We are on the Fifth Stage—that the Bill do now pass.
Central Fund (No. 2) Bill, 1932—First and Final Stages.
Leave granted to introduce a "Bill entitled an Act to apply a certain sum out of the Central Fund to the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, one thousand, nine hundred and thirty-three."—(Minister for Finance).
Bill read the First Time
Bill passed through Second Stage and Committee Stage, and Report Stage.
I would like to ask the Minister for Finance, or whoever is the proper Minister—I think it would be the Minister for Education—could we have some indication of the policy of the Minister for Education, for the forthcoming year, 1932 to 1933? There are one or two matters that I would like to raise.
They were to be raised when we come back in the autumn.
But are we going to come back?
Deputies:
Oh, yes.
We are coming back with flying colours.
During most of my life I have been interested in matters of education, and I have taken a very deep interest, particularly in the workers' side of it, and I am rather anxious to know from the Minister what is his policy, for instance, in relation to married lady teachers. What is the policy of the Minister in regard to placing on equality members of the Civil Service or civil servants, national teachers, full-time University professors—with the exception, of course, of those persons provided for in the Consitution as representing the National University and Trinity College? Does the Minister propose, or is it his intention, to place all those persons on an equal footing in relation to public activities such as representation on public boards, representation in Dáil Eireann, or representation in Seanad Eireann? I hold very strong views on these matters which I have just raised, and if I were a vote catcher or seeking to enlist the sympathies of some very strong people in the country—I use the word "strong" in this connection inasmuch as they have very good or strong influences on the electorate—I would hardly raise the matter.
I forgot to include another section who do not come under the category of civil servants or national teachers. I refer to dispensary medical officers. It cannot be said that I am hitting at one side and neglecting the other in this Parliament, because we have, in both the big Parties, members who are national teachers and members who are dispensary medical officers. I am not quite so sure that we have in both, or in either of the big Parties, many whole-time University professors. I am giving my own personal views in this matter. I have no objection to University professors as such, but I have a very strong objection, and I have registered that objection in other places many times and possibly lost many hundreds and possibly many thousands of votes because of registering this objection, and I take this opportunity now of registering my objection again, in order that the Minister might give us some indication in this matter of education and the things that relate to education in this country. I feel that because of certain circumstances that exist in this country at present, because of circumstances— historical if you like—that have existed in this country for many years past, the national teacher in the country exercises an undue or possibly an abnormal influence if you like, over the electors in certain areas. In like manner, the dispensary doctor exercises the same influence—possibly a more powerful influence. My policy is all in or nobody in.
Why debar the civil servants from entering Parliament or from representation on the Corporation of Dublin, say, or from representation on the Corporation of Cork, and yet admit another man who, in my view, is more important still to the community? Important as is the service given by the civil servant, I feel that the importance to the community of the teachers' service is far greater and more transcending than that of the civil servant. Having these views, I would like to explain why it is that I feel that those people should be excluded. That is to say, why, if you do not include all, these other sections of the community should be excluded from entering either Parliament or other public bodies in this State.
The teacher makes a proclamation, and, because of that proclamation, his status and his salary have been raised in this State. His proclamation is something to this effect: "My profession," he suggests, "is one that demands of me all that I can give to the State. My hours may appear to the ordinary working class people of the State as being inordinately short, but much of my time is taken up in preparing exercises for my students for the following day's programme, much of it is taken up in examining those exercises and in an endeavour to understand the mentality (not to use that word ‘psychology' at all) of my students. I have to work very, very long hours indeed." Now, I do not quarrel with that at all. I say that it is a proper presentation of the case of the national teacher in this country. I say it is a proper presentation of the case of the university professor or of the secondary teacher.
