Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 17 Apr 1929

Vol. 29 No. 4

In Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 45—Office of the Minister for Education (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £110,129 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1930, chun Costaisí Oifig an Aire Oideachais maraon le costas Riaracháin, Cigireachta, etc.
That a sum not exceeding £110,129 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1930, for the Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education, including the cost of Administration, Inspection, etc.

Rinne mé tagairt cheanna don easbaidh leabhar seasta le haghaidh na meán-scoileanna. Ba chóir leabhair seasta a bheith leagtha amach i dtreó nách mbeadh ar na páistí leabhair nua do cheannach o bhliain go bliain. Chó maith leis sin, tá a lán daoine ag a bhfuil eolas aca ar an gceist agus níl siad sásta leis na leabhair staire atá idir lamhaibh na bpáiste sna sgoileanna fá láthair. Ó thárla an sgoilt imeasc na ndaoine a bhí ar thaobh Náisiúntachta, tá seacht mblian ó shoin, tá fhios againn go raibh seans maith ag an namhaid leabhair do scríobhadh cosamhail leis na leabhraí do sgríobh Froude, agus daoine mar é, sa tseanaimsir—leabhair ag cur síos ar na "natives," agus mar sin de. Má tá athrú ann anois, má tá rialtas againn féin agus má tá brí Náisiúntachta ag na daoine atá os cionn Roinne Oideachais, ba cheart féachaint chuige nach mbeadh aon leabhar i lamhaibh na bpáiste nach mbeimíd sásta leis seacht mblian ó shoin. Má's rud go bhfuilimid ar thaobh Náisiúntachta, agus má tá sé romhainn an teanga náisiúntach do shábháil, is ceart dúinn a fhéicéal go bhfuil an sprid ceart ghá nochtadh sna leabhraí scoile; agus ní amháin sin, ach gur fíor-Eireannaigh na daoine a sgríobheas iad agus go mbeadh baint idir na leabhraí Bearla atá in úsáid agus obair na tíre—go mbeidh ceachtanna ionnta ag cur síos ar déantúisi na h-Eireann agus rudái eile mar sin.

Dubhairt mé anuiridh go mba cheart don Roinn Oideachais a thuille de dhéanamh chun ceol Gaedhalach do chur chun chinn sna scoileanna. Ní doigh liom do dtug an tAire aon fhreagra dom ar an gceist sin. Chonnaic mé le déanaí i bpapéir éigin alt a scríobh sagart ag cur síos ar an gceist. D'fhiafruigh sé an raibh aon fáth go raibh ceol Gallda, no ceol de thír ar bith cile lasmuigh de'n tir seo, ghá theagasg sna scoileanna. Ba cheart níos mó cúraim do thabhairt don cheist, i dtreo agus go mbeadh ceol Gaedhalach in uachtar i ngach scoil san tír, má's féidir é.

Táim ar aon intinn le Teachta Mac Antoin mar gheall ar cheárd-oideachas. Tá cúpla blian thart ó cuireadh amach an tuarasgabhail idtaobh an cheird-Oideachais agus ba cheart toradh éigin a bheith ag teacht as anois. Tá fhios againn nach féidir scéim iomlán de cheárd-Oideachas do chur i bhféidhm i lá no i mblian no b'fhéidir i ndeich mbliana ach is féidir tús do dhéanamh. Sé an tús go mba cheart do dhéanamh ná na múinteóirí do thraenáil i dtreo agus go mbeidh siad ullamh, nuair a thiocfas an t-am, leis an obair do ghlaca idir lamhaibh. Tá a lán múinteóirí Gaedhilge sa tír nach mbíonn ag obair ach ar feadh cúpla uair san oiche agus thiocfadh leo abhair leighinn eile do mhúineadh dá mbeadh faill acu iad féin d'ullamhú. Bheadh seans acu, annsin, postanna d'fháil sna scoileanna leanúnacha nuair a cuirfí ar bun iad.

Rud eile—áiteacha in a bhfuil iascaireacht ar siúl ba cheart rud éigin do dhéanamh chun traenáil speisiálta do thabhairt do mhacaibh na n-iasgaire. Tá a fhios againn— tá súil againn go dtiocfaidh toradh maith as—go bhfuil scéim ceaptha ag an Roinn Iasgaireachta agus, mar gheall ar sin, ba cheart scoileanna leanúnacha do chur ar bun i ngach áit in a bhfuil iascaireacht ar siúl.

Ní bhíonn diosbóireacht cheart againn ar an gceist seo. Isé an fá, do réir mo thuairime, nach bhfuil aon chúntas ceart againn ar an bpolaisí atá leagtha amach i gcóir meán-oideachais. Níl aon chuntas againn ó sna cigirí. Níl fhios againn an bhfuil an Roinn ag cur roimpí dluth-bhaint do dhéanamh idir meán-oideachas agus ceárdoideachas i gcoinn cúpla blian no an bhfuil an Roinn sásta leanúint leis an gceangal atá idir na meán-scoileanna agus na hOllsgoileanna agus dochtúirí agus dlitheadóirí do chur amach ó bhliain go bliain. Gan eolas cruinn, ní feidir cur síos ar an gceist seo—ceist an oideachais—i gceart. Tá ionnsuidhe láidir gha dhéanamh i gcuid de na páipéirí ar an nGaedhilg agus gach rud a bhaineas leis an dteangain. Ba cheart eolas cruinn, beacht a bheith againnne i dtreo gur féidir linn na freagraí cearta do thabhairt. Tá fhios againn, ó chuntaisí na gcigirí, an obair mhaith atá á dhéanamh sna bunscoileanna ach ba chóir é a bheith ar ar gcumas an oideachas atá ins na bun-scoileanna anois do chur i gcomparáid leis an oideachas a bhí ann 10 mbliana ó shoin. Má tá aon phoinntí laige san scéim sin, ba chóir iad do dheisiú. Támuid uilig i bhfhaobhar an pholaisí atá ag an Roinn Oideachais acht níl fhios againn i gceart an chaoi in a bhfuil sé ag oibriú.

Mr. Byrne

I consider this Estimate is perhaps one of the most important that this House will be asked to pass. The importance of education in other countries may be summed up by stating that in America it is considered that knowledge is the basis of happiness, while in Germany they consider that the national prosperity and the stability of a country depend upon its system of education. In my opinion it ought to be the aim and object of every Deputy to see that each year when this Estimate is introduced there has been a progressive advance in the standard of education and in the results achieved by the system of education.

We have listened to what, no doubt, have been very eloquent speeches delivered by members of the Opposition Party in the Irish tongue. I wonder what useful purpose will be served—and I hope in making that observation that I will not be misconstrued or misunderstood—by delivering to the House a speech in a language of which only 5 to 10 per cent. of the audience understand a single word. I wonder what object can be served, what useful purpose, as far as the interests of education are concerned, can be achieved by delivering speeches in a language which practically only 5 per cent. of those in this House understand. I do not wish to discuss this for any sentimental reason. I consider that I have been sent here to look after the interests of the common people, and I suggest that, as far as those interests are concerned, the two main speeches from the Opposition have served very little useful purpose. As far as I can gather, the main criticism from the Opposition Benches has been to advocate the advancement of what they term the Gaelicisation of the State. I am one of those who, rightly or wrongly, believe that in advocating the Gaelicisation of this State we are pushing what I consider is an open door. I consider that the national spirit of the country is sufficiently developed without the aid of a spur from any Deputy.

The point that I would ask the House to consider is: what useful purpose may be served by a further development of this process of Gaelicisation? What useful purpose or advantage will the 30,000 people who emigrate from these shores year after year obtain, when they go to earn their livelihood in a foreign country, by this process of Gaelicisation, and by the development of what our friends on the Opposition Benches term the spirit of nationalism? A further point from the Opposition Benches—and I think this sums up their whole criticism—was to suggest that we ought to make an appeal to the Minister to see that nothing but national games were played in the schools. I hope I will not be considered offensive when I say that, in my opinion, that is only wasting the time of the House. I think there are deeper, graver, and more important issues involved in this Vote than criticisms of that kind.

I suggest that we have now reached another milestone in the history of this country, and that the question we should ask ourselves, as far as education is concerned, is: Has this country progressed and advanced in the proper way, or is it only marking time? Last year, when speaking to this Vote, I aroused considerable indignation here by venturing to suggest that our system of primary education was considerably behind those of other countries. I was told that I did not adduce a scintilla of evidence in support of that statement. A very learned gentleman—Rev. Father Lambert McKenna—was quoted as having stated that nowhere had he found teachers more anxious to do their duty than Irish teachers, and that was cited to prove that my views were erroneous. I should like to say that in any criticism I have to pass I do not wish to depreciate the task of those engaged in such an important, and, as far as this nation is concerned, imperative duty as education. I honestly believe that the teachers want to do the best they possibly can for their pupils, and that the Education Department want to do what is best for the general interests of the country; but I suggest that if certain defects exist in the system of primary education, it is the duty of the House to analyse and examine these defects, and, if possible, to see that they are remedied.

The Rev. Lambert McKenna has been quoted as an authority to show that all is well as far as primary education is concerned. I should like to quote the Reverend T.F. Ryan, S.J., who dealt with educational statistics in a very instructive lecture some time ago. He said that an alarming situation existed at present, and pointed out that several thousands of boys and girls at the age of 14 are being added each year to the numbers of unemployed. In 1927, of those who registered for employment on leaving school, 54 per cent. had not reached the sixth standard and 4.3 per cent. were under the fourth, which, in his words, means that 4.3 per cent. are practically illiterate. He further pointed out that 92 per cent. of those who applied for street traders' licences had not reached the sixth standard, and 36.4 per cent. had not reached the fourth. In my opinion these are the questions that matter. We have now an estimate for £110,000 for primary education. Are the results, as far as the figures I have quoted are concerned, commensurate with the money expended? Will it be contended that a proportion of 4.3 of what may be termed practically illiterates is a reasonable proportion under our primary education system upon which the country spends £110,000? I should like to ask the House what is the future of these unfortunate children? Is there any remedy that can be applied to wipe out this ratio of illiterates?

If one examines the results of the technical school examinations for 1927 the same tale is unfolded. These results show that there were 3,244 successes, and that the failures numbered 1,720, a proportion of 55 per cent. of failures. Surely that is a most disheartening fact. It was also stated in the Technical Report that the weakness in spelling was glaring and general; that in the examinations for building construction the standard of drawing was very low, and that the sketches were extremely poor. Building is a subject that occupies a very considerable portion of the time of this House, and it is of outstanding importance as far as this little nation is concerned. That is an industry in which a considerable amount of employment could be given to children who are thrown on the scrap heap of unemployment year after year. Yet what do we find? That they are absolutely unable to avail themselves as they should of this employment in the great industry of building. I remember many years ago when I was engaged in the building trade across the Channel going into an architect's office in Newcastle-on-Tyne and being handed a set of plans dealing with a £50,000 scheme, and asked to make designs and draw plans to scale from the plans submitted to me. Supposing any of the 30,000 children who leave our shores were placed in the same position, how many would be able to do that, if that particular employment were offered them?

I do not know whether I am stating what is a fact or not, but I should like to ask the Minister what method exists by which children in the primary schools pass from a lower to a higher standard? Is it true that when a child reaches a certain age he is automatically removed into a higher standard whether qualified or not? I feel that I am voicing the discontent of large numbers of parents who are not satisfied with the results of the present educational system. Everybody knows that the struggle for existence is exceedingly keen, and that many parents who keep their children at school make great sacrifices to do so. Yet the result of all this sacrifice is the figures I have quoted! Only yesterday I was speaking to a parent who told me that he had spent £200 on educating his girl in one of the convent schools, and that the girl had returned to him practically unfitted to take up any course. I do not want to exaggerate in any way the defects to which I have referred, but I do say in all sincerity that they are in existence and call for remedy. We are not a sort of mutual admiration society in which we may say that this is the grandest nation in the world and that our children are second to none. What we have to do is to fit those children to fight the battle of life when they are thrown into other countries under different conditions from those existing here. If the system of education here is inferior to the systems across the Channel and on the Continent, it is the duty of the House to devise ways and means to remove that inferiority.

The Minister when dealing, on the Education Estimate last year, with this point to which I have referred again to-day, stated that across the Channel they are not satisfied that education in the primary schools is satisfactory between 11½ and 12 years of age. So much dissatisfied were they, that they were making an attempt to remodel the whole system. We are in a better position, because in our primary system we have subjects such as a particular kind of mathematics and a second language. It would appear from the statement of the Minister that when children in the cross-Channel schools reach the age of 12 years they have already finished the course so far as the curriculum is concerned. What do we find here? That when we keep them here up to 14 years, or two years longer, this large proportion of children are in the lower classes, and a great many of them who are in the higher classes are not really competent so far as their work is concerned. In my opinion, this statement of the Minister, instead of proving that our schools are superior, instead of showing that our primary education system is all that it should be, was one of the highest tributes that he could have paid to the primary system across the Channel.

We are saying that our system is almost a sort of sacrosanct institution. We are dealing now with compulsory school attendance. It was discussed last year and again this year, and we think that we are up-to-date. I wonder do people who have been discussing this question, as far as this nation is concerned, know that a compulsory school attendance system for children from five to fourteen years of age was adopted by Germany as long ago as 1873? These are facts that I think ought to be considered when dealing with an Estimate so important as education. These criticisms which I have levelled at our primary education system are levelled with sincere regret, but if these defects exist, surely it is the duty of Deputies to direct attention to them and to endeavour to have them remedied. When I dealt with this Vote previously, and referred to how far we were behind the times in comparison with other countries, the suggestion was made that I had some concealed motive in delivering these criticisms. It was suggested that these criticisms arose because the Irish language was being taught, and that it was a sort of taking it out of the system because it was furthering what may be termed the interests of nationality. That suggestion really needs no answer as far as I am concerned. I have dealt with facts and figures. I have endeavoured to show certain defects existing in the system of primary education, and I think it is the duty of this House to do what in it lies to remedy these defects and to devise ways and means so that they may not exist in the future.

The Minister for Education, in his opening remarks, said that in the year 1927-8 there was an increase of about £17,000 in teachers' salaries. In convents where capitation grants existed, he said there was an increase in the same year of £80,000. Certain critical remarks have been made lately in this country as far as religious teaching orders are concerned. I think I may briefly refer to the protest of the Teachers' Organisation and the demands for safeguarding the existing schools from religious orders and that the teachers should be put upon the same footing in the schools of religious communities as in the ordinary national schools. I think it is only right to point out that to religious orders the Catholic countries throughout Europe owe practically what education they possess at the moment. There were two bodies in the past who put education upon modern methods and developed it, and made it the efficient instrument that it is to-day. One of those, as far as secondary education is concerned, was the Jesuits, and the other body was the Christian Brothers.

I ask the Committee to try to visualise for one moment the conditions that would prevail in the absence of the great work which the Christian Brothers are performing for this country of ours. I would ask them to realise that the Christian Brothers were really the founders of elementary education not alone in this country, but from one end of Europe to the other. Early in the sixteenth century the Christian Brothers were established. It was they who introduced the rule of silence, replaced commands by signals, established the value of written work, and replaced the infliction of punishment by reprimand. What has all this cost the nation? The huge sum of nothing—not a penny. These are the men whom we are asked to restrain from proceeding with their activities so far as this State is concerned. There is no body of men with such a proud record behind them as far as the teaching profession is concerned as the Christian Brothers.

As long ago as 1685 the Christian Brothers' Schools were the first institutions opened for the training of elementary pupils. The superiority of the system of teaching by the Christian Brothers has been admitted by all educationalists who have ever dealt with this subject. It is admitted universally that to the Christian Brothers we owe the introduction of modern standards.

May I ask the Deputy for some information regarding the activities of the Christian Brothers in 1685? Where were they operating?

Mr. Byrne

In 1684 they were operating in France, and they were recognised by the Pope in 1702. I should be very glad to let Deputy Fahy, who is interested in the question of education, have Munroe on the subject, an American authority from whom no prejudice can be expected.

I thought the Deputy was referring to Ireland. I have read most of these books on education.

Mr. Byrne

I was not referring to Ireland. I said that they sprang into existence in 1684, and I am prepared to stand by that.

What about bringing it up to date?

Mr. Byrne

I shall bring it up to date in a moment. As far as the Christian Brothers are concerned, they have put elementary education on its feet; they are the pioneers of modern methods; they introduced the class system and they introduced the grading system which is in existence to-day. Hundreds of years ago they were far ahead of other branches of the teaching profession, and I shall bring the matter up to date by saying they are far ahead of other branches of the teaching profession to-day.

Mr. O'Connell

Are they not in the teaching profession?

Mr. Byrne

Complaint is made that they have put up palatial buildings in order to carry out this magnificent work of charity.

No Deputy has complained of that.

Mr. Byrne

I am not suggesting that any Deputy complained, but I am referring to the state of affairs that is in existence, and I think it is the duty of the Dáil to take notice of it. I do not think I need say any more as far as the Christian Brothers are concerned.

I shall wind up by another brief reference to them. Instead of being taught by cobblers and disabled soldiers and other heterogeneous teachers, we have in them a body of teachers that will rank favourably with any other body in the world to-day. I gather that this Vote, as far as the Christian Brothers are concerned, contains an extra sum of £17,000, but as far as the convent schools were concerned, that in 1927 and 1928 there was an increase of £80,000. I do not know whether I am right in these figures; but all I have to say is, that if the figures as I have given them represent the value the Christian Brothers have given to the country, the money would be repaid if double the amount was spent every year. As far as the teachers in the convent schools are concerned, a great deal might be done by inquiry into their capacity and efficiency before the question of giving them pensions as advocated by the Teachers' Organisation should be considered by the House. I speak with some experience of the products of convent schools, and I hope I speak with respect——

Would the Deputy allow me to ask him a question? When has the Teachers' Organisation ever advocated pensions for members of religious orders? Does the Deputy really know what he is talking about?

Mr. Byrne

I think I have some slight knowledge of it.

Mr. O'Connell

Not much, I am afraid.

Mr. Byrne

I have here in my hand a long letter signed by a member of the Teachers' Organisation. The letter runs into a column in length. I am sorry that the name of the writer is cut off, but I see at the bottom of the letter that he is a B.A. of the National University. The letter is here if any Deputy wants to see it. The Deputy who represents the teachers will have every opportunity of dealing with these few points which I have thought it worth while to make.

The Deputy does not represent the teachers. He represents his constituency, which is a wholly different thing.

Mr. Byrne

Well, I believe I am right in saying that he is interested in the teaching profession.

The point that I want to make clear is this— it has arisen here before—that the Deputy speaks here for himself and his constituents; not for other bodies.

Mr. Byrne

I should have said that Deputy O'Connell, who has considerable knowledge of the subject of education, will have an opportunity of replying to the criticisms which I have thought it worth while to make as regards the primary system of education in this country. I suggest that what we want in this country, whether it be in the convent schools, the national schools or the Christian Brothers' Schools, is efficiency, and for the money spent results. If all of us co-operated in no party spirit —I assure the House that I am speaking in no party spirit even though I speak from the Government Benches—and did our duty on this great issue of education, we would be doing a good day's work for the country and for the young children who, later on, will have to earn their living in the very difficult times that lie ahead.

Padraic O hÓgain

Táim ar aon intinn leis an dTeachta atá tréis labhairt agus ar an adhbhar san labharfad as Gaedhilg ar fad. Ba mhaith liom-sa rud beag, fíor rud bheag, a rádh ar an meastachán so. Baineann pé rud atá le rádh agam-sa le cúrsaí na Gaedhilge sna bun scoileanna sa nGalltacht agus ba mhaith liom freagra d'fháil ar chúpla ceisteanna.

