Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am glad to have an opportunity to speak to the Bill. I have to say that in general terms, it has to be welcomed in as far as it goes. Obviously, it is welcome that more specific provisions are being made regarding the admission of people with special needs to schools. I am also pleased that a greater level of transparency is being provided in relation to admissions policies. In the past, it was often a very secretive process. Parents had to be in the know in order to get their children into schools. It is better that everything will be dealt with in an upfront and open manner from now on. I refer to the requirement on schools to publish their admissions policies. It is deeply ironic and incredible that the Minister is not addressing the baptism barrier in this legislation because it is the greatest barrier to admission to school and it is the cause of the most concern with regard to school admissions. Given the stage we are at in terms of our Republic and our democracy, it is utterly unacceptable that parents feel they have no choice other than to baptise their children in order that they can get into the local State-funded school. By any yardstick, the Minister is presiding over deep discrimination on the part of State-funded schools towards children who do not share the majority faith of the majority of schools in the State. He cannot stand over the continuation of that situation.

The Minister suggested that the issue of the baptism barrier will be dealt with in the context of a Labour Party Bill that was considered in this House some time ago. That will not happen. It is not possible to deal with this issue in the context of the flawed legislation in question, which would embed a discriminatory regime if it were agreed in this House. I ask the Minister to stop putting this live real issue, which is affecting many families in this country, on the long finger and to stop making excuses to put it off. It is wrong and cannot be defended. How can four year olds be denied access to their local schools solely on the grounds of religion because they are not baptised? The Government should not allow this discriminatory situation to continue. One of the excuses we have heard has involved questioning whether it is possible to amend the Equal Status Act 2000. I put it to the Minister that we should deal with this area of discrimination by abolishing section 7(3)(c) of that Act. As I argued in this House last year, I strongly believe it would be quite constitutional to take such action. The Constitution is balanced. We have to balance the public good against any particular protection there is for religions. I am not going to go into all the detail of the various sections of the Constitution. I did that when I spoke on this issue last year.

I would like to mention some of the various organisations working in this area. Equate Ireland has produced a compelling legal opinion from three senior counsel advising that it is possible to address this issue without amending the Constitution. Equally, the Education Equality group has come forward with suggested amendments that it believes to be entirely constitutional. While I do not intend to oppose this legislation on Second Stage, I appeal strongly to the Minister and Fianna Fáil to give a commitment to take a serious look at this issue when this legislation is considered on Committee Stage. The Social Democrats will be tabling amendments to the Bill. I am sure other parties will do likewise. In the interests of fairness and openness, and for the sake of respecting many families in this country who feel they are being seriously discriminated against in terms of the options that are open to them for their children's schooling, I ask the Minister to rethink his position on this matter and to consider the arguments that will be made on Committee Stage. This argument is not just being made by Members of this House or by parents who are affected by this problem. I will return to this point when I complete my contribution tomorrow.

See this speech in context