talking about new schools but in the communities which are fairly homogeneous, there are 75% of schools across the country catering for 25% of the population.

With all due respect, I point out that this is the pressure point other than the quality and delivery of education; issues such industrial relations and three-teacher schools are for another place and another day. With regard to accommodating a new patron, as distinct from a new patronage model, the Minister is bringing forward the VEC idea based on the initiative taken by one of her predecessors in a panic. She is requesting that the VECs manage schools under the temporary patronage of the Minister until such time that the legislation is enacted.

The tone of the debate from the many contributions in May is that politicians are familiar with the VEC structure and like the way it functions. Deputy O'Dowd has mentioned it today. Politicians may believe that the VEC will be a very suitable and comfortable patron of schools. I suggest to the Minister and my two Fine Gael colleagues in the House that this is because politicians, as county councillors, have unique experience of the VEC system which they do not have of the primary school system in its current form of patronage or of most of the free voluntary sector schools.

The thrust of this legislation is to remove that element of democratic accountability and control that is implicit in being a member of a VEC as an elected or appointed member. Section 4 adds to section 10(2) of the relevant Act an additional definition relating to the school in question. Notwithstanding what is done in section 5, although the VEC school will remain as such, for all intents and purposes it will be an autonomous corporate body independent of anything else in the VEC system. All the relationships between such a school and another secondary school in Drogheda or Dundalk, and all the access to the CEO of the VEC or members of the board of that school - a sub-committee of the VEC - will be swept away.

This is not the typical user-friendly secular or modern VEC-type school accessible to elected representatives or people who feel they can come to a councillor or Deputy who stood for election and was on the VEC. Being on the VEC such representatives may feel that there is accountability, and having exhausted internal queries with the principal of a school - a primary school - that person may feel that he or she can outline concerns to the VEC member. That was the way it was sold and it was suggested to everybody in this House that it would be a new model of patronage that is democratically accountable.

That is not true and we are adding to the existing number of patrons under the current 1998 legislation for primary schools. It is an eighth patron with no more or fewer powers than existing patrons. That patron will have no experience of primary education and one would question the capability to deliver formal secondary education. I am not talking about the vast array of work that VECs do in adult education, literacy and a host of other areas but one could question whether the VECs, as they are temporarily constituted, have the ability to embark on a new world of exploration.

My two teacher colleagues on the benches beside me know that primary teachers get a specific education by means of a three-year degree; it is a holistic education across the complete learning process of a young child, as distinct from a secondary school teacher who does an arts degree and possibly a higher diploma. If the candidates did honours maths in the leaving certificate and French and German in a university course, they could end up teaching maths in our secondary school system. That happens. This is not any new model of patronage but an addition to the existing array of patrons. The VECs are being asked to do this, as they were asked to by the Minister's predecessor. There are now five models working and this will now be the legislative process.

There are a couple of questions that should be considered, although we will deal with the Bill in great detail on Committee Stage. What will be the ethos of the patron if it is to be the VEC? We know the ethos of the Church of Ireland, the Roman Catholic Church and the Jewish and Muslim communities, as well as the gaelscoileanna movement. Who will determine the ethos within the VEC? Will it be the elected board members or the CEO, as we know how powerful those CEOs are?

What will be the mechanism for appointing the two patron members of the VEC? There are eight members on a typical board of management, with two nominated by the patron. They are selected with divine choice; there is no such thing as an election. The parents of the school in question, if they participate in the ballot, will elect the two parent representatives. Teachers will elect two, one of whom must be the principal of the school. After this the six people will decide, through a mechanism that can vary from place to place, who the community representatives will be.

There is also the issue of the patron. What sanction, role, democratic input or scrutiny will the elected members of the VEC have for that process? This is not set out in the Bill. Will it be done by the usual Kremlin or Vatican-like system of communication utilised by the Department of Education and Skills, which is the method of circulars? Will we debate a circular, can it be amended and will there be any input? This is not a new model of patronage but an extension of the old system. That is part of the internal democratic accountability access structure of a school. This is a relatively short Bill but it has deep and long implications.