The same case has been made on behalf of the medical officer. The dispensary medical officer is a citizen of this State whose services cannot be measured in terms of money. Here again medicine, or the science of medicine, suggests—and any physician of any note, or physicians, if you like, without any note or of no note, will tell you-and the whole history of medicine suggests, that it demands daily and intimate contact with their patients before proper treatment can be administered. Well, now, take daily contact. Daily contact is suggested in the teacher's case and in the case of the dispensary medical officer. I want to know from these people or from the representatives of these people, can you have that proper contact with your pupil or your patient if you are attending to the duties entailed by attendance at the Dáil? I suggest that you cannot do it. You can only do one thing at a time, and if I want to discharge my duties conscientiously as a teacher I cannot discharge my duties as a representative on a public body such as the Dáil or the Seanad. The same applies quite logically to the dispensary medical officer. Can he say that he is rightly or properly and humanely performing his duties, for which he is well paid and adequately remunerated, that he is doing his duty to his patients if he is absent in Dublin four days a week? I am hitting two sides of this House when I say that, and I am antagonising hundreds and hundreds of my own constituents, but I am not worrying about that. Can any medical officer of health tell me—will he have the audacity to tell me—in view of his own proclamations, in view of the statements made from time to time on behalf of medical officers, statements such as I have just briefly summarised about contact and daily contact in order to be able to trace the history of the disease of a particular patient whom he or she may be attending— that he can perform that duty satisfactorily and attend the Dáil at the same time?
That opens up a very big question which I did not intend to open up on this Vote, but because of the fact that we are faced with a very extraordinary and serious crisis in the affairs of our country, and that there is a strong possibility that a dictatorship or something approaching it may be established, before we meet here again, I want to get some expression of opinion or indication from the Minister for Education in regard to his attitude upon the questions I have raised. I want to know from him does he subscribe to the idea preached and proclaimed by the national teacher, and the secondary teacher, that their job, while it might appear to be a light, and not an arduous one to the outside public, and to the ordinary lay persons in this country, and that while it might appear that they finish at 2 or 3 o'clock in the afternoon, in reality they have work to perform after school hours. Does he believe that if we are to reach a decent standard of education, it would demand that our teachers should be in daily contact with their pupils? I suggest to the Minister, if that is not so, that two millions of money is being wasted in this country upon education, and I have very strong views upon that. Perhaps I shall develop that side, if I am challenged, on another occasion. Does the Minister also—although I am not sure that this comes under his aegis, and that it does not more properly come under the aegis of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health—believe it a good, a right and proper thing for dispensary medical officers in this country to keep in daily contact, as far as they humanly can, with their patients for whom this State is paying many millions of money? I could, of course, have raised all these issues on other Votes, perhaps. As one who has been in public life for many years, and who derives no revenue out of public life, but on the contrary lost considerably from a financial point of view in public life, and as a student of politics in this country, who has given some thought to the education of our boys and girls in this country, I am anxious to hear from the Minister what his views are on the matters I have raised, and to have an indication from him as to his future policy.
As the Minister was not here when I began my speech I would like to put these questions to him now that he is here, even at the risk of repeating myself. What is the Minister's opinion about married lady teachers in the schools? I suggest this much to the Minister—and I do not want to go behind backdoors to say it—that lady teachers in national schools should be placed upon the same basis as lady civil servants, and retired upon marriage for reasons which should be obvious to every sensible man and woman in this Dáil. There is another side to it that should make a very large appeal—although perhaps I should not suggest it—to members of the Labour Party. At times these lady teachers have to be absent from their schools for considerable periods and other ladies are engaged to take their places. But mark you this—not at the rate of pay of those married ladies, but at considerably less. Is that a right or proper state of affairs in this country? I know this thing has agitated the minds of people in other countries. I want to have the Civil Service put upon the same basis as national teachers or medical officers, or, to reverse that, if the lady teacher marries, then let her services be discontinued in the same way as the lady civil servant who marries. Her employment discontinues when she marries. These are matters which may appear very trivial but let me remind the Minister and the House they are causing a good deal of discussion in the country.
We all know of the depressed economic conditions that exist in our own country to-day. I do not want to suggest that we are the only country suffering from this depressed economic condition. It has been proved beyond yea or nay that, up to a period, we were relatively better off than other countries, but can this country afford to carry on with all this money spent upon education? I am an advocate of attracting to the national system of education in this country the best brains, and the best men and women, the country can produce, and I want to see the conditions very attractive as regards salary. But I also want to provide an outlet for the young women that we are turning out of our training colleges and university colleges, and to see that they are employed. Surely every man in this House will agree to this, at any rate, that a man who marries a woman should support her, or he is no man. The State should not be asked, while there are young men and women, and particularly women, unemployed, to continue married women, as teachers. It is most unfair that married women should be kept in employment while their husbands are well able to support them. I quite anticipate a lot of criticism, but we have become quite used to that in this country. It is, of course, according to the new morality we hear preached that it is the right and acceptable thing to play to the gallery, that it is the politic thing and the thing which will get votes. I ask that if there is to be any criticism at all it should be of a constructive character.
