Averil Power (Independent) | Oireachtas source

On the last occasion we discussed this issue it was argued that it is okay to refuse a person employment on the basis that he or she does not share the religion of the school. I do not accept that. This remains acceptable in terms of the wording being put forward today by the Government. The programme for Government, to which the Minister of State's party and Fine Gael signed up when they came into office, specifically states that people of non-faith or minority religious backgrounds should not be deferred from training or taking up employment as teachers in this State. The programme for Government commitment did not relate only to LGBT teachers. While I appreciate the moves being made on this aspect, in terms of changing our equality law, the Government appears to have completely abandoned the commitment not to exclude people from employment because of their religion. I think that is regrettable.

The amendment I have put forward provides an opportunity to address that and to address the unusual position in Ireland whereby the vast majority of our primary schools and a significant number of our second level schools are under religious patronage. While patronage arrangements must be respected and teachers should uphold the ethos of their schools, which means all teachers at primary level must teach religion, the fact that a teacher is not personally adherent to the same faith as the school should not prevent him or her getting a job or promotion. If teachers are prepared to fulfil the full functions of the posts their personal faith should not be an issue.

The National Directory for Catechesis in Ireland sharing of the good news published by the Irish Episcopal Conference states that teachers will be employed on the understanding that they will commit themselves actively to supporting the ethos of the school. At the same time, the school will respect the freedom of conscience of teachers in matters of personal religious belief and practice. I do not believe the two are mutually exclusive. I agree with Senator Norris's earlier comments about atheists. In a free society, people should be free to believe, or not, whatever they wish. Everybody should have the same rights and respect in their personal lives and in the workplace. All I am asking is that we would make clear in the Bill that the fact that a person does not personally share an institution's religious ethos is not a bar to employment. I accept that the provision as drafted provides that the religious ground can only be relied on where there is a genuine occupational requirement but the difficulty brought to my attention by teachers in particular is that this concept is arguable. There is disagreement on it in that some of the patron bodies may well argue that being of the same faith as the school is a genuine occupational requirement. Personally, I do not believe it is if the teacher is prepared to respect the ethos of the school and fulfil all of the functions of their role. I am asking that the Minister of State provide clarity in the Bill in this regard. As I said, my objective in each of these amendments is to seek to improve on the Government wording and to try to give people as much clarity as possible. While the Minister of State may feel these issues are implicit in the legislation I think we should make them explicit.

The INTO, ASTI, TUI and other teacher unions need to be able to go back to their members and clarify that the legislation explicitly provides that the fact that they do not hold the same religious belief as a school in which they work or are seeking to work is not a bar to employment or promotion. It is not sufficient to provide that this may or may not be the case or that a court may or may not accept that. People need clarity on this issue.