Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 23 Mar 1939

Vol. 74 No. 18

Committee on Finance. - Vote 45—Office of the Minister for Education (Resumed).

Mr. Fagan

I would like to suggest to the Minister that he should make some alteration in regard to the teaching of Irish in the national schools, because it is simply scandalous the way the poor children in the country are being taught at the moment. I know many poor children around my constituency; they leave school when they are 13 or 14 years and they do not know how to write their names in English or to read a paper. I met the father of one boy lately and he told me his son is not able to read a sentence in English. I think the education of the poor children is being destroyed. The children of the poor are the chief sufferers, because the parents have no chance of giving the youngsters education after they reach 14 years. They leave school and they do not know how to add two and two together in English.

I have two boys going to a national school, the youngest of them being ten years of age, and he cannot read a word in English; he has nothing but Irish the whole day long. I have heard it remarked that if the teachers try to teach a little English and they have an English book on the desk, if the inspector comes in they have to hide it immediately. As a parent of children going to school, and as one who observes the children of poor people who have no chance of educating them afterwards, I appeal to the Minister to curtail the system of teaching through Irish. The children can add two and two in Irish all right, but if you ask them to do it in English they scarcely understand you, and when they go out in the world later they will be at a great disadvantage. When they have no chance of being educated in English after 14 years of age, where will they be when they have to seek a livelihood?

This thing of teaching through Irish is going too far. Drumming it into the children's heads is nothing but utter nonsense. I do not mind a little Irish being taught, but teaching them nothing but Irish is nothing short of a scandal. There should be a vote taken throughout the country and let the people decide whether they want this compulsory Irish. It looks at the moment as if the next generation will be a lot of dunces. I refer now to the children of the poor, because the other people are able to pay for the better education of their children. I am speaking my mind on this question, and what I say represents the views of many people.

I ask the Minister to submit some scheme which will give the children of the poor some chance of being able to get on in the world. Many of the youngsters will in later years be labouring men, and because of the lack of proper education now they will hardly be able to count sheep in the field, or do anything. It is simply a disgrace and we will be nothing but a nation of dunces instead of, as we were known long ago, a nation of scholars. If I was not in a position to send my children to school after they reach 14 years, they would know very little and they would be a disgrace to any nation.

Mr. Corish

I assume we are discussing the various forms of education on this Vote, including vocational education?

An Ceann Comhairle

For some years past the practice has been that all the education Votes are discussed in the one debate. That was not expressly stated when this Estimate was introduced, but the debate has ranged over the whole course, from the Minister's office to Summerhill, so far, and I presume that will be followed now, though Deputy Mulcahy has moved to refer back the Vote for secondary education, in which he is technically within his rights. The whole course might, I think, be covered, with possible minor exceptions.

Mr. Corish

I should like the Minister to try to secure that the vocational education section will make more scholarships available for students in the technical schools. I think it would be a great attraction if there were more scholarships available for the pupils in vocational education schools. I would like to refer especially to domestic economy instructresses. Anybody attached to a vocational education committee in the country knows how hard it is to secure the services of a domestic economy instructress. That is a very important subject that is being taught in vocational education schools. We find it very difficult on some occasions to secure teachers. I would ask the Minister to permit of scholarships being applied in connection with that particular branch of education so as to give pupils in the small towns and the rural areas an opportunity of becoming proficient in the teaching of domestic economy. There are other scholarships given from time to time, but I have never yet known of a scholarship being given for domestic science. Perhaps the Minister will do something in that direction.

There are other forms of education for which I think scholarships should also be available. I refer particularly to engineering, motor car engineering and kindred subjects. From time to time it has been impossible to secure the services of a teacher in the engineering section, especially the motor car engineering section. I understand there are scholarships available for that section this year, but it has been very spasmodic; I do not think there was any scholarship last year. I ask the Minister to try to keep that subject in mind when he is awarding scholarships.

