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

I thank the Senators for this discussion. Perhaps I come from a different perspective but I certainly favour diversity in education. I believe that, as the Constitution sets out, parents are the primary educators. I believe that the State should try to facilitate parents to the best of its ability. That was the background to the approach.

I had a consultation on this matter. Alternative approaches were being canvassed on how this should be dealt with, such as only allowing religion to be used within the catchment. Some parties put forward that idea while other ideas included having nearest-the-school rules and so on. None of these met with consensus.

I sought to see how we could facilitate parents to the best of our ability. I think it is perfectly acceptable that a parent might want to a child brought up in the faith of the parent. I do not find that to be an objectionable ambition in a republic. We have many high-quality minority religion schools. We have many children and their parents, who have a legitimate and recognised desire that their children should have the chance to be brought up in a school reflecting their ethos. The difficulty is that if we removed religion altogether the concept of a minority religion school would effectively disappear. We could not have a minority religion school if it was obliged to accept all-comers because effectivity minority religion schools represent one out of every 20 schools. They would not be able to maintain the ethos. By contrast, I am not permitting religion to be used in Catholic schools. People in that situation have 18 of every 20 schools to choose from. A parent who wants to have a child brought up in a school with a Catholic ethos can achieve that. Similarly non-denominational schools do not apply religion and I am not in any way interfering with that. As a result, 19 out of every 20 schools will not be using religion as a criterion. The one exception to that will be in the case of minority schools.I am providing that we allow those schools which are a valuable part of our tradition to continue. I am surprised the Senator is advocating that we should abandon that part of our tradition, given all our political history.

Senator Grace O'Sullivan has argued that we should have State education institutions but the truth is we do not. Of our primary schools, 99.5% or more are not State institutions but are private institutions. That is because of all sorts of historical reasons. There are denominational schools and Educate Together is another private institution, along with An Foras Pátrúnachta. The only State schools are the education and training board, ETB, schools, and there is a small number of community national schools. It was 11 at the last count. The philosophy of those schools is that every religion should be invited in and equally celebrated. It is a great model and I would love to see many more State schools. I would like to see the ETB model getting greater traction. I hope we will see transfers of patronage to that model.

For all sorts of reasons we did not go down that road. We have a different model and we must develop and reform the model as best we can. It is what I am doing here. It is a significant reform and I can see it in my constituency. Senator Ó Ríordáin would have the same experience. Parents feel obliged to have their child baptised simply to get into school or they find they live in an area where a baptised child will get a priority in a local school over their child. That is not acceptable. My role is about satisfying parents to the best of my ability rather than imposing uniformity or one model of school.

Our education system is very much a consensus, with stakeholder engagement and consultation being a very big feature. One may say this slows progress but Senators may have read the book by the late Fr. John O'Holohan - sadly, he was recently buried - that reflected on education in the past 50 years. He made a very persuasive case that stakeholder engagement has been a strength of our system. Although we have much friction and tensions, we have seen much very valuable reform. We must continue and accelerate that reform. I am really keen to see far greater diversity. It is wholly inappropriate that 95% of our schools are denominational when at the last count nationally, slightly more than 50% of parents who get married did so in denominational ceremonies. Ireland is changing very rapidly and we must facilitate that change. I hope we can accelerate such change.

I did not address the provision in the amendments that Senator Grace O'Sullivan seeks to address. It is the other feature of the equality legislation, which allows protection to review admission where it is essential to maintain ethos. It is not area where I addressed the change. It has never been used so it has not been an issue that has exercised public concern. It is a very high bar to prove it. I am addressing the real issues of concern.

Amendment No. 22 seeks to apply the provision I am making at primary level to post-primary level. When I initiated this consultation it was very clear the problem we were seeking to address was that 95% of schools are denominational and the capacity to use religion as a barrier. In post-primary education there is far greater diversity, with more than half of schools of non-denominational patronage. I did not address this in the consultation and it is not anything like as pressing. In practice, religious denomination is not used to de-bar to any great extent in this sector, or at least there is not the same complexity. There is much more choice. Nonetheless, Senator O'Sullivan's proposal would for the same reasons see many small, minority religion, post-primary schools wiped out. One could not continue to have minority post-primary schools under the Senator's provision, as they provide that children of a minority ethos who want access to those schools get preference. This may be called ideology but it is catering to a diverse Ireland and the plurality we experience in our community. Ideology should not totally trounce valuable institutions we have inherited.

There is the matter of issuing directions and we have made a significant change in this Bill. Before a child enrols in a school, the school would have to set out the policy it provides with respect to attending religious instruction. This is an area where there has been a good deal of evolution and we must see more. One cannot have a one size fits all approach to this and the precise nature of arrangements must be considered by each school, having regard to the particular circumstances. It would not be appropriate to try to develop a one size fits all approach to this. I have no doubt we are moving to a position where there must be much more catering for the needs. I am making provision in the forthcoming parents and learners charter Bill that there must be consultation with parents in how children who do not share the denomination of the school are catered for. I would prefer to see that develop through a parents and students charter, with a degree of flexibility as to how it would be delivered in the 4,000 schools that we have. That is instead of having some attempt to say the rules will apply in a small Church of Ireland, Methodist, Catholic or Educate Together school and they must be complied with. It does not fit with the way in which our school system has evolved and the diversity that exists. I am not disposed to supporting that.

Amendment No. 23 arose from amendments tabled by Senators. It provides that there will be a review of this section within five years of the section coming into operation. This is an area where custom and practice will evolve and our thinking about such matters will also evolve. I do not in any way pretend that this is the last word to be said on the matter. Amendment No. 24 will fall if my amendment No. 23 is accepted.