Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This whole group of amendments is really the crux of the Education (Admission to Schools) Bill 2016 and it is where the pressure has been coming on legislators to act. There is a difficulty. I acknowledge that and always have. I have come across constituents who have been refused admission to schools because they were not baptised Catholic. I saw one particularly egregious example where somebody had been baptised in a Protestant faith and was told that, under church rules, they cannot be re-baptised into the Catholic faith despite the fact that they go to Mass every Sunday. Still this constituent was not able to be admitted into a local Catholic school because there were not enough places.

I have seen every aspect of this. It is a real problem. Some people dismiss it but it is a real problem in certain parts of the country where there is a lack of availability of places. As I am told by my colleagues in north Dublin, that lack of availability of places in certain towns in north Dublin applies not just to Catholic schools, but to all schools across the board. Along with this, we need to make sure that we focus on resources. The ideological battles and the issue of discrimination are very important but the most important issue in education is that people want a good school to go to. We cannot lose sight of the resource question. We must fund our schools, provide the resources and actually build the schools which we say are needed in particular areas. The Minister needs to keep a razor sharp focus on this as well as dealing with this particular issue.

In our manifesto Fianna Fáil put forward a proposal, which is reflected in the amendments which have been tabled, in terms of providing catchment areas for schools. That proposal would have dealt with this problem to a large degree. It certainly would have helped the minority faith schools, which was our main objective as expressed in this debate before now, however I acknowledge that there are difficulties with the catchment area approach, primarily that the act of drawing up catchment areas would be exceedingly difficult.

On the basis that the Minister’s approach seems to be the best possible approach he can come up with that removes the baptism barrier but protects the minority faith schools, we will support the Minister’s amendments on this issue and I will not be moving my amendments. However, in a republic such as ours, where we have had a relationship between Catholic, Protestant and dissenter for better and for worse at different points in our history, it is important that we protect our minority religions. In allowing the primary schools of the Church of Ireland, the Presbyterian Church and the Jewish and Muslim faiths to ensure that adherents of their faiths can access their schools in preference to other people if they are oversubscribed we are actually helping those communities to sustain themselves, to maintain themselves in the country and to practise their faith. It is essential that we allow them to do that because, in truth, the Protestant communities have historically been treated pretty poorly and pretty appallingly by this State, particularly post-Independence. We at least owe it to them to allow them to have their schools if that is what they want to have. It is open to Church of Ireland schools to divest if that is their wish but we have to protect them if that is what is required to allow them to practise their faith.

This baptism barrier will go in Catholic schools. That does not present any difficulties for Catholics who wish to practise their faith because invariably they will be able to find another Catholic school if their local one is oversubscribed. We are happy to support the Minister’s amendments on this.

However, there are a few other issues in this area. One concerns the surveys on ethos the Minister is carrying out at the moment. They are a complete waste of administrative time. No school that the Minister proposes to open in the future should be a religious-run school. It just should not be. We have enough. Some 90% are under Catholic patronage at the moment. I do not see where the demand for more religious-run schools could possibly be. We do not need them at second level either. We have excellent Catholic and Protestant schools already. I presume that in opening up schools we are looking to diversify. I do not see why we need the surveys.

We have our education and training boards, ETBs. We have the community national school model. Surely that is the way to go in providing schools for the future. Nobody in their right mind would start a school system from scratch with the patronage model. It really needs to be eliminated from the process of providing future schools. In that process Gaelscoileanna and English-speaking community national schools run by the local ETB can also be provided. The structure is there. It would be better for many schools if they were to be run by ETBs because the resources, the administration, the expertise, the shared services and so on are already there. If Fianna Fáil were in power we would say that, unless there were absolutely compelling reasons otherwise, all schools would be patronised by local education and training boards. It seems to be the sensible thing to do. I am not sure what the survey of preschool students is going to achieve. I suspect most of them will end up in the education and training board sector anyway. In addition it is not just the parents of children who are currently in preschool who should be determining the schools in the community.

It seems that having them with the education and training boards would get the most acceptance from the wide mass of the community. I do not mean to rule out Gaelscoileanna when I say that because they could be provided for as well. Perhaps that would be part of parental choice. That can also be part of the Department's planning, rather than subcontracting it out to parents. That would be more sensible than what the Minister is proposing. Certainly, the schools in my community with which I am familiar and which are run by Louth and Meath Education and Training Board are excellent. I hope this arrangement applies to the primary school that is envisaged for Dunshaughlin and the secondary school that is envisaged for the Laytown and Drogheda school planning district. I have made a strong case to the officials in the Department that this planning area should include Duleek. I have mentioned to them that a site has been made available - presumably not for free - by the Diocese of Meath, which has no interest in patronage. This arrangement would simply involve the sale of land to the Department. That is a matter for the Department. As there is no appetite for church patronage, there is no need for concern.

There is no issue with religious preference in primary schools in the UK because between 30% and 40% of primary schools are in the religious category. There is a selection there. If we ever get to that stage, it will be possible for people to say they need to have their Catholic schools or State schools. It is simply not sustainable to have 90% of schools as Catholic schools, which is what we have at the moment. There is no argument about that at this point.

I have to say I think there are strong arguments for religion to be taught outside school hours, as proposed by some Deputies. There is no doubt about that. It happens very effectively with parental support in multidenominational schools. My own children go to a multidenominational school because that is the model to which we subscribe as Catholics. While I have no difficulty with this proposal, I suggest some type of consultation must happen first. We should not provide for religious instruction to take place outside school hours in one legislative gambit here tonight. It is something that will have to be looked at. It is how things were done when the national schools were first established. There was different religious instruction and things got in the way in the meantime. Although I do not think this would present a threat to faith, I am not sure we should simply up-end the system in a Dáil vote tonight or tomorrow. Instead, there should be some element of consultation. I am informed by my colleague, Deputy Ó Cuív, that we cannot do anything that would upset the school bus system. While he is right in this respect, I suggest such matters are easily managed.

We are facing into a period of change in education. I do not think we should be too dogmatic or ideological about it one way or the other. We need to get it right. There are issues being raised, but the focus must always be on having good schools that educate our children properly. In general, parents want good schools beside them that they can access. In fairness to the Minister, he has listened. It is probable that two years have passed since the Labour Party or the Green Party proposed a Private Members' motion on this issue. The Bill before the Dáil this evening will have to go before the Seanad. The sooner this gets done, the better. It is obvious that it will not be in place for the school year beginning in September.

I do not intend to delay the legislation for too long, but I would like to make a general point before I conclude. It should be noted that complying with this legislation in general, including the provisions we have been discussing, will place a significant burden on schools over the coming years. They will have to produce admissions policies and make sure everything is right. I wonder whether the Minister for Education and Skills is proposing to give schools a one-off grant or some sort of help or assistance. The shared services of education and training boards can certainly provide assistance to schools, for example when admissions policies that conform with this legislation are being written. Schools will need some help as they seek to comply with their legal obligations.

See this speech in context