Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I ask the Acting Chairman to tell me when my time has elapsed.

Senator Ó Domhnaill and other Senators raised the issue of the religion barrier being related to a shortage of schools and stated that other children will lose out. I refer them to Senator Higgins's comments in that regard. It is important that we have a fair system of access to whatever places are available but I strongly dispute that the religion barrier relates to a shortage of places. There will always be popular schools which many wish to attend and we must have fair rules for access to such schools. I can bring Senator Ó Domhnaill to a number of schools in my constituency that many students want to attend. There must be a rule governing access to such schools but that cannot be based on the religion of the child. It is unacceptable for a child living many miles from a school to be given priority over one living near the school. We will never be able to provide enough schools such that everyone gets their first preference. That is the reality. Some schools will have to make decisions on admissions. The important thing is that that is done in a fair way. I welcome the support for many other aspects of the Bill and recognise the contribution that Senator Ó Domhnaill's party made to some of those elements.

I do not agree with Senator Mullen that this is about resources and that the opening of autism spectrum disorder, ASD, units is an unfair imposition on schools. In most such cases we provide state-of-the-art facilities and a pupil-teacher ratio of 6:1 in addition to two special needs assistants, SNAs. We also provide favourable access to having a "walking principal", one who does not have teaching duties. Our new resource teaching model is putting more resources into schools which are taking on special education provision, so I do not think it fair to portray this as an issue of resources. We increased resources for special needs children by 42% right through the crash. It is remarkable that we have stuck with that and it is fair to have done so.

On the issue of abusive parents, we are developing a parents' and students' charter which will detail rights and responsibilities. I recognise that parents may overstep the mark and we must try to manage that at local level through a charter. I hope to publish legislation in that regard in the coming weeks.

Senator Byrne rightly stated that improvements are needed in regard to section 29 appeals. A quicker and easier process is required and I think we are making the right changes in that regard. The Gaelscoil issue will always be there and it is tricky because, as I said in my opening remarks, while we want to ensure a child of a family in which Irish is the normal spoken word has access to a Gaelscoil and a Gaelcholáiste, we cannot create something that is seen as another form of discrimination. Someone who is of immigrant parents, a broken home or a non-traditional home is discriminated by the provision, and we cannot do that. I hope we will be able to accommodate the aim.

I welcome the support of Senator Warfield on behalf of his party. I note that Senator Warfield said he would prefer not to see religion in State schools. To be honest, parents are the primary educators under our Constitution and the State has an obligation to recognise what parents want. What I am trying to do is recognise that the views of parents are changing, but some parents still want a religious ethos for their children. I do not think it is right that we should seek to impose uniformity. This Bill represents diversity and having different denominations. We do not have enough diversity but I do not think we should go to the other extreme and suggest that the system should be non-religious or a one-size view or approach. I do not agree with Senator Warfield in that regard.

Senators Higgins and Richmond referred to patronage and diversification. We need to accelerate the process. We are introducing a new approach that is currently under way. Each of the education and training boards is now picking one area and surveying parents. We are hoping to move to a system that would accelerate patronage. As Senator Mullen has said, there is a great deal of support from the church for this but it is a matter of creating the reality as opposed to simply the support. I hope it will work.

I do not agree with Senator Richmond's view that we should prescribe it and that every one of the 42 schools should be something. It is right to have a parental role. However, I have enshrined that the new patron must add to the diversity of offering within the area. It is rare but not impossible for a Catholic school to be successful. At second level one such school was successful. Of 61 new schools, one was Catholic. Anyway, I do not believe we should exclude the possibility of a religious denomination emerging as preferred.

I hear what Senator Ó Ríordáin has said about a citizens' assembly. I would be interested to debate the matter. There is no doubt that we are changing. What I am trying to do is move with the change. The Senator says he does not want gender or religion in schools. I respect the views of parents on this. We have to balance some ivory tower view of what is right versus what parents want, and that is what I am trying to do. I believe it is right that children of parents should have a certain quota. We are introducing a cap on that, but school communities are welcome and where there is a tradition of parents having gone to a school and sending their children there, that is to be welcomed. Many schools do that.

I will leave it at that. I have over-stepped the mark. I thank Senators for their contributions, which were, as always, very thoughtful and well-articulated. I look forward to the Committee Stage debate.