asked the Minister for Education whether in view of his statement in the Dáil on March 24th that his Department had no responsibility for the policy or programme in operation in the primary schools he will give the names of those who are responsible, and also whether he will take steps to ascertain whether those responsible are still of opinion that Irish should be the sole medium of instruction in the infants' classes in schools in which the infants know no Irish.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Primary Schools Programme
The programme at present in operation in national schools had its origin in the report of a conference convened in 1920 by the Irish National Teachers' Organisation. The following bodies were represented at that conference:— The General Council of County Councils, the Gaelic League, the National Labour Executive, the Association of Secondary Teachers, the Irish National Teachers' Organisation, and the Ministry of Education in the Second Dáil. The programme recommended by the conference was published early in 1922 and was brought into operation in national schools in that year by the Department of Education. The present Department of Education had no representatives at the conference. The programme was examined, after it had been in operation for three years, by a second conference summoned by the Minister for Education in 1925. That conference, which included amongst its members some representatives of the present Department of Education, merely confirmed the programme of 1922 with slight modifications and the resulting programme, with a few additional alterations made in 1934, is the programme at present in operation.
The bodies represented at the 1925 conference included representatives of the managers of national schools, the teachers of national schools, the General Council of County Councils, the Gaelic League, and members nominated by the Minister for Education, representing other interests such as the Universities, Labour, the Irish Christian Brothers, and and the Department of Education. Both these conferences affirmed the principle that the work in the infants' classes should be entirely in Irish, and, in the circumstances, I do not see that any useful purpose would be served by the adoption of the Deputy's suggestion.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, the question asks the Minister for the names of the members of the last Commission to which he has referred in his answer. I wonder if he has these names by him, and if he could give them to me?
I shall have the names sent to the Deputy.
I would esteem it a favour if the Minister would give them to me now, if I do not greatly inconvenience him, as a question may arise out of the personnel.
I regret that I cannot give the Deputy the names without some little delay. The names of the members of the National Programme Conference, published on the 4th June, 1925, were: Chairman, Reverend Lambert A.J. McKenna; representing school managers, Right Reverend Thomas F. Macken, Very Reverend Canon Waters, Reverend Canon Kingsmill Moore; representing teachers in national schools, Cornelius P. Murphy, T.J. O'Connell, E. Mansfield, D. Meehan, D.F. Courell; representing the General Council of County Councils, Senator P.W. Kenny, P. Ó Siochfhradha (An Seabhac); representing the Gaelic League, Cormac Breathnach, Caitlin Nic Gabhann; nominated by the Minister for Education, General Mulcahy, T.D., Professor W. Magennis, Professor Thrift, P. Baxter, Senator McLysaght, Senator T. Farren, Miss Louise Gavan Duffy, Reverend Brother Kelleher, Seoirse MacNiocaill, M. Franklin, Henry Morris. The names of those who were on the original Conference the report of which was published in 1922, were: Máire Ní Chinnéide, Chairman; Proinsias O Fathaigh, representing the Minister for Education; Henry O'Friel, representing the General Council of County Councils; Seán O Murthuille, representing the Gaelic League; Thomas Farren, representing the National Labour Executive. Tomás De Burc, representing the Association of Secondary Teachers, and the following, representing the Irish National Teachers' Organisation: J. Harbinson, D.C. Meachair, Cormac Breathnach, E. Manséal, Tomás O Conaill.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, in view of the fact that the Minister passed over to those individuals the responsibility for the present system of teaching infants who do not know Irish, through the medium of Irish, would he not think it expedient to give these individuals an opportunity now of saying whether, after they have seen that system in practice for some years, they remain of the same opinion, because I expect that if that opportunity was afforded to them, some of them, at least, would desire to inform the Minister that, in so far as they sanctioned the existing system in anticipation, from their experience, they have learned that it would be wise to amend their original judgment. Would the Minister give them that opportunity by addressing a letter to them asking for their opinion now?
That is a separate question.
I submit it is the question. The question asks whether the Minister will take steps to ascertain whether those responsible are still of the opinion that Irish should be the sole medium of instruction in infants' classes in schools in which the infants know no Irish. I seriously and sincerely ask the Minister will he take the trouble to send a circular letter to each of those individuals named in his reply and ask them that question.
I have given the Deputy a fairly full answer and I have nothing to add.
I am much obliged for the Minister's answer, but he did not reply to that part of the question. He might give a straight answer to that question.
I said that I did not see that any useful purpose would be served by the adoption of the Deputy's suggestion.
Is the Minister aware of any experience which Deputy Dillon has of teaching infants in national schools?
That is a separate question.