Mar abhar léighinn sna bun scoileanna sa nGalltacht, tá an Ghaedhilg go maith—níos fearr na Greigis na Laidean. Tá postanna le fáil ag cuid de na macaibh léighinn ach don bhfurmhór acu ce'n mhaith i? Níl aon phost le fáil ag an bhfurmór acu.

Táim ag cuimhneamh ar an rud so le fada. An bhfuil níos mó daoine in ánn Gaedhilig do labhairt anois—nílim ag tagairt do na daoine ag a bhfuil "Dia dhuit! agus Bail o Dhia ort!" acu—sa nGalltacht na mar bhí seacht no ocht mblian ó shoin? An mbéidh níos mó Gaedhilgeóirí ann—cainnteóirí Gaedhilge—i gcionn naoi no deich de bhliaintaibh de bharr na gcúrsaí Gaedhilge atá ar siúl fá lathair ná mar tá ann anois? Is dó liom go bhfuil an iomarca muinghne ar fad ghá chur i múineadh na scoileanna. Do chuireas ceist mar gheall ar seo ar a lán múinteóirí atá ábalta Gaedhilig do mhúineadh go maith agus nach bhfuil in aghaidh na Gaedhilge D'fhiafruigheas díobh an féidir cainnteóirí Gaedhilge do dhéanamh de na páistí tar éis na seacht mbliana a caithtear ar scoil. Dubhairt an furmhór acu nach bhféadfaí, gan congnamh ó na máithreacha agus na h-aithreacha sa mbaile. Sé mo thuairim féin nach bhfuil aon mhúineadh ann a bhfuil tairbhe ann maidir leis an nGaedhilg a choimeád beo ach an mhúineadh a déantar sa mbaile. Bhal, níl na máithreacha no na h-aithreacha i nánn—cuid maith acu, ar dhoigh ar bith—congnamh do thabhairt do na páistí sa nGalltacht. Tá siad mar a bhí na máithreacha agus na h-aithreacha idtaobh an Bhéarla sa nGaeltacht fiche blian ó shoin. Níor thuigeadar na páistí agus iad ag labhairt as Bhéarla. Tá sé mar a geeudhna sa nGalltacht fá lathair i dtaobh na Gaedhilge. Ceapann na páistí gur abhar léighinn scoile atá i nGaedhilig sna bun-scoileanna. Tá a n-aithreacha agus a maithreacha ar an dtuairim cheudhna. Ceapann siad go bhfuil an Ghaedhilig go maith mar abhar léighinn scoile ach ní h-é sin an rud ar a bhfuilimid-ne ag smaoineamh. Isé atá rómhann an Ghaedhilig a bheith againn mar gnáth-theangain na tíre. Ceist eile ar fad é sin.

Is dóigh liom go mb' fhearr dhuinn agus don Ghaedhilg an t-airgead atá ghá chaitheamh againn sa nGalltacht do chaitheamh sa nGaeltacht—áit in a bhfuil an teanga beó mar ghnáththeanga fós. B'fhearr dúinn an rud is féidir linn do dhéanamh sa nGaeltacht, mar is eagal liom gur obair in aisge í a bheith ag teagase Gaedhilge sna bun-scoileanna sa nGalltacht. Ba mhaith liom freagra d'fháil ó'n Aire an ar mhaithe na tíre, no ar mhaithe na teangan na ar mhaithe na bpáistí-fhéin an méid seo d'airgead agus an méid seo d'am atá ghá chaitheamh ar mhúineadh na Gaedhilge sna bun scoileanna sa nGalltacht.

In the few observations that I have to make on this Vote, I wish to refer to the teaching of Irish. The question has been so constantly discussed here that one feels one is indulging perhaps in too much repetition in referring to it again. On the last occasion that the Education Vote was before the House, I urged on the Minister the desirability of making inquiries as to whether it would be possible to establish a series of official text-books for the primary schools, and, to some extent, for secondary schools especially in the Irish language. My remarks on that occasion were subjected to a good deal of criticism. The argument was used against what I said that because the use of official text-books was abused in this country by the old English Board of Education and had to a certain extent a bad effect under that Board, that, therefore, the establishment of a series of official text-books by the present Government would also be likely to have a bad effect. I do not agree at all with that argument. On the contrary, I think that the present chaotic conditions that prevail in primary schools with regard to text-books is doing definite injury. There is no particular standard whatever being applied. One finds the greatest possible difference between one school and another. The question as to what text-books are used in a school is very largely decided by chance; as to what publishers' agent happens to call on the teachers from time to time. The matter is still more urgent in the case of the teaching of Irish, because the supply of text-books suitable for use in primary schools in Irish is very small. In addition to the supply being small, I think it is also true to say that a good many of the text-books which are and have been in use, and that have been even I might say—as far as I am aware—officially imposed by the Education Authorities are not fit to be used as text-books at all.

I say that there is a great need for setting up a definite, co-ordinated and carefully-planned series of text-books for the teaching of the Irish language itself, as well as for the teaching of such subjects as are capable of being successfully taught at the moment in that language, such, for example, as the history of Ireland, the geography of Ireland, and other subjects.

With regard to the secondary schools, the position is still worse, because the number of text-books that are really available for any kind of successful teaching in the Irish language in secondary schools is absurdly small. For instance, the number of really useful text-books that are in existence dealing, say, with the history of Irish literature, and that are suitable for use in secondary schools, is practically negligible. In regard to the matter of folklore, a great deal of material was collected and printed in previous years, but I think it is true to say that a large amount of that material is now out of print and not available. The Gaelic League published an enormous amount of useful books dealing with folklore, and a number also dealing with poetry and general literature. I think it would be true to say that the majority of these books are unprocurable, and cannot be used for the purposes of the secondary schools. The establishment then of some kind of series of official text-books is, I think, a very urgent matter, especially in regard to Irish, but to a very large extent in regard to the teaching of English as well.

The notion that because a previous Government made a certain use of that kind of text book the present Government, or any future Government of the country, is likely to make the same use of them is, I think, an altogether erroneous notion. I believe that nothing but good is likely to follow from the adoption of a carefully planned and well thought out scheme for the setting up of a series of official text books. Deputy Pádraig O hOgáin, from what I heard of his speech, was dealing with the teaching generally in the schools outside the Gaeltacht. He is apparently adopting a very extreme point of view in that matter. He seemed to be saying that the money that is being spent in the Galltacht in the teaching of Irish is being completely wasted, and that it would be better for the Government to spend the money which they are spending in the Galltacht on the schools in the Gaeltacht. That is a point of view which. I think, it is worth our while discussing here, for it is a point of view I have heard often expressed, and by nobody so strongly as by people familiar with the Gaeltacht, and who realise the great danger in which the language still stands in the Gaeltacht. I do not think enough time has been given to the examination of that point of view and the examination of the whole question as to how far the present method of teaching Irish in primary schools throughout the Galltacht has been successful, and as to how far the energy that could be spent in the teaching of Irish in the Gaeltacht is being wasted in the Galltacht.

Personally, in so far as I have any experience—and I have some I think —it is very far from true to say that the money that is being spent in the Galltacht is being wasted. I have visited schools in the Galltacht where the use of the Irish language has been dead for two generations, and where the teacher cannot be said to be at all supremely well qualified to teach Irish, and I have certainly been very greatly impressed by the work done in these schools. I have found that an active teacher who is interested in his work and who has a moderate knowledge of the Irish language is able to achieve the most surprising results in the teaching of it, even in schools where it is no longer spoken by the older people. I have found also—it is a matter of personal experience and I have gone into it carefully—that so far from the teaching of English suffering in such schools, it has, if anything, got to as high a level as was attained 15 or 20 years ago when Irish was not taught at all. That is my personal experience and opinion, and I think that while, of course, it is altogether too optimistic to expect that we can succeed at one blow in restoring Irish as the spoken language of a district by means of the work I have referred to in primary schools, I still believe the work that is being done is extremely valuable as a kind of groundwork for the eventual restoration of Irish and its use in the homes, and in the daily lives of the people.

However, there are different points of view in the matter. I think it is a matter worth discussing and never losing sight of. It may happen quite frequently in a particular school that a teacher who is not sufficiently qualified may be doing more harm than good by trying to do work which he is unable to do. In that matter I think everything depends on the knowledge, energy and enthusiasm of the teacher. If you have not got knowledge, energy and enthusiasm, it is quite conceivable a state of affairs might arise like that which Deputy O hOgáin referred to. However, I am very far from saying we have not got that knowledge, and I am still further from believing we have not got both energy and enthusiasm on the part of the primary teachers to do the work.

There are one or two other little points that I would like to refer to. Deputy Fahy spoke of the fact that at the present moment children in Dublin attending secondary schools seem to be forced to do an altogether disproportionate amount of home work. I was interested in that remark of Deputy Fahy, because it happens to be an experience of my own. I am acquainted with a child attending a secondary school whose life seems to be a burden because of the extremely heavy amount of home work which she is compelled to do. It is an amount of home work altogether out of proportion to the amount of work actually done in the school. Deputy Fahy suggested one means of dealing with that, a rather drastic means. He suggested that the number of school days might be increased, or that the amount of holidays might be cut down and the home work at the same time cut down. I do not know that any possible remedy is capable of being found at the moment. I think it is largely a matter of accommodation, and it is possible that through excessive zeal the teachers, without knowing it, would be inflicting an injustice on pupils. For that reason it is worth airing the matter in the Dáil, at any rate.

There are a great many subjects comprised in these Estimates that one could discuss at great length, matters such as the teaching of Latin and Mathematics in secondary schools and the question of the relation between the Matriculation and the Leaving Certificate. All these questions might be discussed at very great length, but, like the question of home work, perhaps the best course is only to refer to them in order that some attention may be devoted to them.

Deputy J.J. Byrne does not approve of the Gaelicisation policy of the Government, and that produces a very interesting suggestion from Deputy Patrick Hogan, with which, like Deputy Tierney, I find myself unable to agree. Like Deputy Tierney, I agree that it is worth examination and discussion. There is one thing that Deputy Hogan said with which I am in entire agreement. He said that too much confidence was placed on school teaching to save the Irish language. He said, further, that the teaching of the language by itself in the schools would not restore it as a spoken language in Ireland. There is no doubt in my mind that we are placing too much confidence in the schools to save the language. We are taking it for granted that the Irish teaching which the children in the English-speaking districts are getting will, in the course of time, produce an Irish-speaking people. I do not think that is going to happen, because a gap is left after children leave the school until the period when they reach more mature age and take up work. There is no form of continuation school, no night school or folk school by which they could improve and consolidate the knowledge they got in the primary schools. That is a gap which, I am convinced, will, in most cases, unless they have tremendous interest in the language, result in the absolute disappearance of the grammatical or book knowledge which they may have gained in the schools. Deputy Byrne wanted to know what useful purpose the Gaelicisation policy of the Government was going to achieve. I do not think anybody with any sense would question that policy on the same lines as Deputy Byrne questions it. Suffice it to say in answer to Deputy Byrne that nationality is the basis of education, and if the Gaelic language, which is subject to so many attacks in this country within recent months, is not taught in the schools, if it is allowed to die, then there is no doubt the hope which Deputy Byrne expresses, that the children would be quite satisfied, will be achieved, but at what a loss?

In regard to the speech of the Minister when introducing the Estimate, I was very pleased to hear, in spite of criticisms to the contrary, that the School Attendance Act has been successful. The figures the Minister gave were interesting and illuminating. I had doubts that the Act was going to prove beneficial to the children, but I am convinced now, having seen it operating in the country, that it is one of the best pieces of legislation passed by this Dáil since its inception. I was glad to hear the figures relating to the numbers of students from the Gaeltacht attending preparatory colleges. That is a good thing. Could the Minister give us any indication when the transfer will take place of Colaiste na Mumhan at Mallow to the Gaelic-speaking districts? Mallow is in the heart of the Gaeltacht, and two places in Cork have been recommended—Coolea and Ballyvourney. I would like to know when the Minister intends to transfer that college to one of the Irish-speaking areas I have mentioned.

In looking through the Estimates I was sorry to note a steady decrease in the amount asked for technical education. Undoubtedly, it is a good thing that the Estimate for primary and secondary education shows a steady increase, but the Estimate for technical education in 1924-25 was £201,585 and that has dropped to £184,739. Like other Deputies, I am curious about the Government's policy with regard to the Report of the Commission on Technical Education. I hope some information will be given us when the debate is concluding as to the Government's proposals in the matter. I regret also to notice the decrease in the Estimate for elementary schools in the City. There is a decrease of something like £6,500 for night schools. I think when the Minister spoke of economies it was very bad economy to commence on some of the items in this Estimate. One item is that of £6,500 which I have just mentioned.

I was sorry to note a decrease which means the practical elimination of the Irish summer courses for teachers. It was stated that out of 13,300 teachers, there are still nearly 6,000 who do not possess a bi-lingual or Ard-teastas certificate for the teaching of the Irish language. It would be well if the Minister stated what he proposes to do to bridge that gap and enable the 6,000 to acquire the bi-lingual certificate within a reasonable time.

Looking through the White Paper with regard to the Gaeltacht Commission Report, I find the Government's attitude set out in paragraph 51:—

That special local courses, which will not interfere with the ordinary working of the schools, be organised at suitable times for the purpose of helping teachers in the Gaeltacht at present unable to impart the whole course of primary education in Irish, to become so qualified.

The Government set out that they do not find this possible but that the following alternative arrangement is under consideration:

The appointment of special organisers who would travel from district to district, organising in the schools instruction through the medium of Irish, and, where necessary, assisting teachers who already have a knowledge of the language to improve their proficiency to the required standard.

That might provide an alternative for the abolition of the summer courses, but I do not think that it would work out successfully. There is another way out which the Minister might take into consideration. There is a lack of co-operation existing between the Department of Education and the local County Committees of Technical Instruction. The services of the Irish teachers employed by the County Committees are availed of at night. Classes are mostly held at night in country districts. During the day time the teachers are free and I do not see why some arrangement should not be arrived at so that the teachers under the County Committees could attend schools in districts where students are not otherwise sufficiently equipped or facilitated to learn the language. Closer co-operation between the County Committees and the Department would result in some alternative for the abolition of the summer courses. That abolition is going to do harm.

Another point mentioned here was the question of school libraries. Some arrangements should be made by the Department of Education by which a library scheme would be put into operation and under which the primary schools could avail of the libraries worked by the County Council. In the Cork County Council we have, under the administration of the County Council, a very successful county library scheme, and in something like 210 schools that has been taken advantage of by the teachers. Some teachers, to whom I have been talking, have assured me that it filled a long felt want. I am sure the experience of those teachers would be the experience of every school in the country were this scheme adopted.

One other question which I do not think has been referred to is with reference to the question of the provision of school buildings. I suggest that some better arrangements should be made with regard to the erection, maintenance and enlargement of school buildings than the present arrangement. I want some information from the Minister when he is replying with regard to the schools that I have been pressing him about for a long time—Adrigole school, which is in the Gaeltacht, and Belgooly school, which is in the Galltacht. The reason I mention the Adrigole school is that in the Government White Paper in connection with the Gaeltacht Report we have it stated that provision for the erection of school buildings, not alone for the Gaeltacht but for the English-speaking areas as well, was in course of preparation. I hope we will get some information on that point before the debate closes.

I think that the amount of money allocated for the cleaning and heating of schools is too small. I should think that should be an all State charge and the responsibility not divided between the local people and the State. Last year, in connection with this Estimate, I referred to the advisability of an extension of the use of the cinema, or at least lantern slides in the schools. Nothing has been done on that matter since, and nothing has been suggested by the Minister in this regard. I suggest that he should give consideration to that question. Some of the districts in my constituency of West Cork. Castletownbere in particular, would be much benefited by such a scheme. We suggest that a travelling teacher could be sent round to visit these schools and give lectures on history and geography which would be illustrated by these pictures or lantern slides. That would be the means of inducing the children to attend school. It would give them an added interest in school life, and would prove a great attraction to them in continuing their studies. Another point on which no information was given by the Minister, when introducing the Estimate, was the question of the teaching of traditional Irish singing in the schools. Some time ago that question was raised in the Dáil. We would like to have from the Minister some definite statement as to the treatment of traditional Irish singing in the primary schools. I hope the Minister will give us some information on that, when he comes to reply, because that is a subject that has been sadly neglected.

Reference has been made to the question of the school books. I agree that the prices of school books are absolutely out of all proportion to the capacity of many parents in the country to pay. The prices of these school books are unreasonable. There is no doubt whatever that were the Government to set up some particular board or authority under the Department of Education to whom would be given the job of publishing suitable school texts, that those texts could be issued to the children at a very reasonable cost. In fact, they could be issued at cost price to children in the Gaeltacht as was suggested in the Gaeltacht Commission Report. One example of the cost of these books is given when I say that five years ago the cost of a one hundred and twenty page copy book was 2d; to-day the cost of a forty-eight page copy book is one penny. Any parent with say, six or seven school-going children who will at the start of the year have to equip the children with copy books as well as the readers that will be required for the children, will find that the small wages paid at present, especially to the agricultural labourers in the country, means to him that he is faced with an almost impossible task. No parent likes to send his children to school and to know that they are worse equipped than the children of other parents. The Minister should give more attention to that question than has been given up to the present.

The suggestion made by Deputy Tierney last year and also in the course of this debate that suitable text books should be taken in hands and published by the State at a reasonable price is a suggestion that is worthy of more consideration than appears to have been given to it by the Government up to the present. Complaints have been made that there are many unsuitable books in use in the schools, particularly history books. I agree. I have been reading through some of them in the last few days. There is very little in them but a hard metallic statement of facts. They are, unfortunately, written in such a style that no child would acquire an interest in the subject which they teach. History written in such a style is not made sufficiently interesting to the children. In these books on history there is very little given as to the conditions or the social life of the people, or the customs of the people in ancient Ireland. Very little attention has been devoted in these books to make the history attractive to the children in the schools. Had these histories been written, for instance, on the principle of A. M. Sullivan's "Story of Ireland," the subject would be made much more attractive to the pupils. At present the history taught in the schools seems to be only a collection of the dates at which certain incidents occurred, and very little else.

Another thing in connection with this is that sufficient attention is not devoted, I maintain, to the teaching of local history. When the teaching of local history is made more attractive to the children a better type of citizens will be built up in this country, people with a good independent, broadminded outlook. The children of to-day would thus, in the next generation, be people of a broadminded, independent outlook. I believe that if the teaching of local history were attended to from this angle the children would get a better understanding of their country, and they would better realise their responsibilities and their duties to the country. Sufficient attention has not been devoted in the way of teaching it. Deputy Clery, in the course of his speech, made a plea for closer co-operation between the County Committees of Technical Instruction and the Department of Education. I should like to support that. I believe that the services of the agricultural and horticultural instructors should be utilised in the same way as I have suggested that the services of the Gaelic teachers should be utilised for the furtherance of the studies of the children in the Irish language. At present agriculture seems to be despised by many people in this country. The tilling of the soil does not attract the possibilities that it should. I believe that if more attention were given in school hours, or even after school hours, to demonstration plots, more interest could be aroused in the minds of the children in country districts in agricultural pursuits.

Under Vote 49, for Science and Art. I presume we can deal with this matter. I find under that that there is £2,400 allotted for publications in Irish, that is, grants-in-aid towards the preparation and publication of translations of original works of general literature. We would like the Minister to give some attention to that point, and if he would say how far the scheme has progressed. For instance, how many translations from foreign authors have already appeared, and what original works have been sanctioned, and the grant made in each case towards the publication.

