Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

While this Bill has been welcomed by some of the parties speaking in the House and while there are attempts in it to do something about admission policies in schools, there are many problems with it that need to be addressed further on Committee Stage to correct them. There are three aspects of concern regarding discrimination in our school system, namely, schools can refuse entry of a child based on religion if it is oversubscribed, even if the child is designated a school by the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, and the Child and Family Agency; schools can discriminate by not providing an alternative to religious instruction; and schools can discriminate by prioritising children who are related to previous students.

Overall, the Bill fails to echo best practice in including the best interests of the child as a measure for educational standards. At a minimum, the best interests of the child and his or her wishes should be reflected from the outset in admission policies and throughout the school day. The Bill obliges schools to publish admission policies but it does not oblige them to change them if they are wrong, and this Bill will not limit the practice of discrimination. The National Council for Special Education or the Child and Family Agency can designate a school for a student where he or she has not secured a school place. However, this Bill allows for that school to appeal the decision based on the "refusal arm" of the current exemption on religious grounds. The best interests of the child should be the primary standard by which the National Council for Special Education and the Child and Family Agency shall have regard to when making a designation or a decision not to designate a school. There is also a need to include the right for parents to appeal where a school has been designated by the Child and Family Agency or the NCSE and the parents believe that the designation is not in the best interests of the child or failed to take into account the wishes of the child. The appeal committees provided for in section 66 should be required to apply the best interest of the child as the primary consideration when assessing an appeal and be required to take into account the best wishes of the child. Furthermore, a child in a particular region with a specific disability could be required to attend a school not of his or her belief in order to access the support he or she needs, or that school could refuse admission of a child with a disability claiming it wouldpreserve the school's ethos.

While separate legislation is before the committee regarding the so-called baptism barrier, it is important to address it here as well because there cannot be comprehensive reform of school admission policies without reform of the baptism barrier. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has repeated this assertion in calling for the baptism barrier to be removed. It recommends that the Equal Status Act be amended to give effect to the principle that no child should be given preferential access to a publicly funded school on the basis of his or her religion. Three constitutional experts have given a legal opinion on how the Dáil can legislate for the power to eliminate the baptism barrier. The Dáil can do this immediately, taking account of the Constitution but not using it as a barrier to take action in this regard. The three constitutional experts have outlined that the Oireachtas has the power to impose reasonable conditions on the provision of funding to educational institutions. This includes requiring that all publicly funded schools must accept all children of all religions, and none, on an equal basis. That can and should be addressed, and this Bill should not be taken in isolation in the context of the baptism barrier. The Bill does not contain provisions to enable the Minister to regulate the use of an admission policy which restricts the admission of students who are related to previous students either. There are also many concerns as to whether the 1998 Act actually has better provisions than those proposed in this legislation to control the admission policies of schools.

Regarding religious instruction, the Bill obliges schools to publish "arrangements" for students not taking religion class but without guidance or regulation on how they should do so. The minimum standards of the nature of exemptions for students who do not take religion class are not included in this Bill either. It does not attempt to move religious instruction towards the end of the day or outside core school hours, which should be the objective in a publicly funded school system. Schools should maybe facilitate religious instruction outside of core hours rather than as a core part of daily class. This would mean that children would not be discriminated against if they did not want to opt into religious classes.

State funded schools should accommodate and respect diversity across all nine discrimination grounds in the equality legislation, including, as I said, the baptism barrier and the right to opt out of religion class.

See this speech in context