Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

The Government's decision to accept this Bill is extremely welcome. It is a tribute to the social movement that took place around the marriage equality referendum. Let us face it, if that referendum had not been passed in such a decisive way, we probably would not be having this debate or seeing the Government accepting the Bill.

I take this opportunity to thank the teachers' unions, the ASTI, the TUI and the INTO, for their support for our Bill. I also thank the ICTU youth committee which issued a statement of support last night. I pay tribute, in particular, to the LGBTQ groups within the teacher unions. In referring to comments made by people in those groups, I wish to illustrate the degree of fear among teachers about coming out as gay or even having a non-conforming lifestyle. I speak as a member of ASTI and as someone who is aware of many cases of teachers who have hidden their sexuality. These people have had to suppress who they are while in work. We now have a situation where teachers can legally marry a person of the same sex but cannot go into the staffroom and talk openly about it or invite colleagues to their wedding for fear of negative consequences for their employment and promotion prospects. I have spoken to teachers who have told no one at their school they are gay and who continually check themselves in case anyone guesses. This is happening not just in rural areas but in our capital city right now.

As my colleague mentioned, several gay teachers spoke to thejournal.ieabout their experiences. That website did us all a service in reporting those interviews. One teacher spoke about being invited in on a Monday for a chat with the school principal and the chairman of the board, who is the local parish priest, after being seen in a particular pub with a person of the same sex. The remarks to this teacher were prefaced with an assurance that there was no intention to say the person could not be of a particular sexuality, but what was made clear was that the teacher could not be allowed to "promote that lifestyle" in the school. This is happening in our country in 2015. That teacher was isolated within the school, essentially bullied and obliged to give up some of the extracurricular activities in which the person was engaged with students. The silencing effect on gay and transgender teachers in our schools is not just a consequence of section 37, but the removal of that section would send a very strong message to teachers to take courage, come out and challenge homophobia within schools.

We must ask ourselves why this culture exists in schools. The reason is the religious ethos that pervades our education system, an ethos which views LGBTQ people as somehow disordered and somehow unsafe to be in the company of children. During the marriage equality referendum, one of the Catholic bishops asked whether its schools would seriously be expected to teach students about same-sex relationships. That was the issue for the church. The debate opened up to scrutiny what is happening in schools and showed the chilling effect on teachers.

As Deputy Paul Murphy noted, some people have asked what the big deal is given that no one has been sacked under the section 37 provisions. When I looked up statistics for the United States, I found that 11 people came out publicly to say they were sacked for being gay in that country in 2011. Ten of those 11 worked in education. Why is it that teachers, in particular, are being subjected to a different standard from that applied to other workers? That is not acceptable, particularly following a marriage equality referendum in which people in this country made clear their wish to remove discrimination, end the oppression of the past and ensure people are not upset in their personal lives.

We have not seen sackings yet, but a person does not need to be sacked. I mentioned the case of the teacher called in for a chat. We have also had someone hiding her face, something the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Ríordáin, commented on at the time. This is not unusual. The Anti-Austerity Alliance held a press conference this morning. I spoke to a number of teachers and asked them if they would speak at it. I know they feel really strongly on the issue, but they were afraid, even after the marriage equality referendum. They were afraid it would somehow jeopardise their relationship with the school and their promotion prospects.

It is not just gay and lesbian teachers who face these threats. This is a broader issue. Eileen Flynn is a case some of us are old enough to remember as it was going on. She was a teacher, in a relationship with a separated father of three young children, who became pregnant and was fired from her school. She lost her case because, unfortunately, in Ireland there is an exemption, in reality, which allows discrimination by religious-run institutions. Unfortunately for Eileen Flynn, she was not a union member as well, which did not help. Could that situation happen again? I think it could. There are cases, particularly in rural areas, where the school management has a very conservative ethos. We have seen cases cited in recent times. A school in Sligo queried why it should introduce a child-centred education when a whole number of cases involving sexual abuse allegations were brought up. I do not think it is out of the world that this would pass.

In the United States, Catholic schools are an increasing sector in education. A teacher in a Catholic school in California was sacked days after marrying his partner in a civil ceremony. The reason given was that the marriage occurred and the school's position was that it violated church teachings. The school issued a statement saying that it would continue to educate students in the tradition of the Catholic faith and that "[a]s a Benedictine school, St. Lucy's is a community for those who wish to express Christian values and education and develop personal and academic excellence". In other words, people are expected to conform to a narrow view of what the Catholic hierarchy deem to be acceptable. There was also the case in the United States of a teacher who was fired and called an immoral sinner by a Catholic school because she had IVF treatment. She announced at school that she was pregnant and disclosed to someone in good faith, in a personal conversation, that she had IVF treatment. She was subsequently dismissed because it was deemed not to be a good example for students and not to go along with Catholic teaching.

Section 37 brings up the historical connection between Church and State in this country. Some 96% of primary schools have denominational patronage and 90% of them are Catholic-owned or run. The situation in secondary schools is not much better. We have schools which are called community schools but there is Catholic patronage in many of those schools as well. This does not reflect a choice among the population. There is a big demand for more diversity. I know this from my own area. Even if it did reflect the wishes of the majority, minority rights also matter. The United Nations and the Council of Europe have raised this issue of education five times with the State. The State funds all schools. It pays the salaries and trains the teachers, but it allows admission policies which are exclusive and it allows exemptions to employment law.

We need a separation of church and State in this country. That has become patently clear from the marriage equality referendum and from the wishes of the majority in society. It was young people who led that movement. What does it say about the homophobic and transgender attitudes that must be prevalent in many schools if teachers themselves cannot come out? What message is being sent to students who are gay? Let us not forget the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar. That this is a Catholic country was cited by a health professional. Archbishops are on the board of the National Maternity Hospital. Why? What gynaecological expertise does a bishop have that he would be sitting on a maternity hospital board? We need to separate church and State in order that women receive the care they need and minorities of all kinds are protected. We also have the huge issue of freedom of conscience. People who are not Catholic or religious are being forced to teach religion and to go to schools to which they do not really want to go. I welcome the support for the Bill and I hope it is moved very quickly and not left to gather dust.

See this speech in context