In reference to (B) (1)—"Publications and Plays in Irish (Grant-in-Aid)" and "An Comhar Dramíochta"—I may mention that last year I had occasion to criticise this sub-head. I should like to know from the Minister whether this grant-in-aid is applicable to any other society than that which is recognised in Dublin, and whether, in the case of a dramatic society operating with his sanction in the country, such, for instance, as that in Cork, any financial assistance is given for the production of Irish drama. If that grant is to secure the best possible results, I think that some encouragement ought to be given to country dramatic societies which, like the Dublin Society, are endeavouring to propagate Gaelic literature. In regard to the grant-in-aid of £500 given for "Preparation of Records of Irish Speech," I would like to know how much has been done in that direction, how many records have been prepared, and whether such records are obtainable by the public, and, if so, where they are to be got.

In connection with educational facilities for Gaelic-speaking districts. I may mention that some time ago, when we had a debate on the Gaeltacht, we secured a good deal of valuable information, but I find that we missed some information on points which come under this Vote, and I am sure that the Minister will endeavour to answer them before he concludes. It is stated in paragraph 4 in the White Paper dealing with educational facilities in the Gaeltacht: "That systematic steps be taken to ascertain the number of teachers in the Irish-speaking districts who are not likely to acquire this essential qualification within reasonable time." The comment on that is: "This information is now in the hands of the Government." The Minister should let us know, if possible, what is the relative proportion of teachers who have got the bilingual certificate and the Ard-Teástas and those who have not yet qualified or who would not be able to qualify in this respect within reasonable time.

Paragraph 5 states "That all teachers who are not likely to qualify in a reasonable time to impart the whole course of primary education through the medium of Irish be removed from schools in the Irish-speaking districts, within a period which, as far as possible, shall not exceed three years; and from schools in the higher percentage areas of the partly Irish-speaking districts within a period which, as far as possible, shall not exceed five years." The Government comment on that recommendation was that as it stood it would present great practical difficulties. It goes on to state "Before the problem is dealt with it would be desirable that a small committee of managers and representatives of the Department of Education should investigate the question in all its bearings. If such a committee could present an agreed report there would be much less danger of friction in the carrying out of whatever changes might be considered necessary and feasible, as the result of the committee's investigation to meet the needs of the Gaeltacht. The Government hopes to be able to set up such a committee."

I should like to know from the Minister whether such committee was set up and, if so, whether its report has been presented and when it will be available to Deputies. In connection with Paragraph 10 (Recommendation 55) it is stated: "That in schools in the Gaeltacht in which Irish is the sole medium of instruction, and the school-work is carried out efficiently, teachers who are reported as ‘highly efficient' be granted a ten per cent. bonus on their salary and teachers reported as ‘efficient' a five per cent. bonus." The comment of the White Paper on that is "The Government accept the principle of special recognition of efficient teaching through the medium of Irish. A suitable scheme is being prepared." Being very curious and having addressed many questions to the Minister I do not think that it is any harm to ask whether that scheme has yet seen the light and, if not, when he expects that it will do so. I have no great quarrel with the administration of the Department of Education and this is one of the Votes which I do not like to see decreasing. I should, in fact, like to see it increase because any money spent on education is well spent. The Department of Education is about the one Department which does not leave itself open for much adverse criticism on administrative details. I have no great quarrel with that Department and I trust when the Minister winds up the Debate that he will give the information asked for on the various points which have been raised, particularly those in reference to the Gaeltacht which I have drawn to his attention.

I did not intend to intervene in this debate, and I hesitated to do so now because I did not want to run across the trend of the discussion so far, for what I have to say is more in the nature of a personal explanation than really a contribution to the matter. The Minister, in the course of his speech introducing the Vote, challenged certain figures of mine, particularly the statement that though the Estimates were designed to give the impression that expenditure on educational services for the current year would represent an increase of £257,230 upon the actual expenditure upon the same services for 1926-7, at the same time, of this apparent increase, £194,000 was being absorbed by the office of the Minister. The Minister is anxious to know where I got my figures. I think I made it clear in my speech on the Vote on Account that the figures which I gave of the respective expenditures on the several groups of services were all-in or inclusive figures giving the total costs for the groups. They thus included not only the nominal costs, as represented by the sum of the Votes specially ascribed for the services in each group, but also the expenditure in respect of each such service which appears on other Estimates and is met on other Votes.

In calculating the total cost of educational services I would like to point out that I had to rely on an uncorrected proof copy of the Estimates which was furnished to the Party on these benches a couple of days before the Vote on Account was taken. According to the figures given in that copy, the total expenditure in connection with the Office of the Minister was expected to be £381,297, which figure I naturally took for the purpose of comparison, and not the figure of £166,294 which appears in the Estimates in Vote 45 proper. I do not think that I was wrong in taking the figure of £381,297. I think that when we are considering the public services by groups in that fashion we ought to take into account the total cost of administering the services, and, undoubtedly, in addition to the £166,294 given in this copy as the Vote to be asked for in respect of the Office of the Minister, we have also to take into account the amount which is asked for under other Votes in respect of the Department. We cannot, for instance, leave out of account the amount asked for under Vote 17 for Rates, or the amount under Vote 11 for Office Accommodation, or the amount under Vote 22 for Printing.

Does the Deputy suggest that Vote 11 is legitimately described as expenses on the bureaucratic side of the Office? I do not want to interrupt the Deputy, but I wish to get the matter clear. I quite see how the Deputy was misled. I suggest to him that it is not fair to include in the bureaucratic administration expenses the building of schools and colleges on which practically the whole £190,000 was spent.

I admit that to the extent of £63,000 possibly——

To the extent of £63,000 I may have erred. However, I do admit, and I was proceeding to say, that when considering the cost and the actual expenditure for 1926-27, I do not think I took into account the amount expended in that year on new works and buildings.

It is on that Vote, as I have pointed out, that the Deputy will find that the total of £190,000 is, except for a couple of thousand pounds, practically spent on school buildings and college buildings.

The only thing I have to guide me is the——

There is a reference to Vote 11, and if the Deputy will look at Vote 11 he will find that it is there.

I was going on to deal with that, because I did look at Vote 11. I find, out of a total sum of £136,700 which was asked for in the year 1926-27 in respect of new buildings and the adaptation of existing buildings, £63,938 was spent.

There is the other question of bureaucracy. There may have been increases in that matter, but not in bureaucracy. I refuse to admit that the building of schools is portion of the bureaucratic expenses. That is the whole point at issue. The amount does not matter. It is not a bureaucratic expense.

Neither is it an actual increase. I think, if you will permit me to develop the matter a little further, I will succeed in showing that if there were not castles in Spain there may have been schools in Spain. The figure of £194,000 which I debited to the Office of the Minister for the year 1926-27 is based on the Appropriation Accounts. A sum of £179,461 was expended on Vote 45 for the Office of the Minister for Education. Adjusting that figure, as it should be adjusted, to take into account the expenditure on fuel, light, water, rates, office accommodation, stationery and printing, superannuation and Post Office, we get £194,000. As I have already said, owing to the fact that these figures have involved a considerable amount of abstracting from estimates of something like 305 pages, and owing to the great haste at which they had to be compiled, I did omit to take into account the amount expended in 1926-27 under Vote 11 for new works. I now find that the expenditure for the Department of Education during that year was £63,000 odd on new works. That amount has to be added to the £194,000 from the Office of the Minister for Education, making a total expenditure during the twelve months——

On the Office of the Minister?

In connection with the Department, the total expenditure in connection with the service. I am taking the figures as they appear in the Estimate.

The total expenditure in connection with the service. If you take Vote 45 you will find that the gross estimate over and above the other amounts to be expended——

That includes primary, secondary and technical education.

Exactly. There is office accommodation, fuel and light ——

Would the Minister allow the Deputy to continue his speech?

That increases the total cost of the services in the educational group for 1926-27 to £4,658,238. This figure of £4,658,238 is now increased to £4,851,530, which, according to the present Estimate, is apparently to be devoted either directly per the Votes that are specially ascribed to the educational services or indirectly through other Votes, such as fuel, light, public works and buildings, Post Office, etc., for the service of education for the year 1929-30. In my speech on the Vote on Account, I gave the Minister for Education and the Government credit for proposing to increase by £257,230 the total expenditure on education during the current year. This figure was based upon the sum of £381,297, which was given in the uncorrected proof of the Estimates, in connection with the Office of the Minister for the current year, but on examining the Estimates actually published I find that the total expenditure on the Office of the Minister for Education is estimated now not to exceed £380,697. After making the necessary adjustment for the difference between the figures as given in the proof copy, and as given ultimately in the Estimates actually published and for the expenditure on new works in 1926-27, I now find that I was more generous to the Government and the Minister than they deserved, and that the actual apparent increase over and above the amount actually expended in 1926-27 will not be £257,000 odd, but only £192,692. The Office of the Minister is to be responsible, directly or indirectly, for £122,759 of this apparent increase. The Minister, if I can foresee or gauge the tenor of his speech from his interruptions, will endeavour to make capital out of these figures——

—and to say that a large part of the £122,000 is accounted for by a proposed increased expenditure on new works, grants for buildings, and rearrangements and adaptations of existing buildings for educational purposes. In respect of that I would like to point out to the Minister that his criticism of the figures has done me one good service because I have gone back to them again and in examining the total cost of the Minister's Department, I find that the Estimate for the proposed new works under that Department is, in some part at any rate, illusory and misleading. For instance, as I have already said, I find from the Appropriation Accounts for 1926-1927 that the sum actually voted for grants for buildings of various sorts for educational purposes during that year amounted to £136,700, whereas the amount actually expended in that year upon such buildings was only £63,938, or less than half of the total voted. In the year 1927-1928, possibly by some miscalculation, the amount voted was only £113,950, whereas the amount expended was £125,940. In 1928-1929, however, the previous year's miscalculation seems to have been heroically remedied because, although there was voted for new buildings on account of the Education Department a sum of £175,000, according to the Estimates for 1929-1930, the estimated total expenditure which has accrued during the year which has just elapsed upon these new works is only £69,600. Now, is it a mere coincidence that that £69,600 is just a little in excess of the £63,000 odd which was the actual expenditure during 1926-1927?

Arising out of that, is it the practice of this Department, in order to convey the impression to the public that the Government is spending each year an increasing amount on education, to over-estimate the amount which they anticipate will be spent in one year upon new works and buildings? Because if you take the two years I have mentioned, the figures given for 1926-1927, and the figures which appear in the Estimates as the total estimated expenditure which has accrued during the year 1928-1929, one can see that it is quite customary for the Department to over-estimate in that way, and if we take into consideration the fact that out of the £175,000 which was voted last year only £69,000 odd was expended, and make an adjustment on the Estimate for this year of this amount of £190,704 which appears in Vote 11, by deducting from it a sum of not less than £100,000, we will find that, instead of there being any substantial increase in the Estimates in the educational group, the amount which the Minister proposes to expend this year practically remains the same as it was in the year 1926-1927.

That was the whole tenor, practically, of my criticism of the Minister's Estimate. I do admit that I was wrong in saying that the increase in the Estimate had practically been swallowed up by bureaucracy. Obviously, from the figures which I have quoted I cannot substantiate that, and accordingly I withdraw it. But my main purpose, in my speech on the Vote on Account, was to show that the Government, while pretending to secure economies in certain services by cutting down Estimates which, for some purpose of the Government had previously been inflated, was at the same time pretending to increase the amount of public money which was to be devoted to educational services. I think that on the figures which I have given, and the fact that we are to assume that the expenditure during the coming year in respect of new works and buildings will bear the same relation to the Estimate for the current year as the actual expenditure bore to the Estimate of last year, I am entitled to assume that the actual expenditure on education in the year 1929-1930, instead of being increased by something like £257,000 on an Estimate of £4,800,000, will remain practically what it was in the year 1926-1927, and that was the gravamen of my criticism of the Minister's Department.

I must say that the gravamen of the Deputy's criticism of the Department was that there was an increase of £190,000 in bureaucracy, and he has not shown that in bureaucracy there has been any such increase. I will read what the Deputy said.

I will read it myself.

He withdraws that, and I am satisfied.

The discussion on this Estimate ranges over such a very wide field and raises such questions of general policy and of particular interest that it is difficult to make a coherent statement, in anything like a reasonable space of time, that will deal adequately with the whole subject. Before I go into a few matters of general interest I would like to refer briefly to the speech we heard this afternoon from Deputy Byrne. When listening to the Deputy I was reminded of one of the main problems that I used to be up against in my old school-mastering days, one of the problems that in fact every practical teacher is up against from time to time. He will always find in his class a few boys to whom he will explain things and make them perfectly clear, as he thinks; he will go away with the impression that such boys have learned and understand what has been taught to them, but when the subject comes up again in a few weeks' time he will find that the same invincible ignorance is just as present as ever it was. And so we find with Deputy Byrne. Last year he raised some of the points that he raised to-day. These matters were explained to him; the Minister went to very great trouble to explain it, and other Deputies did their best, too. But we have Deputy Byrne bobbing up again this year with exactly the same kind of complaint, with exactly the same want of evidence with regard to the allegations which he throws around, and without, indeed, as far as I can see, very much thought or very much consideration for the statements he makes. I really do not know whether I am to take him as really making these charges about the standard of primary education, because towards the end of a speech, when he wanted to establish another case, he spoke about the efficient instrument which primary education was at the moment.

Now, what is the value of such evidence as Deputy Byrne brought forward? He quoted certain figures with regard to a very limited number of children in the city of Dublin during the year 1927. They had no relation whatsoever to the total number of children at school, no relation whatsoever to the number of children in other countries with which he ventured to compare the standard here. He has forgotten, apparently, although he was reminded of it last year, that he was dealing with a period when the School Attendance Act was only about six months in operation. Other Deputies and the Minister made it quite plain that it might be four, five or six years before the full effect of the School Attendance Act was obvious. Many of the pupils to whom Deputy Byrne was referring were children who were, very likely, out of school for a number of years, because we know that before the School Attendance Act came into operation children left school at eleven, twelve and thirteen years of age, many of them before they had reached the Fourth Standard. That no longer prevails, and there is no use in Deputy Byrne producing an extremely limited set of figures to prove a general case. He spoke of examinations but he said nothing of the standard of these examinations, and he said nothing of the standard compared with the standard in other countries. It is again a case of taking a particular instance, as is so often done, and drawing a general conclusion from it. One would think that a man of Deputy Byrne's scholastic and academic attainments would see the fallacy of that line of argument. I am afraid that when we see the nature of the arguments that Deputy Byrne so often brings to the consideration of questions in this House we must have a certain amount of sympathy with the man in the street who begins to question the value of some of these scholastic and academic distinctions.

Mr. Byrne

Might I ask the Deputy if there was not an attendance of 86 per cent. in the city of Dublin?

Mr. O'Connell

Even if there was, that does not affect the argument in the least.

Mr. Byrne

To my mind it does.

Mr. O'Connell

That is where the Deputy and I differ. A child may have attendance every day for six months in 1927, but we have no record of that child's attendance for 1926, 1925 and 1924. In any case that does not prove what the Deputy set out to prove, that the standard of education in this country is lower than it was, or, as he said, that we are fifty years behind the times compared with other countries. If he wants to compare the standard let him take boys or girls who have attended for the same number of years regularly, the same class of schools, and then we will have something to go on. Picking up a few children in one particular area and trying to base on that a standard of education for the whole country is of no value of any kind.

There is one matter that I think arises in a general way on this question of education that has not been raised hitherto in the debate, and that I think is well worthy of attention. It has been previously mentioned, both inside and outside the Dáil, that people, when looking at the amount of money devoted to education in this country, while they do not complain of the amount, undoubtedly express a doubt as to whether or not full value is being got for that money. But I am afraid that many of those who ask that question do so without regard to whether or not the programme or curriculum generally, in kind or quantity, is sufficient or right, or whether the teaching staff is properly qualified, fully trained, and is working diligently and assiduously. Speaking for myself, as far as these two aspects of the problem are concerned. I believe there can be very little doubt. It is open to us to alter the programme if we think it necessary to do so. Here let me say that we have evidence in many quarters of a want of realisation of what should be done in the primary schools. If one were to agree with Deputy Byrne one would imagine that the primary school was expected to turn out fully qualified architects. That is not the work of the primary school.

Mr. Byrne

I never suggested that it was. I suggested that the pupils have the rudiments of drawing.

Mr. O'Connell

There is a long way between that and being able to draw plans. I forget the exact words used by the Deputy, but the impression left on my mind was that pupils would be expected to know something very much more than the rudiments of drawing. All that can be hoped to be done in the primary school is to lay the foundation, in fact, to put the child in the way of learning, training him to be able when he leaves school to embark on a course of education. You cannot hope to fill the child's mind—and it would be a wrong thing to attempt to do so—with a lot of information, and, as it were, to finish him off. You can only hope to bring him up to the age of 13 or 14 when he will be able to avail of further education. I wonder whether, in fact, we are getting full value for the money spent on education. But the aspect to which I would direct the Minister's attention is something different from what has been mentioned. I think it must be obvious to anybody that if the ordinary child is to gain the full benefit from the teaching in the school the child must be in ordinary normal health. I am afraid that that is a matter which has been very seriously neglected in this country up to the present. We find in our ordinary schoolrooms a state of affairs which is no longer found in a great many other countries, that is, the children all together in the same class—children of varying standards of health and varying standards of mental development. There is first the question of health. During the debate on the Vote for the Department of Local Government and Public Health attention was called to this matter, and, I think, we have no reason whatever to be satisfied with the progress that is being made in the matter of medical inspection and treatment of children. Some progress has been made, but it is exceedingly slow. That is not a matter for which the Minister for Education is directly responsible, but I suggest that it is a matter which directly affects the education of the country, because, if children are suffering from defective vision, defective hearing, adenoids, or the usual ailments that so many children, on investigation, are found to be suffering from, then it is obvious that these children cannot avail to the full of the teaching in the school. The teacher's work is, to that extent, wasted, and to that extent we are not getting value for the money spent on education.

But there is another aspect of this question which, so far as I know, has received practically no attention whatsoever in this country, but which is made the subject of special study in other countries. That is the question of the abnormal, or perhaps I should say the sub-normal child. Every teacher must know that in a class of children there will be 75 per cent., or perhaps more, of normal development and normal intelligence, who will be able to make normal progress in their standard, but there will be a small percentage of what are sometimes spoken of as stupid children—a term that should never be applied to them—or dull children, as the case may be. They are children not fully or normally developed, and they have a hampering effect on the class, because in an ordinary class the attention of the teacher will be devoted, and perhaps rightly so in the circumstances, very largely to these children, to the detriment of the normal children. The progress of the class will be determined to some extent by the progress of these children. In most other countries there is a segregation of such children. They are not treated as stupid children or made to feel that they are backward, but they are segregated into a class and get special treatment. They are taught by teachers who have a special aptitude and treated in a manner suitable to their mental development. We have nothing of that kind here so far. I admit that there might be difficulties in the rural areas, but in the cities especially this is a matter that ought to be tackled, to see whether or not such a segregation of sub-normal children could be made and have them treated and taught in accordance with their mental development and their ability to absorb the teaching. In some schools which I visited in the United States last autumn I saw this carried out to a very great extent. Special treatment is provided for these children and they are taught hand work, and are very happy because they are all, as it were, equal in their attainments and have no feeling of inferiority which so-called dull or backward children have very often when they are in the same class as normally-developed children.

