Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill the Minister introduced, though he could have done better. The establishment of the national school system in the 1830s was a tremendously progressive step forward. The Stanley letter of 1831, which is the legal basis of our national school system, contains some core principles for publicly funded, that is, national schools. First, they would be free. Second, they would be open to all children, regardless of religion. Third, all religions would be taught in the one school as separate subjects, not by teachers, but by religious personnel, and there would be no public funding for any school where there was a hint of proselytism. A demand that a child be baptised represents a lot more than a hint. Would it not be wonderful if our national school system lived up to these progressive, integrationalist ideals of almost 200 years ago? We should base our legislation on them.

Any school operating a Catholics-first admissions policy is acting illegally. That is a fact. Such a policy is contrary to the legal basis of our national school system, that is, the Stanley letter of 1831, it is contrary to Article 42 of the Constitution, it is contrary to the Education Act 1998, and it is contrary to the Equal Status Act. An enforcement of the law by the Minister and the Department of Education and Skills is needed on this issue. In practice, the way our national schools are run is a million miles removed from the principles of the Stanley letter. The system has been hijacked. National schools have been given denominational status as allowed in the Rules for National Schools 1965. All State-funded primary schools are governed by the 1965 rules. Rule 68 reads as follows:

Of all the parts of a school curriculum Religious Instruction is by far the most important, as its subject-matter, God's honour and service, includes the proper use of all man's faculties, and affords the most powerful inducements to their proper use. Religious Instruction is, therefore, a fundamental part of the school course, and a religious spirit should inform and vivify the whole work of the school.

That is what we are working under at the moment. Schools are therefore required to adopt an integrated curriculum whereby all aspects of the school day reflect and are informed by religious values. Religious instruction is not confined to one discreet period of the school day. It is impossible for children to opt out effectively of faith formation in schools. We have segregation as opposed to integration. Religion is not taught as a separate subject. It is part of an integrated curriculum taught by teachers paid from public funds. All of this is contrary to the principles of the Stanley letter of 1831, which were incorporated into the Constitution of the Free State and are reflected today in Article 42 of the Constitution of Ireland.

The Bill may make some improvement, and I will seek to amend some parts of it. My contention is that the current situation should not exist. It needs to be ended, not amended. The opt-out situation is not good enough. Where will we opt out the children to, as has already been said? Will they be moved to the back of the class or into a library? Religious education should be provided separately by people involved in the particular religion, who can spread their own word if that is what they want to do, not in the national school system. Some of the measures in the Bill will actually copperfasten the situation by transferring powers from boards of management to patrons.

This is not really a rural problem. It does not come up much in rural schools. They seem to be more able to facilitate their children in their schools. However, in urban areas, it certainly is a problem. A number of parents from my constituency have approached schools to enrol their children in them and have been told openly that if the children are not baptised, they will most likely not be allowed into the school because preference will be given to those who are baptised. That must be dealt with. In 2016, in a so-called progressive society, we should consider these issues and try to deal with them, get rid of them and end them, not amend them. I ask the Minister to consider my comments, maybe address them in his summing up when he contributes again and try to address them in the Bill. The prohibition of children on the basis of not having a baptismal certificate is archaic and should be put in the dustbin of history. We should have as our base the national school system that had been progressive but, as I said, has been hijacked. I will leave it at that. I will not speak for ever and a day and make things up as I go along. I have made the points I wanted to make.

See this speech in context