Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

Senator Barrett and others referred to the increase in population and noted there was not simply a significant increase in people of no religion or of no stated religion but there also has been an increase, because of the general population increase, of 8%. However, as an economist and a statistician, the Senator undoubtedly will be aware the quantum increase in real terms was with the increase of the category of "no religion". The increase in the number of Roman Catholics was largely due to the presence of eastern Europeans, mainly Lithuanians and Poles. The increase in the Muslim population, which is not based on nationality, largely pertains to the massive increase in the number of people working in the health and related employment sectors. Most people in the Muslim community have displayed no interest in seeking to be patrons of their own schools and I note Islam does not have the same hierarchical management structure as exists in the Christian churches. At present, there are two Muslim schools and there is no demand for an additional primary school although there have been some expressions of interest. However, in confirmation of a point made by Senators Mullen, Healy Eames and others, many members of the Muslim community are more than happy for their children to be educated in what predominantly is a Christian Catholic environment and do not consider their faith to be in any way threatened by such participation. Whatever people may say about the Catholic Church, from personal experience I can account of no attempt of any proselytism on behalf of the Catholic Church directed at anyone coming into its schools from other religious faiths.

The report refers to rule 68, which, if memory serves, goes back to 1965. Most of that rule book now is redundant in many respects because of the passage of the Education Act, the provisions of section 29 thereof, as well as a whole host of measures. For example, although corporal punishment no longer exists in our primary schools, the rule book actually offers advice and suggestions as to how it should be dealt with. No decision has made in this regard. Personally, I understand the reason the advisory group identified the particular phrase, "vivify the whole work of the school", as an example of being non-inclusive and rather exclusive, were a single religion to vivify the entire day. However, when this issue is considered in the future, there may be a need to rewrite the entire rule book in the context of the 21st century and to consider it in its entirety, rather than simply taking out one particular identification.

However, to revert to the point made by Senator Barrett, there is no doubt but that the population has changed. This is not a kind of religious headcount in which primary school places will be apportioned accordingly. Many practising Catholic families have chosen or wish to have their children in a multidenominational educational environment, which at present effectively means an Educate Together school. This is as much a factor as is the formal denominational profession. The report published by the Irish Primary Principals Network, IPPN, is interesting in the manner in which it expresses preferences for people having religious formation. Religious education and faith formation are two slightly different things. For example, the reformed church, to give the Protestant churches their generic name, have a very clear approach to religious education within a particular ethos. Given that they have different theological positions on a number of issues, including sacramental matters such as the Eucharist and communion, they teach Christianity as the Bible, given this is what is shared by the reformed churches, but then rely on their tradition of Sunday school to deal with the question of faith formation. The Sunday school tradition does not exist in the Catholic Church in Ireland but exists strongly in other countries in which Catholicism is one of a number of religions. As Members will be aware sacramental preparation of children, not alone in Catholic schools, is costly and many schools are struggling to survive. For children attending a State school which provides no religious education this is provided by the Sunday school or its equivalent in the Catholic church. I am speaking in this regard of Chicago and so on as the Irish tradition is somewhat different in terms of how it is delivered.

Members will excuse my brevity but I am conscious of time. There will be no threat to stand-alone schools in rural Ireland in the sense that none of them will be forcibly amalgamated. In terms of this report, there will be no divestment in the 1,700 stand-alone schools identified. Senator Healy-Eames will be aware there is a large immigrant population in the wider Galway area. We need to develop a "protocol" - that is the word used in the report - that accommodates that diversity. We have been in the space now for over a year of people complaining about the overt religious symbolism of the Catholic religion in schools which their children attend. It is unreasonable for people - myself included - to want the Catholic church to voluntarily and in an orderly manner divest itself of churches which its owns, albeit paid for in many cases by the taxpayer and located on church or religious instruction grounds, so that we can accommodate other demands in terms of gaelscoileanna and at the same time to tell it, in respect of its stand-alone schools, that its hands must be tied behind its back. That is my own personal view. It is not what is stated in the report. I would welcome a debate on this issue. I do not believe we will get agreement from the Catholic community on the divesting of schools if it believes it is to be curtailed in terms of how it celebrates and teaches Catholicism to its own community.