There is another class of children to whom no special consideration seems to be given in an organised way—that is, mentally-deficient children, who are even in a lower standard as regards mental development than those to whom I have referred. They, too, are not dealt with in the organised way in which they should be dealt with. In fact, if there is one thing in our educational system that would strike a stranger, it is the want of attention to the physical well-being of the children, whether in the matter of medical inspection and treatment or of special attention to children of sub-normal development. I should like to repeat and emphasise what I have spoken of on other occasions, that we have no department in connection with the Ministry of Education whose special duty it would be to find out what is being done in this way in other countries. I think there ought to be connected with the Department a special branch which would do research work and find out what is being done in other countries in this matter, what progress is being made, what new methods are being adopted, not only in regard to educational administration generally, but in regard to teaching and a great many matters of that kind, so as to keep the Ministry in touch with educational progress throughout the world. It is a pity that we have not such a branch to which people interested in educational progress and welfare might have recourse for information, and which would from time to time issue publications for the information of people, because if there is one thing we want more than anything else, it is a public opinion in regard to education. We have no informed public opinion in this country in the matter of education.

The question of the health of the school children brings me to the matter of school accommodation. I do not want to go into this question again at great length, because I did so last October, but I should like to ask what progress has been made, if any, in providing school accommodation. I think it was in June last that the Minister spoke of the number of school buildings required— 350 new buildings, 550 schools which required enlargement, and some 900 which required repairs of one kind or another. Perhaps the Minister will tell us what progress has been made in that matter. I regret to see that the amount for building new schools this year has been reduced by £25,000. Perhaps the Minister will tell us the reason for that. Is it that he has overtaken the school-building programme, or is it purely in the interests of economy, or that he has not been able to spend the £100,000 voted last year? I think we should hear from the Minister something with regard to the question of school accommodation. It is a matter that is causing a great deal of trouble, especially in Dublin.

I should also like to hear from him what progress, if any, has been made in the matter of the upkeep of schools. Does he look forward to any change in the present system, or want of system? We know that there have been developments in some counties during the past year. Schools have been condemned by the local boards of health. Is the Minister satisfied that it is sufficient, from his point of view, to put the onus for the upkeep of the schools upon the local manager? He cannot but be aware of the practice that prevails in the majority of the rural schools of the country in the matter of ordinary cleanliness, apart from the question of the heating of the schools. The usual practice was, and is, in a very large number of cases, that the children, after their day, are asked to brush the schools. I think that that is a wholly reprehensible practice and one that should not continue, but the Minister must know that it is the practice in a very large number of primary schools. Parents, in many cases, are objecting and, in my opinion, rightly objecting, to the continuation of this practice. I would like to know, in case they object, what is to be done. How are the schools to be cleaned? Is he satisfied that it is the onus of the managers to provide for the cleaning of the schools and for their upkeep?

A question was raised here about the price of books and the cost to the parents. It is a heavy expense, indeed, on many parents, and that is a consideration which I think must be taken into account in reference to the constitutional position. We are in a different position from people across the water in this that we have a written Constitution. One of the Articles of our written Constitution is that the citizens of the Free State have a right to free primary education. What exactly does that entail? What obligation does that put upon the State so far as the individual young citizen is concerned? I suggest to the Minister that the child who has to pay for the means of education—school books and school exercises—and who has to provide in some form or another for the heating of the schools to which he goes, is not being provided with free elementary education. I submit for the Minister's consideration that, speaking as a layman and not as a lawyer, if the parent of a child proceeded against the Minister under Article 10 of the Constitution he might very well be upheld in the courts if he insisted on having books and other things necessary for free education up to the age of fourteen provided for him. In any case, in the matter of school accommodation and equipment I think it is certainly the duty of the State to provide that for the child, and we know that in the matter of school accommodation and equipment there is very much indeed wanting at the present time.

Deputy O'Clery referred to one or two matters of importance. I do not know whether Deputy O'Clery is aware of the fact that in school there is at the present time on the curriculum a subject known as rural science. He gave me the impression that the farmers, and the people in the country were not satisfied with the education that the children are getting, and he thinks it is perhaps for that reason. My own experience is that I have never known an ordinary man satisfied with the education that is being given in the schools; he always finds something to complain of in it, and to say that things were different in his day, when he was at school. I myself, long before rural science was made a compulsory subject in the schools, thought that it would be a good thing to teach children in the rural areas the elements of plant life, to give them some experience in the matter, and to teach the rudiments underlying these things. But I found as a result that the children were withdrawn from my school because their parents said that they sent their children to school to learn something and not to dig the master's garden. I am afraid that that has been the experience of more people than myself. Deputy O'Clery told us that the farmers living near the schools would be glad to place a rood or so of ground at the disposal of the Department as a playground. Deputy O'Clery and I come from the same county, and I would be glad if Deputy O'Clery would find some of those farmers who are willing to place a rood or two of ground at the disposal of the Department for a playground. I have not met that particular farmer yet, anyhow.

Perhaps he means for a consideration?

Mr. O'Connell

He did not say so. He said farmers who would be glad to place it at the disposal of the Department. I think the price of land in the neighbourhood of schools would go up considerably if it was found that the Minister for Education was anxious to acquire land. I suggest, in that connection, something might be done when estates were being divided up by the Land Commission. It might then be possible. Unfortunately, you find that these ranches are not always in the neighbourhood of schools, but I think, perhaps, to some extent the difficulty might be met if, in transferring tenants to ranches, consideration was given to the necessity for providing plots of land in the neighbourhood of schools for playing fields and for the purpose of demonstration plots also.

Another matter—and this, I suppose, would be a matter more for the Public Health Department than the Minister for Education—that I would like to call attention to is the necessity for a pure water supply in connection with schools, whether in town or country. I think it ought to be the policy of the Minister for Education, or the Minister for Public Health, to insist, in so far as he can, on the provision of a pure water supply in connection with schools. I know schools in rural areas where the nearest water supply, and that but a mediocre supply, is half a mile distant from the schools. Children bring water in open buckets every morning for the use of the pupils every day. That is a matter, I think, that is deserving of very great attention.

There are a few other matters to which I shall refer briefly, and which I would like the Minister to deal with. A Departmental Committee sat for a considerable time some years ago in regard to the matter of the training colleges and the training of teachers generally. That Committee finished its labours, but we have heard nothing of the result. I would like to ask what has been the outcome of the inquiry, which extended for a considerable period, and I would like to know why we never heard what has been the result.

There is very great complaint in regard to the delay that occurs in the issue of diplomas to teachers who have been trained. There is one matter in connection with it that I want to call attention to, and that is the date that appears on the diplomas. The regulation is that a teacher must serve two years, after leaving the training college, as a probationary period. I think that is a rather considerable time. At the end of the two years, if the teacher's work is deemed satisfactory, he is told that his probation has been completed, and that his increments will begin to date from that time. But, in practice, the diploma is not issued for six or seven months later, and it often happens that the period is much longer. What occurs then is that the date which appears on the diploma is the date on which it has been issued rather than the date upon which the probationary period was completed. I suggest to the Minister that it is the latter date that should appear on the diploma, because the date of the completion of the probationary period is the significant date. The other date is a purely arbitrary one. It is whatever date it may be convenient for the Minister to sign the diploma and issue it. That date may be six weeks or six months after the date on which the teacher has completed his probationary period.

I now direct the Minister's attention to the question of the absence of teachers from school on account of illness. In this matter teachers suffer from a disability which other public servants are not subjected to. If a teacher is absent from school for more than a month on account of illness he has to provide and pay his own substitute. That imposes a very severe strain on the financial resources of a teacher, because, of course, it is at that particular time that he wants his salary most. If the teacher is unable to provide and pay a substitute during illness, then somebody else has to do it for him. This question was raised here before. I would like to know from the Minister if he has made any inquiries as to whether a more equitable system, so far as teachers are concerned, could not be devised, such, for instance, as by the transfer of teachers. That is what is done in most other countries. They have a number of teachers on what is called "supply"—extra teachers who are sent out to schools where the regular teacher is absent on account of illness. That is the practice, too, that is normal in the Civil Service and in other public services, and I say it should apply to teachers, so that if a teacher is absent on account of illness there will be someone to take his place. The teacher should not be obliged to provide a substitute, as he has to do at present, and pay the substitute out of his own pocket.

The question of the progress made in the teaching of Irish was raised. I agree with Deputy Mullins, who referred to the point, that the real trouble as to the continuation of the good effect of the work done in the national schools in the Galltacht arises after the children leave school. Deputy Pádraig O hOgáin asked if it were possible for children who spend six or seven years in a national school in the Galltacht to become Irish speakers at the end of that period? Well, it is possible. We have numerous instances of children who for six or seven years have been attending schools in the City of Dublin and in the Midlands and who are fluent speakers of the Irish language and are able to converse with native Irish speakers at the end of their school period. But what becomes of them then? That is the question, and that is where the difficulty lies. If we want to make our policy effective it is to that end of the problem, I think, that we must devote attention. It is all right, of course, in the Gaeltacht where the language is alive, but the problem that presents itself is, what can be done in the case of children who have acquired a good knowledge of the Irish language in schools in the Galltacht in the way of keeping them together and getting them to practise speaking the language. It is very difficult to know what can be done in that direction. Various things have been suggested, such as classes, societies, and scout organisations of one kind or another. All these things might, of course, be very useful in their way, but if we are to have any value for the money we are spending in the teaching of Irish in the schools in the Galltacht I believe that we must give attention to that aspect of the problem.

I now wish to refer to the suggestion that I have made before—that I would like to see issued by the Department to every school something in the nature of a monthly journal. That is being done at present in some other countries and in the Dominions, especially in South Africa and Australia. The Department of Education in these countries issues monthly, and sometimes at more frequent intervals, an official journal to the schools. The journal deals with such matters as administration, changes in the inspectorate, and publishes articles on modern teaching methods, as well as pointing to developments in the teaching of various subjects in other countries, and also suggesting new methods to the teachers. I refer now to the need for having something in the nature of an educational publication which would keep the teachers in touch with the latest developments in their particular work. Such a publication would, I think, be very useful from many points of view. I suggest to the Minister that his Department might consider whether it should not prepare and issue a journal of that kind.

I am almost ashamed—but as Deputy Tierncy said, we have to keep on repeating things—to have to refer to a publication known as "The Notes for Teachers," which was promised so long ago as 1925 or 1926. I have referred to the matter year after year, asking why it has not been issued. Like the rules, which we hope some day to see issued, I suppose that we shall likewise see the "Notes for Teachers" issued some day. I suggest that it is more important that a publication of this kind should be issued than that inspectors should be going around the country pointing out, in a few schools, how certain work should be done. I think it would be far more important to detach two or three inspectors, as was suggested by the programme conference, and set them to do this work. In that way their work, as set out in the "Notes," would reach all teachers instead of the small number of teachers that they may happen to come in contact with in the course of their inspection. I suggest that this is a very important matter from the point of view of the teaching service as a whole, that the most modern methods of dealing with the subjects taught in the schools, and especially those new subjects that were put on the programme lately, should be brought to the notice of the teachers. This information, instead of having it confined to the few teachers the inspectors can reach in the course of their visits, should be put together in such a form that all the teachers in the country will have it before them at all times and particularly when they find it necessary to refer to it.

I must candidly confess that I am disappointed with the Estimate of the Minister for Education, and particularly with his Estimate for technical education. I have drawn attention in past years to the inadequacy of the grants for technical instruction, but, protest that, notwithstanding, the grants seem to reduce year by year. I have the figures before me showing the net amount of the Estimates for the last five years. In 1925-26 the Estimate amounted to £167,720. That has shrunk gradually year by year until the figure this year is £141,217. If we had any proper vitality in the Department of Education a department of such national importance as that of technical instruction ought to have an increasing grant. Instead we have got a reduction every year, and this year we have practically the biggest reduction of any year. There has been a reduction of £26,500 in five years, or a reduction of 16 per cent. To-day the Minister puts forward for technical instruction the miserable estimate of 11d. per head of the population. There is no enthusiasm behind this department of technical instruction. Let us contrast what the Minister is doing for technical instruction with the other departments of education. Take the years I have given with regard to the Estimates for technical instruction, and take the Estimates for the same years for primary education.

The net Estimate for 1925-26 for primary education was £3,475,832. That Estimate has since grown to £3,610,793, and there is in the present year an increase of £134,961, or an increase of 4 per cent. as against a reduction of 16 per cent. in the case of technical instruction. We are spending on primary education £1 4s. 1½d. per head of the population as against a miserable 11d. on technical instruction. Taking secondary education, we find that in the year 1925-26 the Estimate was £261,535. That has grown to £300,800 in the present year, notwithstanding the financial stringency, an increase of £39,265 in the five years, or an increase of 15 per cent. We expend two shillings in the pound on secondary education as against 11d. on technical instruction. I have urged, when dealing with this matter on previous occasions, that in view of its importance from the point of view of employment, and of equipping our people to meet the battle of life, it was necessary there should be a larger expenditure on technical instruction. What is the very first, in fact the primary, recommendation of the Commission on Technical Instruction which the Minister set up and which reported on 5th October, 1927? It is given in page 51, paragraph 115, of their report:

"It is our view that a proper system of continuation education is of vital importance to the social and economic welfare of the people, and its organisation must be undertaken without delay."

Though that report was issued in October, 1927, here we are in April, 1929, and can it be said that any step whatever has been taken to give effect to that report? The Minister has told us he has a Bill to introduce that will give effect to the recommendations of that Commission. He has also told us on several occasions that it will be an expensive matter to carry out the recommendations of the Commission. It is quite obvious we are not going to see any of the recommendations given effect in the coming financial year, for there is no provision whatever in the Estimates for the carrying out of the recommendations. We are told that the local authorities must do more in that connection. The local authorities have struck their Estimates. In most cases there is no scheme before them. The local authorities are limited to the expenditure of 2d. in the pound under the 1899 Act for the purpose of technical instruction. Where is the money to come from? What provision is there for carrying out this recommendation which is immediately necessary?

I must say, frankly, that I am disappointed at the efforts of this Department to deal with this urgent problem. It has been pointed out in this House from time to time that the difficulty of getting employment for young people between the ages of 14 and 16 was a growing one. We all know that any boy or girl in the city or in the country under the age of 16 finds it exceedingly difficult to get employment. Practically all those boys and girls leave school at the age of 14. It has been urged that they should be retained where they have not got employment up to the age of 16. We are told there is no accommodation in the schools, that the schools are already overcrowded, but that makes the problem, to my mind, more urgent. We spend large sums in educating these young people to equip them for the battle of life, and we throw them out of the schools and leave them there at the most critical period of their lives. What happens? These boys and girls, after they have left school at the age of 14, register for employment at the unemployment exchanges. They come to these exchanges day after day for four or five months expecting to hear of something. No opening offers and they get disappointed with life, even the brightest and best of them. Then they turn their attention in other directions. They become a difficulty to the State and to their parents. That is the position in which these boys and girls are placed at the most critical and most useful period of their lives, though the Commission reported that they should be in continuation schools. The girls should be taught domestic economy and dress-making in order to make them useful citizens, and the boys should be taught how to work, and they should get some useful knowledge that would help them in getting employment.

That could all be done and most usefully done during the ages of fourteen and sixteen—the two most important years. To any of them who can get employment under the recommendations of the Commission this compulsory attendance is not to apply. There the case will be met. But the percentage, as I have said, of those of that particular age who cannot get employment is very large. That is a problem that we have urged again and again on the Ministry with the view to having something done to meet it. Those who are in touch with education know that if a boy or girl is allowed to run wild for two years, when they leave school—until they reach sixteen—then when they become qualified for unemployment grants under the Insurance Act at the age of sixteen, in order to get those grants they have to go to technical schools and qualify through their attendance. But then they have been running wild, as I have said, for two years. It is most difficult to make any progress with them because of their having been allowed to run wild for two years. Then we make it compulsory for them to attend technical schools when it is too late.

I feel so strongly upon this problem that comes before me in connection with the Department of Juvenile Employment in our City with which I have been connected for some years that I want to press this very much upon the attention of the Minister. We get 6,000 or 7,000 youngsters from our schools, boys and girls, every year, registering for employment. We are not, to our cost, able to find employment for one-tenth of them. If we can do as the Commission recommended that we should do with the balance that cannot find employment, we will make them much more eligible for employment. Many of these boys and girls become unemployable because they have no idea of work. They are so ignorant when they come along to an employer that the employer will not take the time or the trouble to train them. They must be trained. They must be equipped outside before they come along. We cannot get that done. I am satisfied that the number of unemployed in this country will continue at the present inflated figure until something is done to make many of them who are unemployable, employable. That is the problem that is involved in technical instruction. The object of technical instruction is to equip those and have them educated for the battle of life through a definite course of instruction. That is the object of it, and until steps are taken by the Ministry to do something on those lines to deal with this problem, I certainly, unless the Minister is prepared to give an undertaking to this House that something will be done in the immediate future, am going to vote against this Estimate.

Domhnall Ua Buachalla

Nílim ar aon intinn leis an rud a dubhairt Teachta Pádraig O h-Ógáin o chianaibh, nuair a bhí sé ag cainnt ar an gceist seo i dtaobh na Gaoluinne. Dubhairt sé gur aimsir agus airgead caithte le fánaigh an méid airgid agus an méid aimsire a caitheadh ag múineadh na Gaoluinne sa Ghalltacht. Táim ar aon aigne leis an rud a dubhairt Mícheál O Tighearnaigh, Teachta, go bhfuil obair mhaith thabhachtach á dhéanamh sna sgoileanna sa Ghalltacht. Bhíos féin le déanaí i scoil i gceart-lár na tíre in a bhfuil an Ghaoluinn a múineadh agus b'ionghna liom an oireadh Gaoluinne agus a bhí ag na páistí annsin. Do bhí beirt bhanmhúinteóirí sa sgoil sin agus an Ghaoluinn go maith ag duine acu agus ní raibh sé chó maith sin ag an mnaoi eile; ach, mar sin féin, bhí iongantas orm an rith cainnte a bhí ag na leanbhaí.

Sé an locht is mó atá agam ag Aire an Oideachais ná fuil stáir na tíre ag fáil cothrom na féinne sna scoileanna agus ná fuiltear ag múineadh na sgéalta fianaidheachta do na leanbhaí. Tá a fhios againn go bhfuil a lán sgéalta fianaidheachta againn—níos mó i bhfad agus níos fearr ná atá ag aon tír eile, agus ba choir na sgealta soin agus an stair do mhúineadh do na leanbhaíd'fhonn is an sprid ceart do thabhairt dóibh. Tá sean duine sa bhreac-Ghaeltacht agus d'fhiafruigheadh dhe, le déanaí, cad é a thuairim ar módh múineadh na Gaoluinne sna scoileanna. Sé an freagra a thug sé ná; "Níl aon eolas ag na scoláirí ar Fhionn Mac Cumhail no ar Aodhagán O Raghallaigh, Eoghain Ruadh O Néill no ar an bPiarsach féin, níl ach Gramar, gramar, gramar, acu." Tá an iomad gramair ann agus níl go leor de stair na tíre. Sé mo thuairimse dá múintí stair na tíre sna scoileanna, do bheadh an Ghaoluinn ag dul chun chinn níos fearr agus do bheadh cúis na teangan níos láidre indiu.

Tá siúl agam go mbeidh leabhair ag na páistí sar a bhfad i n-a mbeidh na sgealta i dtaobh Fhinn Mhic Chumhaill agus Eoghain Ruaidh agus laochra Gaedhil mar iad le fáil ionta.