Deputy O'Dowd indicated in his comments that the thrust for this type of school comes from the changing nature of Irish society. We are no longer the homogeneous, inward-looking, church-ridden island off an island off the coast of the rest of Europe that John McGahern and so many others characterised in literature. The same John McGahern, because he spoke the truth of his time, was sacked as a primary school teacher at the behest of the then archbishop of Dublin. Fortunately, he taught enough good young people like Declan Kiberd and others to leave us with a legacy of excellence which continues to hold the light against that period.

The Catholic Church, through Bishop Leo O'Reilly - a very nice and reasonable man - has set out a clear attitude to the teaching of religion in primary schools. He has articulated a view, which he is entitled to, in a publication and couple of articles for newspapers, that the church does not believe in non-denominational education. It wants multi-denominational education in schools.

It accepts one should have a religious curriculum taught in which the history and the diversity of the world's religions, including those without a belief system in a superior being, humanism, Hinduism and Confucianism. Considering we will be doing so much business with China in the future, we had better learn about Confucianism. Schools, the church feels, should separate religious education from religious instruction while every child should have an understanding of the world's religions and should be free to decide – or their parents on their behalf - what religious path they want to follow and have the instruction to ensure they adhere to the path chosen. This liberty for parents and their children is perfectly reasonable and one I support.

For educationalists, the issue arises as to whether faith formation - religious instruction – should take place inside or outside school hours. The Educate Together model, like the ones adopted in many other countries, opts for the latter option, outside of school hours. A general education is provided during school time while a period after school is given in which the school authorities provide every facility for those parents who want their children prepared for, say, first communion and confirmation. Many Catholic children attending Church of Ireland schools are also provided with this time. The Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, has stated he wants those parents, who may seldom go to church, to become involved in the faith formation of their children for communion and confirmation and not delegate it to the teachers.

The agreement made with the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, and the representatives of the church gave a commitment that the form of religious instruction, which will be an integral part of the primary school system, will be faith formation inside school hours. Will the Tánaiste and Minister for Education and Skills confirm if this method of teaching religion will be extended to schools under VEC patronage? If it will be the case, will she explain how a class of 30 children will be divided up for the four-week faith formation in, say, confirmation? Has she explored the implications, costs and logistics of this? What happens to the other children of different denominations or of none?

There has already been extensive correspondence between the chief executive officer of the County Dublin VEC and others involved in education seeking clarification on some of these questions. I know the Department spends its time doing little else but thinking about these fundamental issues. The questions, however, remain unanswered.

Serious difficulties emerge with this. Citizens in this republic have a right to choose the education they want for their children, irrespective of whether their birth certificate states they are Roman Catholic, Jewish or Protestant. While Roman Catholics make up a large part of the population according to census statistics, these figures are not often reflected in choice of education or religious instruction. Some Roman Catholic parents may wish to have their children educated in a multidenominational context to ensure they have an understanding of other people's beliefs.

Coming from County Donegal, the Tánaiste and Minister for Education and Skills would know better than some of us from the south that a lack of understanding of other people's religions has been a source of suspicion, antagonism and, as we saw in the past, violence in this country. Many argue much of the conflict in the modern world is driven by religious intolerance informed by ignorance. The only way to ameliorate this is through knowing a little bit more about each other's beliefs and practices. Sadly, in this country most of us have little of such knowledge. One would think that educating a child in others' beliefs and practices is best when the child is four years of age and has no prejudices or antagonisms.

While 48% of parents would like a denominational education for their children, over one third of those polled would like a multidenominational education. Is this provided for in or outside school hours? How will the logistics for its provision be worked out? More important in these days of cost consciousness, has anyone calculated the cost implications of this in the coming decades?

Article 44 of the Constitution states:

1. The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion.

2. 1° Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.

2° The State guarantees not to endow any religion.

