Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)

I thank Deputy Burton for sharing time. I very much welcome the Bill. It is long overdue, although it is not quite the Bill I would have introduced were I sitting on the other side of the House.

The separation of church and State must be completed. In the Twenty-six Counties the State pays for education through capitation grants, teachers' salaries and a range of other funding. However, the vast majority of primary and secondary schools are not under democratic control but instead are predominantly under the patronage of Catholic bishops and in the ownership of the Catholic Church. It is a legacy of the old era of ecclesiastical power and control. We must move toward a democratically controlled education system which is truly representative of the community, which respects the rights of people of all religions and none and is totally child centred.

In that regard, I welcome the initiative taken in this Bill with regard to VEC patronage of primary schools. This is a step in the right direction in terms of throwing off the shackles of our outdated church-dominated education system. To allow denominational schools the discretion to disqualify some children from admission on the basis of religious belief, or lack thereof, is not sustainable in a modern, diverse 21st century Ireland. It is a scandal that this discrimination has been allowed to continue for so long.

The current patronage model has its foundations in the establishment of the national school system in 1831. A lot has changed since then and we now live in an Ireland which is more diverse, more inclusive and more respecting of other cultures and religious identity. We need to move with the times. We cannot continue to base our education system, which is the bedrock of our society and moulds and shapes the lives of generations, on a system dating back to British rule. The VEC system is a democratic one. VECs across the state are comprised of elected representatives, parents and community representatives who are at the coal face of education and who have first-hand knowledge of their communities and how they work.

I am disappointed that on the eve of this debate, the Government made an announcement that it is to amalgamate 29 out of the 33 VECs in the State. This is a bad move. While the Bill increases the roles and responsibilities of VECs, the proposal to amalgamate does the opposite and diminishes the role of the VECs. We need only look at the Health Service Executive to see that centralising services does not work. Under the old health board system, with all its faults, there was at least an element of democratic accountability. There is no democratic accountability under the HSE. Parliamentary questions the Minister for Health and Children are simply referred to an official somewhere in the system who may or may not reply. If there is a reply it may well be in the form of a daft note which means nothing. I hope the same mistake will not be made with regard to the VECs. The Minister must publish a cost-benefit analysis of this proposal before proceeding with any changes. VECs are anchored in democracy and are accountable.

There has been much debate about the teaching of religion in schools. Although the new VEC model of primary school will allow for faith formation during the day, it intends to cater for those of all religions and none. Provision will be made during the school day, based on the level of demand, for the religious education of children in conformity with the wishes of parents. The school will also cater for parents who do not wish their children to receive education based on any one particular faith. This is very much welcome. In a perfect world there would be no religious instruction during school hours in the classrooms of a secular state. However, it must be recognised that this is a major step in the right direction to inclusiveness and tolerance, and I hope it will go some way towards the full secularisation of the education system.

I have concerns about some sections of this Bill, in particular the move to disband the educational disadvantage committee. What type of message does that send? At a time when unemployment is soaring and social welfare provision is being reduced it makes no sense to disband a committee whose sole focus is to act on the issue of disadvantage in education. The proposed saving arising from the disbandment of the committee is €300,000, a pittance in comparison with the billions being pumped into the banks. It is clear that the Government has its priorities all wrong. Educational disadvantage will not go away without a focused strategy but it seems to be last on the list of this Administration's concerns. The Government has already cut student grants, Youthreach allowances and Traveller training centres. Now it is proposing to disband the educational disadvantage committee. I hope the Minister will reconsider this proposal.

I also take issue with the provision in the Bill to allow unqualified persons to teach where a substitution requirement arises. At a time when fully qualified teachers are in the dole queue, it is totally unacceptable that persons who are not qualified for the job are being employed in schools. I propose to move an amendment in this regard, which will also be put forward by my colleague, Senator Doherty, in the Upper House. A person who is not a teacher and who is engaged by a school to cover the absence of a teacher should be recruited in a supervisory capacity only. Moreover, the appointment should be recorded as such so that the impact of the Minister's failure to make provision for qualified substitution can be monitored. The availability of accurate monitoring figures would reveal the extent of this practice.

Not only do children deserve to be taught by a qualified teacher but teachers who have trained and received their qualification deserve to work. I propose the establishment of supply panels of qualified teachers so that every teacher absence is covered by a fully qualified teacher. This makes far more sense than the current arrangement. I am acutely familiar with the practice of teacher panels because such a panel was in operation in Dundalk town for a considerable time before recently being discontinued because of funding issues. It was an excellent practice which gave principals some degree of certainty in regard to the inevitable absences that occur.

There is a need for us to move on as a society by providing more choice in our education system. We must throw out the archaic system of religious control over our education. There is also a need for fundamental reform of our outdated patronage system. I support the proposals in this Bill with regard to VEC patronage of primary schools. However, I will reserve judgment on the legislation in its entirety until the concerns I have raised are addressed.

I conclude by noting that it is unfortunate that there are Members of this House - qualified teachers - who are holding onto teaching posts and thus preventing unemployed teachers from taking up those positions. I fully understand why a first-time Member would wish to retain the option to return to a teaching job after the next election. However, once a Member has been re-elected, he or she should be prohibited from holding onto that post and therefore preventing teacher colleagues from securing their proper position in the education system. I may propose an amendment to the Bill in this regard.

See this speech in context