My reason for intervening in the debate is that I would like to know from the Minister if he has any plans in connection with the use of wireless for educational purposes. It appears that there are very big developments of that kind on the continent and it will be interesting to know whether our Department of Education has considered how far they would go to facilitate schools that are prepared to instal loud-speakers and to use wireless for educational purposes. It would seem to me a thing worth considering whether the whole wireless service should not be taken over by the Education Department. So far as one can judge—though I know that a lot of the criticism is prejudiced criticism—our wireless is not a success from the entertainment point of view. It would seem worth considering whether it could not be made more useful for the people if applied entirely to educational purposes. On the occasion of the last debate on this Estimate Deputy Alton made this suggestion:—"If the Department of Education had a kind of supplementary inspectorate at their disposal which it could send down as itinerant teachers with special lantern lectures, especially in the district schools, such men might throw a little colour into what must be at times a rather drab curriculum and might stimulate the imagination of the students." It would seem wireless is the obvious answer to a suggestion of that kind. The suggestion itself has the great authority of Deputy Professor Alton behind it and it would seem to me that the most practical and obvious reply would be lectures from the wireless stations.

With regard to complaints cropping up year after year here on the state of schools, the ugly and bad buildings they are, the indifferent way in which they are maintained, and also the question of meals for school children, it appears to me that these things can only be remedied by a Minister who would exercise a very big moral influence on all connected with education. I doubt if these things could ever be attained by rules or regulations. If it be not impertinent to suggest it, we would like some particulars as to how far the Minister is exercising his moral influence on these matters. We would like to know how far he is endeavouring to urge upon those connected with education the ideal of making the schools, at least the country schools, the best that can be got in the way of rural civilisation. I think it would be possible to develop a healthy rivalry in the matter that would have extremely good results. I think it would be possible to get a lot of teachers and managers and others connected with education competing with each other so that there would be a very considerable improvement. It is shocking to think that a thing that can be so easily done as the improvement of a school building, that goes from bad to worse year after year, is not attended to when the slightest stimulus of three or four people in the parish could have the effect of making it quite a tolerable building.

In connection with meals for school children, it appears to me that if a local committee came into being in parishes here and there, undertaking to supply simple, necessary, wholesome food to such children as require it, it would be very desirable. I think it is very likely that the publicity such an enterprise would get would very quickly solve the problem over a great part of the country. If you once get a matter of that sort going it will make headway. I am quite sure a thing so simple would appeal to many people in the country and the example would undoubtedly be copied.

We agree with Deputy Good that the problem of extending technical education is one that demands very immediate attention. We are disappointed to find that the Vote is reduced under that heading. We are satisfied, anyhow, that there are not anything like enough trained inhabitants in this country. If we are to make progress we will have to put a lot more energy and enthusiasm into the question of technical education. When one reads that in certain cities on the continent not only is every day and every evening of the week availed of for technical classes, but that on Sunday mornings children are expected and are even compelled to attend technical classes, then it is obvious that we are running a great risk in allowing this subject to drag along here as it is dragging. The experience in certain districts where technical education has been put into operation, even under the limited possibilities now available, shows that the people would respond if they were given a fair lead.

We on this side very sincerely hope that the Minister will, before long, come to the Dáil with his proposal for putting the recommendations of the recent Commission into effect. It must be remembered there are certain industries in connection with which it is absolutely urgent and every day means a big loss. For instance, in connection with the fishing industry, there are a great many of the people interested, who hold that the recommendations regarding the training of young fishermen are not merely desirable but urgently necessary, and if they are delayed for any length of time it may be too late satisfactorily to put them into effect. Nobody wants to make a party matter out of the subject, and anything the Minister may propose will certainly get the utmost sympathy from this part of the House. I believe the time is coming when, as a celebrated man recently said, nations will be formidable not because of their size, though that may be important, nor merely because of their population, though that, too, may be important, but because of the number of their trained, intelligent and capable inhabitants.

I rise as a representative of the old generation. It is over 60 years ago since I started my education in the national school and I must say that I was filled with joy and satisfaction on hearing from every Bench in the Dáil the anxiety of Deputies to do all they could for the education of the present and future generations of boys and girls in the Saorstát. During the lengthy period of my existence education was up against a great many vicissitudes. We were ruled from Westminster and we had an Education Board that was not directly in touch with the people. The teachers were in a sad plight, without houses, with miserable salaries and with no inducement to stick to their work. But they did stick to their work and, speaking now as one of a generation, the greater part of which has passed away, I must say those old national teachers were the cream of the country. They taught by the hedges in the Penal Days and they taught the Irish race manfully and well. We have now come to a generation, judging by the speakers here to-day, composed of scholars. We have B.A.'s and men with many other qualifications, and all are anxious to further education. But we must look at the matter from another aspect. It is not by multiplying the B.A.'s or exporting them from the country that we are going to build up the nation. It is by going to the cabins of the labourer, the artisan, the small farmer and the fisherman, and, as Deputy O'Connell said, if there are brains and ability in those homesteads, we should set out to develop them and thus give benefit to the nation.

I must say, with regard to technical education, which has come in for sharp criticism to-night, that I was a member of the Technical Board for four years up to the date at which it was dissolved. I have a full knowledge of how they work education, and from my personal knowledge and experience during the last four or five years, I can say, on my honour as an Irishman, that it has not gone back, but that the Government and the Minister for Education who are responsible for its development are doing their best under the circumstances. A vast number of people in the country proclaim that the £4,000,000 which is being spent on education is too severe a drain on the resources of the nation. I am not of that opinion. I believe that on the education of our youth the future of the nation depends. I believe that, so far as their future is concerned, if we could only link up the children when they leave the schools at 14 years of age with the industrial development of our country and provide for them in factories and workshops, we would be carrying on the great work of nation building. It is sad to think, as Deputy Good said, that the vast bulk of our boys and girls, who cannot find employment through that agency which Deputy Good and other philanthropic gentlemen carry on for them, have to face the emigrant ship which brings them to foreign lands.

Let us put politics aside and do all that we possibly can with the resources at our command. Let us co-operate with Professor O'Sullivan, and in this respect I will say without fear of contradiction that he is the man in the gap. Since he took up the reins of education he has proved himself to be a thousand miles ahead of the old National Board that ruled this country for years. Let us not divide on this Vote. Let us be unanimous in passing the Estimate. Let us realise the difficulties of the Minister. Many people are crying out that we are going into debt and going backward. We are not going backward. As an instance of that I may tell you what occurred in Skibbereen last week. Buyers from Dublin went down and purchased cattle there. There were no cattle left except the merest rubbish. Bonhams realised £2 10s., and fat pigs made £5 10s. Now, who can say we are sinking? We are not. If we put our shoulders to the wheel we will get all we require for education, for fisheries, for the development of land, and we will secure for everybody everything that will make this a glorious and happy nation.

I intend to vote for this Estimate, but there are some matters to which I would like to call the Minister's attention. First of all. I would like to call the attention of the Dáil to a statement made by one of the most intellectual Ministers who represented America in London. He said that he had been teaching his country what democracy meant. He put education in the forefront of everything, and he said that that must be the plank on which democracy will stand, because if you have not an educated democracy you will have an oligarchy, which is the worst form of tyranny that can exist in any country. I have repeatedly talked about the condition of schools. Before doing so again I should say that I am very glad that one of the matters on which we had a good deal of discussion during past sessions, the question of pensions for secondary teachers, has now been satisfactorily settled. So much to the good. I come back now to the old problem of the condition of the schools. Having read certain reports that appeared in the provincial papers, I am still horrified to find that the condition of some of the schools is anything but satisfactory. In addition to the lack of proper sanitation, which is one of the worst features in connection with schools, no attempt is made to encourage the artistic side of the child's education. It is all very well to talk about schools being nicely painted and having pictures on the walls which would stimulate an artistic temperament among children, but what is the use of them when the sanitary conditions are, in many cases, almost primitive and, in some instances. actually wanting?

I should like to say a few words in regard to the physical training of children. I was surprised to get a letter from an important lady in the South of Ireland saying that she had gone to the expense of buying dumbbells for the children in her school but when the inspector came round he told her that they could not be used as that such training was not part of the children's education. I am of opinion that the physical health of the children is almost of more importance than the educational side. I am of opinion that unless you house children in sanitary, well-ventilated schools you will get no good educational results. I go further and say that you should make proper provision for playgrounds. Some years ago, in an address to national teachers, I advocated the use of simple physical exercises and I based my advocacy on the fact that children were closed up in cold weather without any warmth in the schools and with the windows closed. The way to warm school children is not to close the windows but to give them healthy exercises. These will prove to be of considerable benefit in their physical development. I urge on the Minister to see that where that training is not given it should, at least, be encouraged. In regard to the teaching imparted in the schools I should say that I have some experience with regard to the amount of work which children get to do at home. This particularly applies to secondary schools where boys of a tender age, boys of 12 or 13 years of age, are given four hours' work at least in the evening. That, in my opinion, is not teaching.

I think that the teaching should be done in the schools and that it is the duty of the inspectors to see what amount of work is given to the children to do at home. It is a dreadful thing to turn children into slaves, because in many cases they are poor little slaves working for five or six hours in school and for four or five hours in the evenings at home. Let the teaching be done in the school and let us do away with the tremendous amount which children have to do at home. Although I did not understand what Deputy Fahy said when he was speaking in Irish, I read a report of his speech, and I agree with him that in a country like this some attempt should be made to give children a knowledge of agricultural pursuits. When I was a small boy in a national school I knew all about the rotation of crops and other things in connection with agriculture. Perhaps these things are being taught now. I do not know if they are, but, at all events, it is quite necessary in a country like this that children should be encouraged to go a little bit beyond the ordinary routine subjects and learn something about agriculture. I have no doubt that there is something also in what Deputy Moore said in regard to giving children a knowledge of matters in connection with fishing. I have not much knowledge of that side of education, but I have no doubt that it is desirable that children should be taught the difference between, perhaps, a cod and a sole.

They are very useful in this House.

I do not want to digress too far in order to give a lecture on the special value of certain foodstuffs, as this is not the place to do it. I would like to ask a question in regard to another matter that has cropped up in my experience. I want to know what actual provision is made for the examination of houses to see whether children residing in these houses are attending school or not. I say that very deliberately because, in my opinion, there is very great laxity in this direction. I know that the people who are appointed to discharge this duty number very few, but I would like to know what is the routine, whether they take districts, whether they call at houses, and whether they see that the children in the various families are attending or not. I know cases in which boys up to thirteen and fourteen years of age are not attending school and no one is calling attention to the fact. I ask the Minister to state whether sufficient provision has been made to see that the provisions of the Compulsory School Attendance Act are carried into force.

I am sure the Irish speakers in the House will forgive me if I allude to one other point. My work brings me into contact with a number of boys and girls up to fifteen and sixteen years of age who come into hospital for various causes. It is my invariable custom to ask them questions about their education, to see what instruction they are receiving or what they know. One of the points that has cropped up is their knowledge of Irish. I ask: "Can you speak Irish?""No.""Have you not attended school?""Yes.""Have you not been taught Irish?""Yes.""Why can you not speak it now?""Because we have forgotten it." These are children who have left school for a year or two and have absolutely forgotten it. I suppose they have no one to whom they can speak it, but that is the condition of affairs. As far as I, who will call myself an impartial observer—some of the Deputies opposite would not perhaps think I am an impartial observer—am concerned I am always out to learn something, and I have learned this, at all events, that when the children leave school at fourteen years of age and when they have no one to whom they can speak the language, they forget it within an extremely short time. Therefore, a great deal of the time spent in teaching them Irish is wasted. I do not want that to occur. If you spend money and wish to have children turned out of the schools who can speak Irish, for goodness sake let some arrangement be made by which that money will not be wasted. Do not allow the money and time spent in this direction to be entirely wasted.

As far as my own experience goes, I agree with what Deputy Sheehy has said, that the Minister for Education is doing his very best to develop the educational interests of the country. I have very little experience of the industrial part of education of which Deputy Good has spoken but I say that as far as the Minister is concerned he is deeply interested in the efforts to provide decent and useful education for the children in the country. It is not his fault if it is not given in all the directions that he would like. I would ask him to pay particular attention to the points I have raised, namely, whether there are any provisions made for developing the physical condition of the children, such as giving them simple exercises. These exercises should be encouraged. I hope the Minister in his reply will be able to tell me that that has been already done in the majority of schools. I also wish to congratulate the Minister on having put beyond the realm of discussion the problem of pensions for secondary teachers. I hope also that he will remember the other point to which I have alluded, namely, the tremendous pressure that is brought to bear upon some children, particularly in secondary schools, where they are made little slaves and compelled to work of an evening at home when they have already spent five or six hours in school.

While I quite appreciate the efforts that have been made by the Minister to improve primary and secondary education, I feel that there are still many things that could be done and that heretofore have not been done. Year by year we have speeches made on this Estimate about sanitation. We have speeches made about school meals and about the provision of proper playgrounds for children. In other years I think Deputy Sir James Craig has always mentioned the subject of medical and dental inspection of school children. We have other matters also mentioned on this Estimate each year but we find when we come to examine the position that not very much has been done. Personally I can say that practically nothing has been done to improve the sanitation of schools in the rural areas within the last five or six years. There are some schools in the country districts in Ireland and they are not provided with anything even approaching what could be called sanitary accommodation and those schools which have such a thing as so-called sanitary accommodation would certainly be better without it. I am quite willing to allow for all the difficulties that lie in the Minister's way but let us hope that when this Estimate is under discussion in the coming year some progress will have been made in that way, even a little.

The provision of school meals for children, especially in towns where you have crowded tenements and many poor children, is an absolute necessity. We all realise the fact that it would entail very considerable expense, but that expense would be justified. In reference to playgrounds, I have always maintained that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, and if proper playgrounds were attached to each school, we would get better value for the money spent on education. If the children get a half an hour or three-quarters of an hour for adequate recreation they will attend better to their work when they come back to school and there will be a better return for the money spent. Deputy Sir James Craig mentioned that in rural districts instruction in agriculture was useful for boys. I thoroughly agree with that. I remember when as a very small boy I was attending a national school, and when I was not of an age to take a spade and earn the twopence that was paid to older boys, such instruction was given in the national schools. The people in the areas in which that instruction was given will to-day agree that there was no class in national schools from which they derived so much benefit. That instruction could be revived with advantage. I also suggest that useful lectures to add to the curriculum of the national schools would be lectures in hygiene for senior girls. I think that all girls in, say, the sixth and seventh standards should have at least one or two lectures in hygiene.

We have had a good deal of talk about housing, and the provision of houses in and around towns, but I think that at least some attention— more attention than has been given to it in the past—should be given to the question of the provision of proper residences for teachers. I know of teachers who have to go four and five miles to schools in winter and in summer who find it very difficult to get proper accommodation within three or four miles of their schools. I think that in all these cases proper residences should be provided. There is just one other point I want to mention. It has been brought to my notice time and time again, notwithstanding contradiction from the Minister in this House, that many of the schools are being and have been, for a considerable time, used to the advantage of one political Party. I suppose that the Minister will say that I have no grounds for that statement, but I can inform him that in the local papers two or three days before meetings are held, there are announcements, at least in County Roscommon, that a Cumann na nGaedheal meeting will be held at a particular time "at the usual place." On the following Saturday a report of that meeting will appear. I have myself seen the few members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party that are left in this district going in to attend these meetings after second Mass on Sundays. There is no denying that fact, and any time the Minister wishes I can give him the names of two schools in my own district in which Cumann na nGaedheal meetings are held monthly or fortnightly. If Cumann na nGaedheal, as a political Party, are to be facilitated in that way, then it is only right that the Fianna Fáil, the Labour and the Independent Parties should also have the use of these schools to meet in whenever they like.

I do not know whether I am quite in order on this Vote in bringing up the subject of deaf-mute children, but I think that it is a very important matter and one which ought to be considered by the Minister. In the last authoritative Census which we have, there were, roughly, 3,000 deaf mutes shown as being in the Free State. Of those 3,000 nearly half— 1,316—were uneducated, and of that 1,316 more than half were children. I think that when you have about 800 children in the country absolutely uneducated something should be done by the Department to remedy it. Those children consist of three classes—the children of destitute people, the children of people who are not destitute, but who are not wealthy, and the children of well-off people. It may surprise the Minister to know that while the children of destitute parents can be certified by the county authorities as worthy of relief and that they will be accepted at a reduced premium—say, £25 a year—by the two big institutions in Dublin with which I am connected, the Deaf and Dumb Institutes at Cabra, there are two county authorities which refuse to certify that children belonging to destitute parents should be eligible for admittance to these institutions, and the reason they give is that they fear they would be surcharged. That is a matter that ought to be taken up at once. I have been in communication with the Minister for Local Government and I understood from him that he would be glad to take it up. At present, we know of fifteen cases of children whose parents have refused to take any steps whatever to have them educated, and these children are growing up like rabbits. There are three of these in Dublin, four in Cork, one in Meath —one of the places where the County Council will not certify for a child to be admitted—three in Waterford, two in Kerry, and two in Galway. In the case of the four Cork cases, one unfortunate man had three of them, and he was not in a position to pay anything for them. Since that information was obtained by me on the 8th March, he has been able to induce the Cork county authority to certify for two of the children, and they have been admitted to Cabra.

I do not see why some assistance should not be given by the State for the education of these children. There are at present 340 such children being educated at Cabra, and if any Deputy would care to spend an hour or two seeing these children, he would be astonished at the amount of education that they have absorbed. Another point that I want to bring before the Minister is that when a child becomes eighteen years of age, although that child may not have entered the institution until he was 15, 16 or 17, the £25 a year that is authorised to be paid by the county authorities is automatically reduced to £15 12s. That throws a very heavy burden indeed on the charitable public. The cost of these 340 children works out at, roughly, £10,000, something like £37 a child. That is for education, board and clothes. Of that £10,000 the charitable public has had to make up £2,000, and a great deal of that—something like £1,200—is received in very small sums from what might be called the poorer people— in half-crowns, five shillings and ten shillings. The collection for 1928 from this source, with an occasional pound and two pounds, was £1,169 1s. 10d. The pensions that were received from parents and from the county authorities amounted to £6,961. These two amounts come to £8,000 roughly, so that there is £2,000 of a deficit, and that £2,000 is obtained from the interest received from bequests by charitable people. It has not, in fact, been made up, because there was a deficit last year of £500 or £600 between what it cost to educate the children and the incomes that the two institutions received. The fact is that there are also certain parents who refuse to take any steps whatever to have deaf mute children educated. Whether it is that they are afraid of being looked down on because the children are so afflicted, or whether they try to keep the fact secret or not, I do not know, but in the poorer districts they certainly do not do that, because our inspectors have found them. They have no sense of religion, no sense of what they ought to do, and nobody minds them. I think this subject is very important, and I have, therefore, brought it before the Minister's attention.

I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the position of technical education in County Wicklow, and to suggest that in the new Bill he is going to introduce, to carry out the recommendations of the Technical Commission, he will consider the serious position that has arisen in the Bray area. I refer to the difficulty that the technical committee there find in procuring a suitable site on which to build a new technical school. In the new Bill I suggest that the Minister should take compulsory powers to acquire sites for school buildings. In 1914, the trustees of the estate offered the Bray Technical Committee a free site, but owing to the outbreak of the war the Department and the technical committee did not proceed with the work. In 1926, when the urban council and the committee made arrangements to proceed with the building, the trustees of the estate informed them that they would not now grant the site on any consideration, stating that a technical school there would depreciate the value of the site for the building of residential houses, although opposite this particular site stands a national school belonging to the Presbyterian Church. To acquire a site at the present time would cost as much as to build a technical school. I appeal to the Minister to make special grants to enable committees to obtain sites, because in the Bray area the position has been within the last couple of years, owing to the increased number of students attending the technical schools from 100 in 1912 to 300 now, that the Committee have refused to accept any more students for want of proper accommodation.