Article 42 provides for primary education and insists parents send their children to school. In cases where a parent opts to educate a child at home, the Constitution provides that the parent must demonstrate he or she is meeting with certain obligations. It is as much a protection of the child, as it is the right of the parent. Schools, be they under the patronage of the local Roman Catholic bishop, Church of Ireland community or Educate Together, are denominational non-State organisations that, as established by the Stanley Letter of 1831, have been asked to provide primary education while in return the State provides the moneys for such provision. This system of education, which we inherited, has, by and large, served us very well. The VECs, however, are not a linguistic or cultural movement such as An Foras Pátrúnachta. Neither are they multidenominational such as Educate Together. The VECs are a State organ. Can a State organ adhere to the constitutional provisions I earlier set out while employing teachers to teach religion? Has this been assessed? I hope it is not a contradictory or conflicting matter because I am looking for a formula which will accommodate everyone. There are some concerns in this regard.

I will read from the conclusion of a paper, Freedom of Religion in the Irish Primary School System: a Failure to Protect Human Rights?, the author of which is Dr. Alison Mawhinney from Queen's University. The concluding remarks are worth listening to:

The analysis presented in this paper suggests that the Irish domestic legal order does not provide protection against involuntary religious indoctrination conveyed through the practice of a doctrinal integrated curriculum in crime rates schools. The conscience clauses found in the Constitution and the Education Act 1988 cannot operation to protect freedom of religion in a situation where a child is exposed to doctrinal teaching throughout the school day. These provisions are designed for a school system which is non-denominational and where religious instruction is only given during specific timetabled hours. By the standards set by international human rights bodies, the operation of a doctrinal integrated curriculum in an education system dominated by religious schools - where a realistic alternatives are non-existent - raises serious concerns under both the Convention [on Human Rights] and the UN treaties and should, if brought to the notice of the supervisory bodies, cause Ireland to be declared in breach of its international obligations.

This is not fanciful because we have been cited and the Irish Human Rights Commission has responded to those suggestions and attempted to make submissions on them, something of which the Minister is no doubt aware. I will complete the quotation, which has a conclusion I share:

The difficulty the [Irish] state has in taking appropriate measures to comply with international standards stems from the fact that it has chosen to deliver primary education almost entirely through the medium of religious non-state actors. In the absence of realistic alternatives to religious schools, the only alternative form of acceptable state-funded denominational schooling would be one where religious instruction is taught for a specific period of the day from which it is practically possible to opt out and where teachers refrain from any attempt at indoctrination. However, this arrangement produces a tension between the rights of the child not to be exposed to unwanted doctrinal instruction and the rights of those parents who wish to see their children receive a full denominational education through the practice of an integrated curriculum.

We have a problem. Enough reputational damage has been done to this country. As the Minister's Department is no doubt aware, cases are going through the courts. Facts are facts and this Republic has signed up willingly and knowingly to conventions and obligations. Have the implications of our international commitments been fully thought through and has the Attorney General been consulted on the constitutionality of this Bill?

My view, as a non-lawyer but someone who has some parliamentary experience, is that the Bill, as presented to any Attorney General, would of course be deemed constitutional because it does not contain any specification about the ethos of a VEC. There is no indication as to what the ethos should be and there is no reference at all to faith formation inside school hours which is the current practice of the model VECs.

We could find ourselves in a very messy situation in which I would hate to see this country mired. The Minister has access to the records and the people who worked with the previous Minister when the concession was made by the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, to adopt what the Catholic Church and Bishop Leo O'Reilly wanted, namely, faith formation inside school hours. That issue may need to be revisited.

Educate Together, which is the only group in this Republic with any experience of this thorny issue, would be the first to say that it took a long time to get it right, there was a lot of internal debate and dispute within it and it has now finally arrived at a model which so far seems to work. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom or experience but it is something that needs to be examined seriously - I say that in a constructive way.

Before I turn to the Teaching Council and disadvantage, that is, the miscellaneous elements of the Bill to which the Minister referred, I would like to ask why the VECs are now being targeted and about their value for money. Does the Department know the additional unit administrative cost for a secondary school pupil in a VEC, as distinct from a secondary school pupil in a free voluntary school? Does it know the additional administrative cost for a primary school pupil in a VEC? I refer only to the administrative costs and not capitation grants and teachers' salaries, all of which are common.

Will the two nominated board members, which will be nominated by the patrons of the boards of management of the primary schools, get expenses for attending meetings, as they currently do?

See this speech in context