I ask the Minister to indicate what is his policy in regard to—(1) the married lady teacher in the schools; (2) in view of what I have said, the undoubted influence that can, and may, be exercised on both sides of the House because of their position by dispensary medical officers of health. Would he indicate to the House what his policy is in this direction? Would he receive with approval a motion that I have the temerity to put on the Order Paper which, if adopted, would exclude from Dáil Eireann or Seanad Eireann members of the teaching profession and persons who are medical officers of health under the Local Government and Public Health system of this country? The answer to these two questions and to the other questions I raised would be of very great interest to the people in the agricultural areas, not to mention those who live in the urban districts.
In view of the danger of a dictatorship, which Deputy Anthony foresees, I am rather astonished that he should seek to speak on what I regard, for him, as the singularly inappropriate subject of education—particularly when he raises such grave issues without any notice to me that he proposed to raise them. I would remind Deputy Anthony that education is a very delicate matter and that speeches for the gallery are not likely to make easier the task of those responsible for directing the educational administration of the Free State. Speeches for the gallery on potential dictatorships and matters on which Deputy Anthony shines are, no doubt, very appropriate, but when Deputy Anthony seeks to enter the educational domain and professes to give his views to this House on technical matters relating to education, I question, in the first place, whether the moment is opportune, and, secondly, if we need advice, whether Deputy Anthony, judged by the remarks he has just made, is at all fitted to give information which any fair-minded or well-informed person would consider of the slightest benefit. Deputy Anthony has been in this House for ten years, and although there was at least one member of the teaching profession here during most of that time, he did not raise this question as to whether teachers ought to be members of the Oireachtas or not during the whole period of the recent administration.
That might be due to Party discipline.
We must excuse the gyrations of Deputy Anthony. He is no longer a member of the Labour Party and he probably forgets that he was a member of that Party and agreed to having members of the teachers' organisation put up for membership of both the Dáil and the Seanad. I think I am not wrong in stating that for many years Deputy Anthony himself was prepared to accept the leadership of the General Secretary of the National Teachers' Organisation. Is it because the National Teachers' Organisation is no longer officially represented in this House that Deputy Anthony takes this opportunity to try to throw the largest possible number of slurs, in one of the most ill-advised speeches I ever listened to, on a body deserving of nothing but the highest consideration from their fellow countrymen and fellow countrywomen? Let me remind Deputy Anthony that when he and men like him were trying to throw cold water on the Irish programmes in the schools, trying to make out, as he tried to make out to-day, that there was a wastage of millions of pounds—
I stand by that.
I challenged him before, when I was in opposition, and I challenge him now, to show where the wastage is. If there is going to be an improvement in our education I hope that those bodies responsible for the future of education will have better views, sounder opinions, and, may I say, more sincere convictions than Deputy Anthony has shown himself to possess this evening. The Deputy was prepared to follow the leadership of the General Secretary of the teachers' organisation for many years in this House. Now, he proceeds to attack the body of teachers. What has Deputy Anthony found out at this juncture on the question of married women teachers, membership of the Oireachtas in relation to teachers and membership of the Oireachtas in relation to dispensary doctors, to render this a very acute question when, as he says, we are faced with a dictatorship? If we are going to discuss this question—I have no objection whatever to discussing it in a reasonable manner—let us bear in mind that in education we cannot effect revolutions. We cannot set up dictatorships in education. We have to wait for gradual growth and change and it has been accepted, up to the present, in regard to married women teachers that they are as efficient as non-married women teachers. We know that, in other countries, the movement to which Deputy Anthony claims to belong is dependent almost wholly on the teaching profession for its place in the public life of the country.
That does not alter the principle.