I referred here some time ago to an appointment the Minister sanctioned in the Wicklow area. I made certain statements then, and it is not necessary to repeat them now, beyond saying that I stand by every word. However, Wicklow area is different from Bray area. I agree with Deputy Good that there is no enthusiasm in the Department with regard to technical education. If there was, the Department would not have refused to accede to the request of the Committee in Wicklow when they wanted a young energetic principal. The Department sanctioned an increase of the age limit by the Appointments Commissioners in order to suit a particular candidate, and the result, I am sorry to say, is that the County Council has refused to strike the full rate owing to the action of the Department in sanctioning that appointment. I know nothing personally about the man appointed, who may be a very good man, but as a result of his appointment the domestic economy and various other classes will be abolished. Only half the rate for technical education will be struck this year, the excuse given being because of this appointment. I am sorry the County Council did not strike a full rate. Notwithstanding what happened, and my own personal opinion of the appointment, I would have supported even a higher rate for technical education. I only refer to the matter with the hope that some settlement will be arrived at, but I fear not, when members of the Committee, from the Chairman down, have resigned. A man has been appointed to look after Irish teachers who has no knowledge of the Irish language. Even with half the rate being struck people ask: "What is the use of having a large number of whole-time Irish teachers if the man who is to look after them has no knowledge of the language they are supposed to be teaching?"

I am not certain if the cost of the provision of meals for school children comes under the Minister's Department. I understand it is a matter for the Minister for Local Government. I have no information that the Local Government Department refused to sanction the raising of such a rate by urban councils. In fact it is the other way around, as the Department is pressing local bodies to raise a rate for providing meals for school children. The Minister for Local Government should urge the County Councils to raise a similar rate to that raised in the urban centres for supplying meals to poor children in rural areas.

I have had complaints from a large number of workers about the cost of books for children attending national schools. It appears that books that a boy uses in the fourth standard will not suit younger children who are later passing into the fourth standard. The Department might be able to give a certain grant to provide the children of poor people in rural areas with books, especially when there is such a large amount of unemployment in these areas. When education is compulsory and when the parents of a large number of the students attending the school have not the money to purchase books, it is a great disadvantage, not only to the children themselves, but to the other students in the classes. I appeal to the Minister to make some special provision for books in the poorer areas, so that grants might be given to the teachers, whether they are religious orders or national school teachers, to supply free books. On the question of building sites even for national schools compulsory powers are required in order to acquire land where an attitude is taken up similar to what has happened in Bray. I agree with Deputy O'Connell that if we are going to provide allotments and plots near building sites a similar state of affairs will arise. If instruction in horticulture is to be given the children, you will have owners of land near the schools demanding exorbitant prices. I ask the Minister to consider these points. Whatever drawback there may be in Wicklow in connection with technical education, the responsibility will not rest on the people but on the Minister and his Department.

The Minister said I made an attack on his inspectors. I am prepared to stand over that statement and to give the Minister the names of reliable clergymen who can support the statement I made, that the inspector who visited this gentleman's house remained in his house each night that he went to visit him before the appointment was made.

The Minister has heard a lot about what he should do and about the subjects he should introduce. I am going to take a different line. I wonder if we are not endeavouring to do too much in the primary course, and if it would not be much better if we made it much more simple and effective. I am reminded of a remark made by the Minister in a recent public speech to the effect that the great majority of children here could never expect any more education than that to be obtained in the primary schools, and for that reason an effort must be made to give them as much as possible in that course. I am afraid that I do not agree with that. I may remark in passing that it does not speak too well for the intentions of the Ministry with regard to the Report of the Technical Commission.

What I said was that I did not think the majority could get a secondary education, whether they came from poor or rich families. Secondary education was what I referred to, not any post-primary education.

I understood from the Minister's remark in this address that it was his belief that the vast majority of young people would never get any opportunity of any course beyond the primary course.

No. I was referring purely to secondary education, which was referred to in the address to which I was replying.

I hope I am wrong in feeling that no effort will be made to provide a continuation course, which I regard as of the utmost importance if we are ever to get anywhere. Several Deputies referred to the cost of books in the primary schools. Perhaps the cost of books at present may to a great extent be caused by the constant changing of the programme. One Deputy referred to the fact that one child's books could be used by another afterwards. That is no longer possible. The result is that people who cannot afford it are called upon several times during the school year to buy expensive books. I know Nuns who have to provide the books themselves. Deputy Sir James Craig referred to the failure of the children to understand people when they spoke Irish. I quite agree with Deputy Sir James Craig, because I have had the same experience. Although I disagree entirely with those who hold that the teaching of Irish is a waste of money, it has often struck me that unless there is an effort made to teach the children what they are being taught Irish for it will be a failure. Many of the children regard it as a tiresome subject. Many of them will speak of "that old Irish" and say they are tired of it, for the reason that they are not taught in the schools why they must learn it. In France, America and other countries, the children are taught patriotism in the schools. I, for one, would not waste a minute learning the Irish language or teaching it if there were no patriotic incentive behind it. From the purely literary point of view I would rather study French or German or some of the modern languages possessing a great literature. It would be far more advantageous to me from a purely educational point of view, but the Irish language is essential to this country if we want to maintain patriotism. There is no use in simply hammering the dry bones of a language into children unless you let them know why they must learn Irish. If that is done, I hold that the children, when they leave school, will keep up the language and speak it, but if an effort is not made in the schools to teach patriotism, then the teaching of Irish is going to fail.

I rise to endorse all the good things I have heard this evening about the Minister for Education and the staff of his Department, who, I must say, are very courteous whenever one appeals to them to have something done. I should, however, like to point out that one of the things which are essential in connection with the schools is a room where the children can dry their clothes when they reach school. I hold that one of the primary causes of consumption is that children have to remain in school for four or five hours in wet clothes, and thereby contract colds. As to technical education, in Fermoy we have for a long time been looking for a site for a technical school, and I am glad to be able to tell the Minister that we have at last got one of the finest sites in the town,—we were made a present of it—so that we are better than the people in Wicklow.

It was not the Wicklow people, but those who came into it.

I would urge the Minister to give us all the help possible so that we can proceed with the building of this school immediately in Fermoy, as it is very much needed. I am sure I am knocking at an open door when I ask the Minister to do that. As regards the schoolhouses in my district, for the past three or four years I have been calling on the officials in Marlboro' House and in Hume Street, and, with the co-operation of the Office of Public Works, improvements have been made wherever I put up a case. I think I would not be doing my duty if I did not thank them for their efforts in that direction.

Are you looking for any more?

Unlike Deputy Everett, I am not anticipating. I have nothing further to say after all that has been said in praise of the Minister for Education. We all know that a nation's progress depends upon the education of the people, and the education of our people is safe in the hands of the Minister, whom we hope to see at the head of this Department for a long time to come.

I am sorry that I shall have to strike a discordant note in this debate. Certainly in matters of detail the work of the Department seems to be carried out in a conscientious way, but on questions of larger policy it seems to be lacking to a considerable extent. It has been pointed out by Deputy Mullins, who very carefully went through a great many of the school books, and examined them and by some other people who happened to be present at the lessons given in Irish history, that they showed that the tendency of the Department was not strongly enough Irish and was not strongly enough patriotic. From the point of view of the party at present in power, one would imagine, and expect, from that Government and party, at least up to a certain point, that they would be as deeply interested in making the children thoroughly Irish as any other section of the Irish people. Up to the point where disagreement arose between the two sections of the really Irish people it should be brought home to the children, and enthusiasm should be created in them for their country and for their local history. They should really be taught not merely in an abstract sort of way the dry bones of history, but they should be made to feel attachment to the tremendous traditions of their country. After all we are a very ancient nation with an extremely rich tradition.

Take, for instance, the county of Waterford. I naturally speak of that county, representing it as I do. It is full of the remains of a tremendous civilisation from one end of the county to the other. How much do the children know about the conditions that surround the ruins there? How much do they know about its social history? What do they know of the vision of Ireland given by men like Corkery? I would imagine that that would be the first thing about which enthusiasm should be stirred up in the children if the Education Department ever tried directly to make Irish children really Irish. A considerable amount of emigration would be stopped if children were given the proper spirit. They would look to Ireland rather than outside Ireland. I do not suggest the emigration problem could be dealt with from an educational point of view, because it is an economic question, but it would help to stem the spirit which looks to America and to other countries and make the Irish people look to Ireland only. For that reason, on this Estimate I think the Department deserves very severe criticism for not, first of all, having books which have the right tendency in them. Of course the books would establish the tendency, because one cannot leave it entirely in the hands of the teachers. Unless there are books that would give the teachers an indication it is hardly fair to ask the teachers to take up a general attitude upon this question.

The value also of having an official book of Irish history would be this: That it would be open for everybody to read it. Every party in the country would be able to agree up to a point that Irish history should be dealt with in a certain way. The more recent period of history might be dealt with by simply stating the bald facts. You have teachers now who when they come to lecture on the Irish history of the last ten years do not point out the actual facts. I do not want them to carry on propaganda for one party or another, but they cannot ignore the fact that Ireland is partitioned, yet no reference is made very often to that in these lectures. I speak from knowledge gained from people who have listened to these lectures. I suggest that the bald facts be given as to the period between 1922 and 1929 and for the period before that the greatest enthusiasm should be roused in the children for the march towards freedom as far as it went.

There is another question which bears upon the technical education problem which has already been very well dealt with. There is only one particular aspect of that question to which I wish to refer and that is the Irish teachers. The Irish teachers are perhaps the most devoted band of teachers in the country. They would be an asset to any country because they have taken up this matter really voluntarily and with enthusiasm. There are about 200 of these teachers and their position is a precarious one. Their present position is only temporary and no one knows what their position will be under the new Bill which it is proposed to bring in, I understand, in the autumn. I would suggest to the Minister that he should make immediate arrangements if he proposes taking over these teachers under the new scheme to take what is called the long course because in any event it would take a year to give 100 teachers the long course. Six months is the course, I understand, for people who have been teaching Irish and who are efficient and who would become proficient in the knowledge of English and mathematics which are the only two subjects they could take up because the other subjects are specialised. If preparation was made now for them a considerable number of them would be ready to be taken over when the Bill becomes an Act. Perhaps the Minister will tell us what is his intention in this matter, because if he does this he will be doing something for a class of teachers in this country who deserve more admiration and more attention than perhaps any other class.

There are a few matters which I would like to bring to the notice of the Minister. The first is as regards sanitation in the schools in the rural areas. In portion of the constituency from which I come the sanitary conditions in the schools are most deplorable. There is not a year that passes but these schools have to be closed because of an outbreak of scarlet fever or diphtheria. The children are sent home to their parents, and I maintain before they are allowed back to school again, they should be medically examined and have a clean bill of health.

In the town of Charleville the sanitation of some of these schools is dealt with in the report of the medical officer, Dr. Saunders, made to the members of the North Cork County Board of Health after he visited the schools in Charleville. He states: "This school is situate in the Main Street and abuts on Charleville creamery in the rear. There are 350 boys on the roll, whose ages vary from 7 to 18 years. The only water supply is from a pump which draws water from a well at the eastern end of the school grounds. It was not possible to ascertain the present condition of this well or its suitability. owing to the fact that it is covered over in concrete. The boys, however, have been strictly forbidden to use it, and there is no doubt that the water is absolutely unfit for drinking owing to the presence of sediment. Its present uses are confined to the flushing of the school urinals and closets during dry weather, and to supply the physics and chemistry laboratory, which is on the upper storey of the school building. For this latter purpose the water is pumped by the boys into a storage tank in the roof.

"The sanitary accommodation in the schools is exceedingly bad, and this is due entirely to the lack of an adequate water supply. Actually it consists of—(a) a urinal divided into four compartments; (b) three privy middens entered from the urinals. There is no flush down of any description either for the urinals or the middens. Just outside the urinals there is a rain-water tank (supplied from the roof of a neighbouring building). The water from this tank is taken in buckets and dashed over the surfaces of the urinals. There is no independent supply for the middens, and it is only the surplus water which runs away after the above-mentioned process has been carried out, and which passes under the middens, that is relied upon to flush them. In summer time the tank runs dry and water has then to be carried in buckets from the pump and used as described. Even in winter time the whole process can only be regarded as hopelessly inadequate, and in summer one can but surmise that the conditions must be deplorable.

"As has been stated above, there are 350 boys on the roll of this school. Even granting that other things were equal, the sanitary accommodation is entirely inadequate, and in dry weather must constitute an actual menace to the health not only of the boys attending the school. but to that of the inhabitants of the town and the neighbouring country. from which a large proportion of the pupils are drawn."

In regard to the Convent, he states: "The Community comprises 40 nuns. The water supply is derived from a well in the convent grounds and appears to be adequate. It is pumped by means of an electric motor from the well to a storage tank within the convent buildings. The water has been tested several times and found to be suitable."

He says, in regard to the Pension school: "There are 150 children on the roll, of ages varying from 8 to 17 years. The school buildings are modern and well-equipped in the ordinary way, but there is no supply of drinking water laid on, and what has been said in connection with the boys' school concerning this matter, of course, applies with equal force here. There is a storage tank for rain water in the roof of one of the buildings, but this is used entirely for flushing purposes."

In regard to the infants' national school he states: "The situation of this school is adjacent to that of the Pension school. Two hundred and fifty children attend, both girls and boys. What has been said in regard to the supply of drinking water in connection with the other schools applies here also." And in regard to the senior national schools, he says: "Situated in Croom Road, these schools cater for both boys and girls. The latter department is managed by the Sisters of Charity and is on the ground floor of the building. The boys' department is on the upper floor. The rolls contain 180 girls, of ages varying from 8 to 17 years, and 120 boys (3½ to 16 years), making a total of 300. There is no water supply of any description either for drinking or sanitary purposes. There is a small tank (rain water) in the girls' school in connection with the boiler of a central-heating system which was erected by the Nuns. I was informed by the Sister in charge of the schools that the odour from these closets in summer is almost unbearable, and this can be readily understood. Furthermore, it is practically impossible to get anyone who is willing to undertake the cleaning of them. It will be observed that there are 1,050 children attending the schools of Charleville. The sanitary provisions which exist for them can, without exception, only be described as most primitive, and it would undoubtedly appear that the reason for this is the entirely inadequate supply of water to the town."

It may be said by the Minister that these matters that I have referred to with regard to the sanitary condition of the schools and the provision of a water supply for them do not belong to his but to another department. I maintain that when matters like these are brought to his attention it is his duty to bring them to the notice of the proper authority and have the defects complained of remedied. In my part of the country there are children who have to travel two and three miles to school. Some of them have very little to eat in the morning. If a child goes to school with an empty stomach it cannot be expected that it will retain very much of what it is taught during the day. I think that the Department of Education should provide a substantial meal all the year round for those school children so that they may become strong in their health and may be able to take full advantage of the instruction given to them in school during the day. Comparing the children of the present day with those of forty or fifty years ago there is, I think, a great deterioration to be noticed in them physically. I have observed in the last few years that many of the school children are like mere shadows. They go along with a satchel of books that they hardly seem capable of carrying. These children require a good substantial meal to build up their constitutions. The Department of Education should provide that if they want to have in this country a race of young people who will be strong, intellectually and physically.

As regards the girls, I think more attention should be given in the schools in the matter of instructing them in domestic economy, sewing, needlework, and in the art of lace-making. I am sorry to say that at the present time you see very few girls or women in the country working with a set of knitting needles in their leisure hours. I am afraid there is very little of that work carried out in their homes. They are all aping after foreign styles and foreign fashions in dress, such as one might expect to see in Piccadilly or Rotten Row. More attention, I think, should be paid to instruction of that kind, so that something might be done to restore the manners and fashions of the older generation. As regards the boys, I would suggest to the Minister that in every national school, where a suitable piece of ground can be found, instruction should be given to them with regard to the cultivation of vegetables and fruit, and also in regard to beekeeping. This instruction would prove very valuable to them in after life. It would be the means of enabling them to produce for themselves and for the country good wholesome food.

I hope that the Minister will consider the advisability of bringing the matters that I have referred to, especially in regard to the Charleville schools, under the notice of the proper authorities. The Charleville area is unable itself to bear the cost of providing a water supply. I think it is the duty of the Minister to see that a proper water supply is provided for these schools. I maintain that the Minister for Education is the intellectual father of our educational family. By providing the children with good food and with a good education we will be laying the foundations of a healthy, intelligent and thrifty race for the future.

I want to ask the Minister two questions. I would like to know from him whether he has any information as to the working of the School Attendance Act in outlying areas of the cities, particularly the City of Dublin. The Minister said that the effect of the Act has been very good in the rural districts and in cities, and that, I believe, is the case. But I have heard it stated that in districts adjacent to Dublin the Act is more or less a dead letter—at any rate, that it has not led to any improvement. A great deal, of course, depends on whether the attendance officer does his work or not. My second question is in reference to the continuation schools. I was disappointed that the Minister did not make any reference to this in his opening statement. I would like to ask him if he can tell us what plans he has in mind with reference to substituting something for the work that has been done up to this by the continuation schools.

Some aspects of the education question I leave to others who are more competent to deal with them than I am. Certain points were touched upon by my colleague just now, and to my mind they are most important. He pointed out that in some of the rural areas in his constituency the sanitary conditions are simply appalling. They are undoubtedly of the most primitive kind. In places such as we have in Donegal and Galway, and the rest of the congested areas, it is simply looking for trouble to permit the existing conditions in the schools to continue. In these places you have children travelling three or four miles to school. I do not know whether the Minister is aware of it or not, but for a number of years there are children in those areas who have not been brought up on milk. That may surprise the Minister. They have been brought up on water and flour as a substitute for milk. These children on reaching the ages of five, six or seven go to school sometimes without breakfast, without boots, and very ill-clad, and sometimes it is raining and sometimes it is snowing. When they get into the school it is very badly heated, and the sanitary conditions are very bad, for all that is there from one year's end to another is a dry closet for all the children. If the Minister thinks that is conducive to good health or good citizenship, I do not think so.

With regard to the School Attendance Act, for one reason or another it is often impossible for parents to send their children to school. They are supposed to provide a doctor's certificate, but it must be remembered that in some cases families live four or five miles away from a doctor. A child may be indisposed for a day or two, and in some cases it might happen that the child would be back again at school before the doctor arrives. Sometimes the mother is indisposed. In Donegal, Galway, and the rest of the congested areas, it is impossible to follow all the rules and regulations laid down. Although the Act is quite a good Act, those who are enforcing it should realise that it should be more elastic, for it is simply impossible, as I have said, to follow out all these rules and regulations. For instance, in a backward area in Donegal the mother of a family may be ill, and one of the children has to be kept at home to look after the others. You cannot get a doctor's certificate for that, for the child is not ill. While an exception in cases of that kind should not, perhaps, be embodied in the Act, it should be left to the discretion of those who administer the Act.

Is the Minister for Education concerned in the enforcing of the Act?.

No, but it was referred to by Deputy Thrift.

The question of enforcing the Act rests with the Minister for Justice. Deputy Thrift referred to how it would affect the school attendance with regard to numbers. That is a different point. The matter referred to by Deputy Carney can arise on the Vote of the Minister for Justice.

There is that actual discretion with the Justice. In the case referred to by the Deputy there, first, is no necessity for the production of a doctor's certificate; and, secondly, the discretion the Deputy wants is already in the Act and is vested in the District Justice.

Then what is the necessity for the Act at all?

Because the Act gives the Deputy what he wants there is no necessity for it?

If a child has a reasonable excuse that would be taken.