It can be argued that teachers—I am glad to say that I have been one myself—are just as good as anybody else. If the people consider them worthy of their suffrages and elect them to positions of responsibility, is it suggested that disabilities should be definitely placed upon them?
I suggested that civil servants and teachers should be placed on all fours.
I should like, a Chinn Comhairle, to be allowed to proceed with my speech.
On a point of order—
A Deputy:
Sit down.
I do not mind that hooligan. I want to have the civil servant placed on the same plane as the national teacher and allowed to come in here.
I have no control over the Civil Service. The Executive Council has control of the Civil Service and the Minister for Finance is the Minister to deal with questions affecting the Civil Service. In my capacity as Minister for Education, I have given some attention to this matter and I have found that for a considerable period teachers have been permitted to become members of the Oireachtas. The question has been considered. It is a very weighty and important question. Whether a large body of the community, if they can show that during their attendance at the Oireachtas their duties will be carried out to the satisfaction of the authorities for whom they work, should be allowed to be members of the Oireachtas is a very important question, and a decision as to whether a new policy should be brought into operation cannot be reached in a moment.
What is the Minister's own opinion?
If Deputy Anthony's view were correct, the House would lose the services of the professors in the universities as well as the services of the national teachers because, I take it, the same argument could be applied to university professors. You would also include dispensary medical officers. Regarding dispensary medical officers, I recognise that the position is possibly a difficult one if it can be shown that while the dispensary medical officer is away from his dispensary the duties of the office are in any way being neglected. But, up to the present, the dispensary medical officers who are members of the Dáil have appointed satisfactory substitutes and have had their duties carried out to the satisfaction of the authorities employing them. I do not think that any position has arisen up to the present in regard either to teachers or dispensary medical officers that compels us, on such grounds as Deputy Anthony has advanced, to alter the policy or, if you wish, the absence of change, which has characterised this matter in recent years. We have been carrying on in a certain way and the way is simply this: that we allow these people to become members of the Oireachtas so long as their duties can be performed satisfactorily.
With regard to the question of the payment of substitutes, upon which Deputy Anthony lays great stress, in regard to teachers, the position is that the substitute is generally a younger and less experienced teacher than the married woman, let us say, who appoints her, and not having the same years of service she is not entitled to the same remuneration. In these cases at any rate it is entirely a matter between the teacher and the substitute. As far as I know those teachers who are members of the Oireachtas, I think there has not been any disposition on their part to draw additional salaries or to make use of the position that the people conferred on them to try to draw extra revenue out of the State. Deputy Anthony has told us that he is not in public life to draw revenue out of it. Who is? The members of the Dáil, as far as I know them, who are national teachers have given service to this country of which I think we may be well proud.
Have they resigned their positions?
At any rate I am proud to be associated with them in political life. When men were wanted they were not afraid or ashamed to face the bullets and the bayonets of the enemy. Some of them carried the flag of a united Ireland and carried the flag of the Irish Republic in the Six Counties under the aegis of the gentlemen on the opposite side during and before the year 1922. If to-morrow we ask these men to forfeit anything that Deputy Anthony suggested in a mean speech of misrepresentation that they are gaining in the way of extra remuneration, I have not the remotest doubt but that they would be prepared to sacrifice it. They are prepared to sacrifice it if called upon but it is a matter of some difficulty and must be examined with great care to ascertain what exactly we are going to do in future with regard to these two classes of people. I take it that later on we shall have probably better and more worthy contributions to this very serious and very delicate matter than we have had from Deputy Anthony. While I am anxious to come to a final decision on these matters I would point out that no decision was come to upon the principle during the ten years' control of the preceding administration. We have got to go into these questions very carefully and I shall be very glad to have at the time the views of the members. I should welcome speeches and certainly should welcome opinions, which would show that Deputies had a real appreciation of the situation and were really interested in educational welfare, but which would show, at the same time, that they were prepared to give fair play to members of the professions in question and to have real advertence to the democratic ideal about which so many of us are anxious to shout, but which we decry sometimes when we change our political opinions.
Question put, and agreed to.
This is a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 35 of the Constitution.
Message ordered to be sent to the Seanad accordingly.