To return to the question of providing meals for children who are in need of them, I think the Minister should make some provision as regards such cases, especially in the congested areas. There are few parents in this country who would like their children to be fed in school. I know perfectly well they do not like it, but at the same time, as the saying is, "necessity knows no law," and there are cases where it is absolutely necessary that some sustenance should be provided for children during school hours. Men work eight hours a day, and these children work almost eight hours a day, when it is considered that they have to walk four miles to school and four miles from the school back to their homes again. The Minister should pay attention to these schools and see that their sanitary conditions are improved, and that in the winter time a certain amount of heat is provided. There is a certain provision made for that at present, but it is not at all what it might be. I think if the Minister gave instructions to his inspectors on the lines I have suggested regarding those schools it would do a certain amount of good which would be appreciated in the areas I have referred to.

As a representative of a rural constituency, I would like to support the references that have been made by other Deputies as to the necessity for having more done in the matter of school gardening. Deputies who represent rural areas will recognise that at present in rural Ireland not more than 20 per cent. of the agricultural workers, by which I mean both farmers' sons and those who earn their livelihood as workers on the farms, could intelligently cultivate a garden—I mean as regards vegetables. If you send them into a garden and give them the necessary seeds and manures they would not be capable of properly cultivating vegetables. We have had arguments on technical education and the necessity for properly equipping those who have to look for their means of livelihood in the industrial sphere, but I think we should also devote some attention to the great majority of our workers, that is, the people who are engaged in the agricultural industry. which it is admitted is the backbone of industry in this country.

I, therefore, as a young farmer, and as one who knows what it is to work in the country and who has experience with the agricultural workers and the farmers' sons of the country, would advocate that the Minister should seriously consider this matter in the future. I would advocate that the Department would provide at each rural school an adequate plot in which the senior boys could get a practical education following up the theoretical education which they get in the school and for which the reading matter is supplied in the school reader. I hold that a lot of very useful work could be done in that respect. A lot of the teaching that is imparted in the rural school to the average boy is unsuited to him. A lot of practical instruction could be given which would make him grow up with an interest in agricultural pursuits and an interest in his calling in life.

I imagine that if this question was tackled at the present time that we might do a lot to solve the difficulties that the rural people meet in life. If you go through the country you will find 50 or 60 per cent. of the cottage gardens going to absolute waste. There is nothing in the way of cultivating these gardens and growing in them many of the things that the family want. I know families actually drawing home assistance and a burden on the rates, and at the same time, while their boys, fourteen or fifteen years of age, are running around wild their gardens go untilled. Had their education in the schools been such, had they been taught to till a plot in the schools, these same boys could be made to use their garden plots and provide a lot of food for the family.

I am satisfied, from my inquiries amongst the rural teachers, that they would welcome the provision of such plots in most cases. I have in mind a number of instances of teachers who, on their own initiative, have taken up this work. The results are-surprising. One can see those boys, when they go home, trying to carry out there in waste plots and spaces what they have seen done in the school plot. In this way, they till their cottage gardens and plots that otherwise would have gone to waste. I believe the Minister for Education could do a lot in this matter by giving the encouragement of his Department to the teachers who are trying to do this work. I believe that the rural teachers of Ireland will cooperate in this matter if they are provided with the necessary means. By the necessary means, I mean, a suitable plot near the schools. Then, when the boys have done their theoretical lessons and have gone through their readers, they can be brought out and given a demonstration by the teacher on the theoretical matter that they have been reading in the books.

To make the matter more attractive these plots could be sub-divided and prizes given to the boys who keep the best plots. This would result in rivalry of a useful and healthy kind that would be of benefit to the boys and would do a great deal of good to the school itself. If some of the boys were ruled out and did not get charge of a plot then their comrades would work all the keener to make their plots a success. This would certainly be a considerable advantage to the school and to the boys themselves. I am quite sure that the many who are interested in this and the country generally would support that scheme. I therefore ask the Minister to keep it in his mind and to consider it very carefully.

I would certainly support also the provision of meals for school children because I know quite well that in districts that are not considered poverty-stricken the young children usually have their luncheons eaten before they reach school in the mornings. Anyone can understand that if a child of tender years is hungry in school during the long day, it will not be conducive to that child absorbing instruction. I think that a half pint of milk per child might be provided in those schools. That could be easily worked out as a matter of fact.

What I have to say will not take more than a minute or two. Deputy Kent passed the remark that he would like to see needlework, knitting and domestic economy taught in the senior classes. I may tell Deputy Kent that the same programme in needlework, which includes knitting, is in operation in the schools now as in the days when he was a boy. It is not the fault of the Minister for Education that the fashions have changed. The Minister for Education may be the intellectual father of the children of the Saorstát but he cannot be the father of the fashions and he cannot lay down any sumptuary laws that will regulate the dress that the ladies of 1929 will wear. I may mention that no female teacher can be qualified as a teacher without having passed the necessary examination in needlework. Needlework, as taught in the schools in 1929, is the same as the needlework that was taught in the days when I was a girl and Deputy Kent was a boy.

The question of domestic economy has been mentioned by some Deputies. I see here in the Estimate that for cookery and laundry instruction a sum of £9,000 is provided. I may tell Deputies that the fee will not be allotted in this subject unless the pupils presented for examination have a good knowledge of domestic economy. I have had experience myself of cookery and needlework organisers. Organisers from the Education Office go round, and if Deputies heard the questions that are asked by these organisers and the work that is given to the girls to do, they would know that the children are up against a pretty tough proposition. In order to pass in this subject they must know domestic economy pretty well.

The philanthropic lady who presented dumb-bells to a school in the South of Ireland must have been ignorant of the school programme, because drill in every school is one of the subjects on the programme, and I cannot conceive any inspector having any objection to children using dumb-bells. I just wanted to inform Deputy Sir James Craig on this matter. I took a note of what Deputy Carney said. The Minister anticipated me in that matter, because one of the provisions of the School Attendance Act was that urgent domestic necessity is put down as a valid reason for absence from school.

I am more optimistic than Deputy Mullins with regard to Irish being restored as the national spoken language through the medium of the schools. The summer courses for Irish did, I admit, very useful work, but now that the preparatory colleges have been established, the Department of Education is, so to speak, commencing at the right end. When the students in these colleges have completed their four years' course and have passed on to the training colleges and completed their two years there, they will be as well equipped to teach Irish in the schools as they will be to teach English.

From what I know of two Irish schools here in the city—Scoil Mhuire and Scoil Bhrighde—Deputies may rest satisfied that the children attending them are getting a thoroughly sound knowledge of the Irish language. In these two schools all subjects except English are taught through the medium of Irish. I know that the children attending these schools are actually more proficient in Irish than they are in English. Through no fault of the teachers, and through no fault of the managers, the Irish language was lost in the schools a couple of generations ago. I hope that in this generation we will see, through the medium of the schools, the Irish language again restored.

I do not think that Deputy Good would expect me to become a fashion plate in the promotion of practical education. There was one question raised by Deputy Thrift in regard to school attendance. If the Deputy will give me an exact instance that he has in mind I will try to get the figures for him. In the annual report, which is being printed at the moment, the figures will appear. He will find there the figures for Dublin County, and also for Dublin County Borough. That is not altogether what he wants. He probably wants the figures—I do not know how far they will be available—for villages in the neighbourhood of Dublin.

For townships like Pembroke, Rathmines and Rathgar.

I will see what I can do in getting the information for the Deputy. Deputy Clery said there was a certain feeling amongst the people of the country, and, to a certain extent, he thought that might be at the back of their opposition to the Compulsory Attendance Act. There was a feeling, he said, that the people were not getting value for their money. He said he did not agree with that opinion; it was deplorable the opinion should be there, but he would not agree with it. I gathered from the rest of his speech that he possibly meant that the instruction given in the schools was rather too academic. He went on then to make a number of suggestions in a more or less modified form. Those suggestions were made by several other Deputies, and they touched on subjects that might be taught in the primary schools.

Deputy Clery pointed out that there was not enough taught about the climate and about the soils. He was optimistic enough to think that we could get plots for nothing, and he pointed out the use that could be made of garden plots. If the Deputy will turn to page 41 of the actual programme for national schools he will find something that might interest him. Other Deputies who have interested themselves in this matter have urged that after a certain age in the primary schools the attention of pupils, in the rural districts particularly, should be directed towards agriculture. If the Deputy studies page 41 of the national school programme he will find that we have provided there for that particular matter. In the programme he will find that provision is made for what he has in mind, both in the teaching of geography and in regard to local industries such as creameries and so on. More especially on pages 43 to 46 of the programme he will find there is an elaborate scheme either for rural science or nature study. The difference between them is that the rural science course depends for its proper carrying out on the existence of a demonstration plot in the neighbourhood of the school. In the case of nature study such a plot is not available. Not merely is this on the programme, but where the teacher is qualified to teach the subject, it is, with some exceptions, compulsory. It is a subject that is now being taught in the training colleges. so that the number of schools in which the subject will be compulsory will increase year by year as the number of teachers qualified to teach come out of the training colleges. Furthermore, the exceptions I have mentioned will be in the case of two-teacher schools with a junior assistant mistress. It is not compulsory in that school, nor in a mixed school with a woman principal. But as changes take place there the number of schools in which this forms a part of the curriculum will increase.

The subject was made compulsory in 1926 and at present, out of the 5,000 schools in the country, 420 schools teach rural science and they have demonstration plots. Those are boys' schools. There are 480 boys' and mixed schools in which nature study is taught. There are 1,200 girls' and mixed schools with a mistress at the head of the school in which nature study is also taught. Therefore, in considerably over 2,000 schools, either rural science or nature study is taught. If Deputies will refer to the programme they will see the nature of the instructions given in these schools. The subjects are precisely the ones mentioned by various Deputies. There is a steady increase and we expect a more steady increase in the schools in which these subjects will be taken in the rural districts.

Some Deputies, in so far as they were aware that these conditions prevail, did not seem to be satisfied; they want apparently actual instruction in agriculture as such. I believe there are a few countries in which very definite technical education of that kind is given prior to the age of fourteen. But the general run of educated opinion is against anything of the kind. The general view is that even where you have subjects of that kind they should have not, what I might call, a definitely educational but primarily a practical object. Ultimately they would have a practical effect. One of the Deputies has put it that in a school an effort should be made to teach people how to plant and boys how to keep bees. That would be beyond the subjects that most people would think ought to be included in a primary school programme.

In that connection I will make one or two quotations from a rather interesting article that appeared in 1928, in the "Edinburgh Review." I quote it because it is authoritative. It is from the pen of the agricultural adviser to the Danish Legation in London. What he does is to point out that a great deal of misconception obtains outside Denmark as to the precise effect and the precise aims of Danish education. He combats the idea that, he says, seems to be prevalent that the excellence of Denmark in agricultural matters is due to the fact that agriculture is taught in the primary schools. He disagrees altogether with that. He says that is not the fact. He quotes with approval a Mr. Munroe. Deputy Goulding is not here, but I am sure he would agree with some of this, because it represents one of the views he expressed. Mr. Munroe says: "Something could, perhaps, be learned from the Danish system of rural schools, which concentrated on a few essential subjects and taught these subjects thoroughly. It was interesting to note, for example, that in Denmark there was no attempt to teach agriculture in the elementary schools." This is one of the most successful countries in the world. Now that is the opinion of Mr. Munroe, whom the Danish attaché quotes with approval. He points out, however, that though agriculture, as such, is not taught in the schools—it is kept out in the primary schools—an opportunity is given to the young people during vacation times to work upon the land. He says that nobody would be admitted to an agricultural college in Denmark before he reaches the age of eighteen.

That, of course, is in accordance with the views which Deputies will find expressed in the report of the Technical Education Commission. That is, that not merely for children of 14 years of age but from 14 to 16 years of age the type of education you want is continuation education and not technical education, in the stricter or narrower sense of the word, whether in rural districts or in towns. Another subject that was referred to in the course of the debate was the question of mathematics, and it was stated that the teachers were not trained in modern methods. As Deputies know, a considerable change has taken place. It has not been acquiesced in by mathematicians and by all teachers of mathematics, but a considerable change has undoubtedly taken place in the teaching of that subject. Undoubtedly it is an important problem as to how existing teachers, not those now in the training colleges who can learn the new methods, are to be brought into touch with more modern methods. The position has somewhat improved, I believe, in that respect in the last couple of years, but I quite recognise that in that regard something more is required to be done. As to how best to achieve it, it is rather difficult to say. It will receive attention, because with regard to the new system of inspection and the issue of instructions to teachers, to which Deputy O'Connell referred, I may say that, so far as that is concerned, my purpose would be to issue different subjects in pamphlet form. I think that some of them are already composed. It was suggested by, I think, Deputy O'Connell that we should set aside a number of inspectors to deal with that particular work. We have done so, and some of the subjects have been dealt with, including that referred to by Deputy Sir James Craig, namely, physical drill. We will issue instructions to teachers. That is advice given by inspectors. We will be able to deal with modern methods. Mathematics is now an ordinary subject in the school curriculum in the sense that it never was before.

A suggestion was made by more than one Deputy that in order to promote the study of Irish in the schools we should take speakers from the Gaeltacht and put one into each school. Some Deputy suggested that we should make them itinerant teachers. I doubt if we would find suitable material in that respect in the Gaeltacht. I gravely doubt the effect which the bringing in of outsiders to do such work would have on the whole discipline and conduct in a school. I do not think that it is an experiment which is likely to meet with anything in the nature of success. The question of the type of books used has been referred to. Deputy Tierney referred to it last year, and he again alluded to it this year. It was referred to by other speakers also. Two things are suggested. The first suggestion is that Committees should "vet" the books, and the other suggestion is that the Department should publish its own text books, especially in history. In the lecture which we got from Deputy Little on history, it was suggested that there was no controversy in Irish history before 1922. As one who at one time had to deal with history, I may be pessimistic in doubting a view of that kind. Apart from that, I doubt the wisdom of the Department issuing what I might call standard text-books of Irish history. I am not for one moment pretending that I am satisfied with the books used or available in the schools. There ought to be better books on history as well as on other subjects. They are especially wanting, perhaps, in history, and sometimes the books chosen by managers and teachers are not, perhaps, the most suitable, but in these matters there is an obligation on other people besides the Department and the Government. If it be a question of teaching patriotism, we are prepared to do our part, but everything cannot be done from the Central Government. I will, however, carefully consider the question of subjecting books on all subjects to a more careful examination than we have heretofore given, but whether we will have a Departmental or other Committee to look into the matter is a question to which I will give further consideration.

Reference has been made to the teaching of local history. Here again the Department can only lay down what it wants to see taught within reasonable limits. An effort has been made to do what the Department wants but, in the last resort, so far as the teaching of local history is concerned, everything will depend on the local writers or on people interested in local history writing hand-books. I presume that that also will be put on to the Department and that the teachers will be asked to take part in that work. We have advised teachers when dealing with history to pay special attention to local history and local geography. Many of them are very willing to do so but it must be borne in mind that one of the difficulties they have to face is the absence of local text-books or books dealing with local history. That is a want that may be gradually supplied but that want is there. It can hardly be suggested seriously that it is the business of the Department not merely to write national history but also to write local history in each county, and possibly, in each parish. There was something in what Deputy Goulding stated about the necessity not merely of teaching Irish but of conveying to the bulk of the pupils why precisely it is being taught. I will say this about some of the books that are being used that, although I do not think that it is our business to have cultivated Chauvinism or anything of the kind, there are a number of books used, for instance, in the teaching of English and history also, where Irish history is not concerned, that could quite as easily be used in any other country. That in itself is not healthy. The books ought to have particular reference to the country in which the pupils live. I think you will find that that is the case in practically every other country.

The usual demands were made as regards the expenditure of money. I want to point out that I cannot possibly go nearly meeting all these demands. I am convinced that most of them fall altogether outside my sphere, but I am not relying on that alone. I am certain it is not in the power of the Government at present to provide meals for school children, even if it were their duty. I am not saying it should not be done. I am not saying that local authorities should not do it. It may be that some organisations ought to take the matter in hand, but a very serious question is raised, as I pointed out, when it is laid down as a fundamental principle that the Government is bound to supply meals to school children. Certainly it lies outside the scope of the work of my Department. The same remark would apply to some of the other demands for expenditure of money that were made. As regards school buildings we have done something by an increased building programme up to the present year. Temporarily, at all events, it seems to show a slackening up this year, but we have, as I pointed out already, spent a considerable amount of money. I gave the figures last year. The figure for the year 1928-29, which possibly I did not give, was £120,000 actually spent, so that since we have come into office, we have given from State grants alone—you must add possibly one-fourth for the local contribution to find the actual expenditure—about £100,000. Progress has been especially marked in the past couple of years. All that required money, but we try to deal with the more urgent cases. We are still spending more than, what might be called, the normal amount on school buildings. If you add the local contribution to the State contribution you might say that in the last seven years half a million has been spent in the building of new schools and in the enlargement and improvements of existing schools.

So far as heating and cleaning are concerned I have brought that particular matter before the authorities. I thought that they might possibly influence and get a better response from those locally interested. I do not think it is unreasonable when the State bears as it does 95 per cent. to 97 per cent. of the total cost of primary education, or that it is not really asking too much that the rest might be found from local sources. I have no reason to believe that if a serious effort were made there are any portions of the country so poor that the managers would not be able to raise—in some cases it might be difficult, but it is done in other countries placed in a much more serious position—a sufficient amount to solve this problem. I do not think it is beyond their powers or resources to meet that particular matter.

Some Deputy, I think it was Deputy Fahy, complained that the county council scholarships intended for the children of the poor classes were being given to the children of people who could afford to send their children to school. I do not say that that statement is altogether unfounded. I do not think it is. I think the Deputy is, to a certain extent, correct in that statement, but we try, as well as we can, to point out to the local councils their duty in that respect. That is primarily a local matter. Our power in that respect is very limited. We have, theoretically, a certain amount of power, but in practice we are not in a position to know whether a certain local person who gets a scholarship is entitled to it from the point of view of means or not. If we were to undertake a function of that kind it would mean a great deal of expenditure on our part, more, possibly, than the actual sums involved were worth. It is stated that these scholarships had been suppressed in some places. I believe that is true, but I would ask the Deputy who raised that question—I think it was Deputy Powell—to use his influence with a member of his Party, who is also a member of the local authority, to see that they will not suppress these particular scholarships. However, it is a matter again for the local authorities. I regret that these scholarships were suppressed in that case, but, as I say, it is a matter primarily for the local authority. I certainly have no initiative or no control over them in that matter.

Does the Minister regret that it has been the practice in that county to give scholarships to boys and girls of means?

I do not know what the facts were.

Cannot they change the practice?

It is a matter purely, as Deputy O'Connell says, for the local body. The fact that they administered the scheme in this way is an extraordinary reason for abolishing it altogether. The remedy seems altogether drastic as they had a more obvious remedy in their own hands. Another question raised had reference to the teaching of music and singing. I cannot give Deputy Fahy off-hand the precise answer to the question he asked, namely, the number of schools in which music is taught, but I can give him the actual number of pupils who were taught music. The number of pupils on the rolls for the year was 522,090. Vocal music was taught through Irish to 236,924; through English to 37,769; through English and Irish to 208,432, making a total of 483,025. Another matter raised in connection with the curriculum of national schools is the question of drawing. That is a matter, owing to the importance attached to it by the Technical Commission, which I have already taken up to see what can be done.

It may mean that they would need to do, say, an hour and a half of drawing per week, and that would certainly mean a lightening of the school programme per day. I do not say that the Saturday half-day would meet the situation. It is a matter with which I am dealing. As regards summer courses, these have been in existence for a number of years. An ample opportunity was given to teachers under a certain age to avail themselves of the facilities, and money was provided to help them to do so. We recognise that when teachers have reached a certain age very much cannot be expected from them in the way of picking up a new language. But so far as the younger teachers are concerned, we think that they have got ample opportunity in the course of the last five or six years, and that the duty now lies on themselves to fit themselves to be able to deal with the school programme. I might also point out that when the preparatory colleges were being established, and when a Supplementary Estimate was introduced in the year 1926, I practically indicated that the establishment of the preparatory colleges would lead to a saving on this Vote. Another matter that has been referred to by two Galway Deputies—Deputies Fahy and Powell—is the question of a new training college. There is great difficulty in getting teachers at present, and there probably will be a shortage. The question of a new training college has come up, and Deputy Fahy is very innocent if he thinks that the matter has been mentioned now for the first time.

No, I do not.

I am glad that Deputy Fahy is not under that impression. The matter has been under consideration for two or three years, and the claims of Galway for the last two years to be the seat of the new training college are not being by any means overlooked.

That is not a definite promise from the Minister, is it?

Oh, no, but I have already, as the Deputy knows, committed myself fairly far in that direction. Deputy Fahy raised a question as to the transfer of the preparatory colleges to the Gaeltacht proper, referring especially to two—Coláiste Bhrighde and Coláiste Ide. So far as these are concerned, the buildings that are necessary are practically completed, so that in the autumn they ought to be able to house their full quotas. The college of Tourmakeady is by no means so far advanced, and the autumn of 1930 will be certainly the earliest date at which it can possibly be ready for receiving pupils. Even that would be an optimistic forecast so far as the other Munster college, of which Mallow is the temporary home, is concerned.

Deputy Byrne asked what machinery there was for promotion and how was a person promoted in the national schools. The duty of promotion lies upon the principal teacher. I gathered from Deputy Byrne's remarks that he was under the impression that the teachers were too keen on promotion, that they were doing it too quickly. In a number of countries, promotion takes place in exactly the same way. Deputy Fahy referred to the German examination paper. I would like to see the German examination paper. They have very few examinations in that country; certainly they have no general State examination in comparison with our junior certificate. Promotion takes place there naturally from year to year, and the same more or less as happens in our national schools. If I have a fault to find about promotions it is along the lines that Deputy Byrne indicated; it is in connection with the slowness of promotion in a number of schools. That may be a matter that will require looking into, but, as I say, the complaint of those who are familiar with the running of national schools is not that people are promoted who ought not to be promoted, but that people are not promoted who, in the ordinary course of events, ought to be put into a higher class.

We have taken steps to set going the idea of a Leaving Certificate examination in the primary schools; we have sent out communications to the managers and principals, and in a good many cases we have received satisfactory replies. I hope that that is an institution that will spread and that it will occupy a particularly important place in the ordinary school year. Deputy Mullins wanted some information about Gaeltacht teachers and their qualifications. These are the figures to which reference was made in the Report from which he quoted: The number of schools in the Gaeltacht was 447; the Ard-Teastas is held by 150 teachers, the bi-lingual certificate by 413, the ordinary certificate by 213, and no qualification—no paper qualification, at all events—was possessed by 102 teachers. That is the position so far as the full Gaeltacht is concerned. A committee is in process of being set up, as indicated on the Government commentary on the Report, to deal with that matter. Deputy Mullins asked me for certain information about the publications under Vote 49, B.1, B.2 and B.3. B.3 deals with the preparation of records of Irish speech. They are not actually meant, of course, for ordinary use in the schools or for propagating the language; they are really meant as records to preserve the spoken language. Such a study as this is being undertaken in the case of most languages, and it is largely a scientific study. The records are practically complete so far as the Munster dialects are concerned, and they will be soon available for the public. I think the question of letterpress is now being considered. As regards the number of school text-books published to-day—that was not definitely referred to by Deputy Mullins, but I will give the figures because they are really connected with the subject he raised—under Vote 47, sub-head E the secondary school text-books published to date are 19—one arithmetic, one geometry one poetry, five full-length stories, seven volumes of short stories, two of sketches, one play for juveniles and one series of dialogues. Books in various stages of preparation amount to thirty—six Latin texts, three histories, seventeen general readers and stories, one poetry, one "French Revolution," one translation from the Greek, and one geography. The books published to date under Vote 49.B to which the Deputy has referred are two, and books in various stages of preparation fifty-four, of which twenty-nine are translations of stories and readers, five are volumes of plays and one is a volume of poems from the German.

As regards Amharclann Gaedhealach, the actual Vote takes into account only the theatre that is active in Dublin. A similar theatre was recently started in Galway. If other places put forward their claims they can, of course, be examined. As regards the sanitation of the schools, whenever any matter of that kind has been brought to our notice we have immediately got in touch with the responsible party, the manager, and in many cases, at all events, the complaint, when referred to him, has been remedied.

Coming to Vote 47, there is a statement in Deputy Fahy's speech that I do not know if I am correctly interpreting or not. It is more or less along the lines that in every school you have a number of what are called dull pupils—heavyweights, I think, would be the translation.

In the larger colleges.

In the larger colleges you have a number of dull pupils. I think the Deputy said you might call them heavyweights, and he suggested that there should be two curricula—one for the clever pupil and one for the dull pupil. Have I interpreted him right so far?

I do not think so. I referred to a type of pupil who is not going for any profession, who would probably be going on for farming, who takes no interest in many of these subjects, who very often, takes a very great interest in the games, and who is not catered for because he does not worry much about these subjects, and was not going for an exhibition. I suggest that there might be a special course to meet that type in which such pupils might take an interest.

I am glad I gave the Deputy an opportunity of explaining. Anyhow, what I do not like is the suggestion that we should have two courses in secondary schools, but there is nothing to prevent that. If that is not so the fault lies, to a large extent, with the secondary schools themselves.

Quite so.

The Deputy recognises that, but I do not like any suggestion that the clever pupils should go on for the theoretical course, and the dull pupils for the practical course. Anything like that is to be deprecated.

No, because the man who can run a good farm successfully might require more brains than the professional man.

I quite agree. Another Deputy referred to the speech I made at the recent Congress. He did not quite get the grasp of what I said. Owing to certain references made in the address to which I was, to a certain extent, speaking, which demanded secondary education for everybody, I felt it necessary to point out that I personally objected to that boosting of secondary education at the expense of other types of post-primary education, the boosting up of professional subjects and professions. It may be that the lecturer in question, by secondary education, meant post-primary education, but I did feel inclined there to express my belief that in the country, taking the educational system as a whole, there was a tendency undoubtedly for the people unduly to exalt secondary education, and not to pay sufficient attention or sufficient respect to the other types of education. That was the speech of mine to which Deputy Goulding referred. Now, there is, I again repeat, that attitude on the part of the country, and it is not a healthy attitude. As I indicated a moment ago, there is nothing to prevent a secondary school adopting a much more practical programme than some of them do at present, and, to a certain extent, it is undoubtedly waste of energy when you have two secondary schools serving the same area adopting exactly the same programme.

I regret that, but, as the Deputy knows, and as the House knows, my control over secondary education is very slight. I certainly would not be able to say which of them had adopted the more practical programme. But there is, even in the secondary programme, great latitude left, so far as these matters are concerned. A certain number of subjects have to be taken, I am speaking now only of the Intermediate Certificate, but more liberty is allowed in connection with the Intermediate Certificate. There they have to take either Irish or English. Full liberty is allowed to the school in the choice of subjects, but for the Leaving Certificate they have practically to study four subjects, Irish, English, history, geography and mathematics. For mathematics the girls may substitute arithmetic and another subject. In addition to these four they may take one, two or three more subjects and get credit for them. Amongst the subjects they may take are, what I may call, vocational subjects. If, as the Deputy said, the student is interested in farming he can take rural science and manual instruction, and if he is interested in business he can take commercial French or any modern language, or commerce and so on. There is a similar choice as regards any other particular opening. Actually a few schools, I think two at all events, have availed themselves of that liberty, and certainly they have met with nothing but encouragement from the Department and myself in that respect. This is a specimen course that was submitted and approved by us from a secondary school in the country: Irish, English, mathematics, agricultural science, commerce, manual instruction, practical agriculture and horticulture. A recently established secondary school in Donegal—a mixed school composed of boys and girls—had the following subjects—Irish, English, history and geography. In addition the boys took mathematics, manual instruction and nature study. The girls took arithmetic and domestic science, and then boys and girls as extra subjects took drawing and music.

resumed the Chair.

The more schools with a secondary curriculum that adopt that particular kind of programme the better I will be pleased. Once or twice I have spoken in public and drawn attention, so far as I could, to this fact, and also more or less put it up to some schools that they could do this. I think, especially if you have a number of schools, that it would be much healthier, even in the case of secondary schools, if they adopted a more practical programme of that kind.

Reference was made by Deputy Fahy, Deputy Tierney and Deputy Sir James Craig to the question of home work, so far as secondary schools are concerned. I am not going to speak of my own experience in that matter, but I may say that I am in full sympathy with what they said. Recently I happened to be in Germany, which is well known for its driving powers in educational matters, and it was pointed out there that the tendency was altogether away from giving too much homework. In the past undoubtedly they did give too much. Now, though it is very hard to change from what the educational authorities consider bad habits, and though they would not guarantee what was the maximum home work that young people had to do, they said that they certainly did not regard it as a sign of good teaching if a large quantity of home work had to be done. Again my influence there is largely a moral influence. I would feel inclined to do what Deputy Sir James Craig asked me—to look into and see whether from the inspection point of view we could not do something in that respect. It is a matter that requires a certain amount of attention. Up to the present, the general complaint we have heard is not in that direction; it is generally in the other direction. I know that there are cases in which boys—and the same may apply to girls—have practically very little free time, if you take into account the amount of time, in the city of Dublin especially, that they have to spend going to and from school. Deputy Fahy found fault with our history syllabus on the ground, as well as I understood him that it was not sufficiently wide.

That people might do four or five particular periods and not have a connected view of history.

There is a connected view of history; at least we have tried to secure it by insisting upon it for the curriculum and for examinations. For the Intermediate Certificate they have European and Irish history complete. It is when they come afterwards to the Leaving Certificate that they have to specialise in certain periods, but a more accurate and a more intensive knowledge of the Leaving Certificate period is required. It was precisely in order to achieve what the Deputy had in view that that was done. Deputy Good and Deputy Mullins referred to the reduction in the Estimates for technical education. That is largely due to the fact—and I think it is this particular portion of the technical education Estimate that is affected in the different years —that the Central Government pays back the cost-of-living bonus to local committees and that there has been actually a fall in the cost-of-living bonus. Most of the reduction can be explained in that way during the years to which the Deputy referred.

Will the Minister say whether that was responsible for it, if we take last year and this year, when there was a fall of nearly £8,000?

The fall there is due also to the question of whether or not we should give the cost-of-living bonus to the part-time teachers. We are not giving the bonus to the part-time teachers, and that is the cause. The committees themselves, if they think it proper, can pay the full salaries, but these teachers are not whole-time. Teaching is not their profession, and we are not paying back the- cost-of-living bonus. I think the Deputy will find that it is there the principal reduction takes place.

That only accounts for about half.

I have already on various occasions given my views on technical education. I certainly have never pretended that it was not at least as important as the other. I have been accused of delay. Certainly my Department and myself have not ceased to work at this problem of reforming the system of technical education. I recognise that there are a number of problems in education that we have to face in the primary schools. As I indicated to the Congress in Waterford, we may have to face these problems. I tried to get information as to how matters stand in the primary schools. We have to face the problem as to the actual amount of the type of education given from twelve to fourteen—whether it is quite suitable for these ages; whether, in fact, it is not, to some extent, a repetition. That was the charge made, that between twelve and fourteen it was to a certain extent a repetition of what was done in the previous years. We want to see that there is no staleness so far as the pupils are concerned. The other problem is one that has undoubtedly engaged my attention, and that is, the question of from fourteen to sixteen, and sixteen to eighteen. I did not refer to this matter in my opening statement, because I thought that to a certain extent I was debarred from referring to coming legislation. However, I may indicate some of the difficulties we hope to remove and some of the drawbacks in the present system which we hope to deal with. It is by no means intended to have a break between anything in the nature of a new or revised programme or system and the existing system. I feel, and people who have been connected with technical education for a great many years also feel, that undoubtedly in some respects there is waste in a great deal of what is done in some technical schools—not all of them. I instance one particular example. I feel, for instance, that there is a great deal too much typewriting and shorthand being done. There was a time, four or five years ago, when there was a market for shorthand-typists and, as a result, practically every girl now that goes into a technical school wants to do typewriting and shorthand. The result is that there is waste from every point of view. I think that the occasion of a new system being introduced ought to give us an opportunity for a thorough overhauling where there is waste. I feel that there is waste in other matters, where the aims we have in view could be better achieved at less cost. I intend to have undoubtedly smaller committees.

As to the question of buildings raised by Deputy Anthony, when he dealt with the situation in Cork, the present situation is most unsatisfactory. There must be power given to the local authorities to borrow money for the erection of buildings. The interest on that money should be met out of the fund, which will be a fund, as at present, that will be partly subscribed to by the local authorities and partly by the central Government. I anticipate on the part of the central Government, and rather quickly, too, there will be a gradual working up until the maximum effect and cost will be achieved and increased year by year, so far as this is concerned. Powers will be given to the councils to borrow for the purpose of erecting proper technical school buildings. It will be necessary, from various points of view, to preserve a distinction between rural and urban committees, because the task which each has to perform from every point of view is different. It is a much more intensive and more vital a task in many respects in the towns than in the country. There is not the same danger in the country between the years of fourteen and sixteen, that there is to the young persons in the town. And the type of instruction will be altogether different in the towns from the country. Therefore, in so far as that the urban districts are of a certain size, it will be necessary to continue that distinction. There are two types of education that we have to face. They both have to go on. That is continuation education and technical education in the narrow sense. So far as the country is concerned, you will have continuation education gradually introduced. It will be part-time education, and from our economic conditions, and various other reasons, it cannot be anything else, so far as compulsion is concerned, except part-time education —possibly two hundred hours in the year. Remember, if we succeed in doing that and gradually spreading out a system of that kind in the country districts, we are doing as much as has been done in some of the most advanced States, for instance in Germany. So far as the town is concerned, it is a different problem and more urgent in many respects. Again, the continuation system of education is necessary— full time, with probably compulsory powers where the boy or girl is not in employment, and part-time where there is employment, and then technical education in the narrow sense from sixteen to eighteen.

Now in the country my Department does not propose to undertake the provision of technical education in the narrow sense, that is, agricultural education. Our efforts there will be limited to primary education, post primary education, that is continuation education. Agricultural education in the narrow sense for those grown-up people from eighteen years onwards will be a matter mainly for the Department of Agriculture. Now, in the towns it is different. In the towns technical education will also be necessary from sixteen years to eighteen years. We intend to adopt the Commission's suggestion as regards the apprenticeship committees. These committees should be local and in touch with the local bodies. So far as anything in the nature of a central body is concerned there will be power to have advisory, technical and vocational committees. Apprenticeship committees should be local committees knowing local conditions and needs, working in touch with the local educational committees.

As I say, there will be a process of gradual extension of that system. It will mean a yearly increase on the cost to the local rates and to the central body as well. It will take a number of years before we achieve our maximum effort, and that is necessary. The Commission on Technical Instruction recognised that, apart from the question of finance, you could only gradually advance, and that if you tried to jump immediately to a complete system you probably would do more harm and make more mistakes than you could get back from. We therefore intend to advance, but to advance gradually. It has been pointed out that the local authorities at present are hampered from the fact that they cannot raise more than two pence in the pound, and in some cases three pence in the pound. There will be more opportunity in that respect, I hope, under the new system. Now, as to the teachers. Remember there will have to be a transition arrangement made for taking over as far as possible existing teachers. The other Departments, as the House will recognise, are interested in this particular matter. So far as the apprenticeship is concerned, it is a very delicate and ticklish matter, but that need not hold us up, but there will be the views of the Department of Industry and Commerce to be considered as to the effect a system of that kind may have on trade. However, I anticipate no great difficulty there. I am fully convinced that one of the primary needs of the country is to train our people. If we are to hold our place it must be by training our people, and, as I say, it does not matter whether it is in secondary, university or technical education.

Personally I have always stressed, when I spoke in public since I was entrusted with this Department, that in this country there is not a healthy outlook so far as secondary and other types of education are concerned. There is too much tendency to regard the professions and the Civil Service as the be all of what education should aim at. I naturally do my best, seeing this is my view, to put it before those who, with the system we have, are, in the last resort responsible.

Deputy Everett raised two questions. With one of them I cannot deal. It was about an appointment in the County Wicklow. It showed, he says, great lack of enthusiasm on my part because I consented to that particular appointment. That particular name was submitted to me by the Local Appointments Commissioners. I gave my assent to the appointment, and there is nothing that I can regret in that particular matter. The other matter he referred to was the difficulty of getting a site. He asked me to consider the possibility of getting compulsory powers. That is a matter to which I am quite willing to give consideration. It may involve difficulties, but it is a matter which certainly requires some consideration. I have dealt with many of the matters raised by Deputies in the course of this debate. I do not, for a moment, suggest that I have satisfied Deputies; I never undertake impossible tasks of that kind. Many things have to be borne in mind. There is a period of stringency, and apart from that there is the other factor that I would ask Deputies to remember. Our Department is largely a directing Department and a paying Department. It does not educate, but it deals with those who do educate, and if people are dissatisfied, attention might be turned to those who educate in the different types of schools, university, technical, secondary, primary, and so on.

I would like to ask the Minister a question arising out of a remark that he made in the course of his speech to the effect that he did not think it was the duty of the Government to provide free meals for school children, even in the congested areas. Might I ask him would it be anything more extraordinary for the Department of Education to adopt that principle than it is for the authorities, say, in Scotland, to provide free books for school children? Further, would the Minister inform us whether he expects that local authorities in congested areas like Donegal and Galway should be held responsible for the provision of free meals where they are necessary when these county councils or local bodies are mulcted to the extent of the amounts owing by the defaulters of land annuities —by people who find it impossible to pay them? Now, without intending any personal reflection, it is quite obvious that the Minister was not brought up on a diet of hot water and flour.

Would the Minister say when the Bill that he has under consideration giving effect to the recommendations of the Technical Education Commission will be introduced?

All that I can say in regard to that Bill is that I have considered it personally several times with the particular department of education concerned. So far as I am personally concerned, I am satisfied with the Bill as it stands at present, but not as regards the drafting of some of the details of it. There are some very elaborate details in the Bill, and these will have to be considered. I will try to get the Bill introduced as early as possible. I am as anxious as anybody else about it. The Deputy and the House will remember that the report of the Technical Education Commission is an extremely difficult document to deal with. A general recommendation made by the Commission brought us into avenues of investigation that were never suspected at the start. The question of apprenticeship and matters of that kind are extremely difficult to deal with. As I have said, I have considered the Bill on several occasions with the Department concerned. Certainly all that I can promise is that I will push it as hard as I can.

Can the Minister say if the Bill will be introduced before the Summer Recess?

I will make an effort, and that is all I can say.

I did not gather from the Minister, when replying, whether he proposes to take over the Irish teachers for the teaching in the continuation schools.

Provision will be taken in the Bill to deal with existing officers, and the Deputy will see that when the Bill is brought forward.

Will the Minister see that some arrangement is made for the people concerned to be taught from this out, so that there will be no waste of time?

Not from this out; in this year.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share