With regard to secondary schools, I understand that matter has been referred to by Deputy Mulcahy and by Deputy Hurley. I think the Minister knows that, so far as secondary teachers are concerned, they are in an inferior position to people occupying similar posts in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Their salaries are much below those paid in those places I have mentioned. But I want specially to refer to their pension scheme. They have continuously asked for something to be done in that connection. Something has been done for the national teachers in recent years, not all that we would expect should be done for them, but something has been done for them, at any rate. If a national teacher dies, I understand that his dependents are given the equivalent of a year's salary by way of grant. That does not prevail in so far as a secondary teacher is concerned, and I would ask the Minister to give attention to the matter and to treat them in the same manner as the national teachers are treated. These teachers are doing very valuable work, and I think they are entitled to the same treatment. The Minister during the year, of course, has restored the 5 per cent. cut to the national teachers. That is very good, as far as it goes, but the national teachers are still expecting that the full cut will be restored. The Minister knows that since the cut was imposed the cost of foodstuffs has increased enormously and the cost of living has increased enormously, and the national teachers expect that in the very near future the whole cut will be restored.

There is one matter to which I wish to refer, which perhaps would be thought to be a very unpopular one, that is, the rule that has come into operation recently in connection with the retirement of lady teachers on marriage. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction all over the country in connection with this matter. To a great extent it is a good idea, but I am of the opinion that it should not have been brought into operation until those who were in colleges during the period were dealt with. It takes, I understand, about eight years to turn out a proficient teacher and a great many teachers who are on service now will lose their positions if they get married. I suggest to the Minister that it would have been far better for him to have waited to put that into operation until the people who were in colleges at the time had been established in their positions and that it should not apply to those particular people. I have information which leads me to believe that a great many lady teachers are not getting married at the present time because of that rule being in operation. The marriage rate is low enough at present, if we are to believe, and we have no reason to doubt, what the religious authorities say, and I think there should be some adjustment to get over a certain period in order to deal with certain teachers who were in course of training when the rule was introduced and that it should only come into operation for those who had not entered college at the particular time the Minister brought it into operation.

I would like to ask the Minister to pay attention to those matters, especially to the question of scholarships for domestic economy teachers because, as I said before, it is very difficult to get teachers of that kind when vocational education committees want them.

Tomás Ó Maoláin

Braithim ar dtúis gur ceart dúinn admháil go ndearna an tAire agus an Roinn Oideachais a lán deagh-oibre ar feadh na bliadhna seo thart agus le blianta anuas. 'Sé mo bharamhail gurb iad na scoileanna nuadha an toradh is sásúla agus is seasamhaighe dá bhfuil againn as an obair sin. Tá toradh na hoibre sin dá fhoillsiú againn fá láthair. Tá toradh na hoibre sin le feiscint i sláinte na ndaltaí, cuir i gcás, sa bhfonn nuadh oibre a bhíonns ortha, agus san spiorad nuadh Ghaedhealach atá le feiceáil i measc an aosa óig. D'réir na rudaí sin, is léir dúinn ar gach taobh fé láthair gur féidir oideachas do stiúradh agus oideas níos fearr a thabhairt do na daltaí nuair a feabhsuíghtear na coingheallacha fá na mbíónn na múinteoirí agus na daltaí ag déanamh a gcuid oibre. Dá bhrígh sin, ba chúis ríméid dúinn a chloisint go bhfuil sé ar intinn ag an Aire an polasaí céadna do leanamhaint san athbhliain. Gach scoil a thógann sé, sin céim ar aghaidh agus céim san áird cheart, agus badh mhaith liom go leanfadh sé go daingean leis an bpolasaí céadna san.

Do rinneadh a lán tagairt annseo do cheist na teangan agus dubhradh a lán ráiméis ina taobh, acht ní indiu ná indé do scréach agus do mhasluigh daoine an teanga agus árd-smaointe na nGaedheal, acht le cóngnamh Dé, gheobhaidh na daoine sin, ó mhuintir na hÉireann, an méid a bheidh tuillte aca.

Ceann de na rudaí adubhradh anso go raibh caighdeán geinearálta an oideachais dá ísliú ar fud na tíre agus gurab é an clár dá-theangach a bhíonn a mhúineadh ins na bun-scoileanna agus sna scoileanna eile fé ndear é sin. Is féidir liom a rá nach ceart é sin agus nach bhfuil focal fírinne ann. Táim cinnte, agus tá an fhaisnéis ann le teasbáint do dhuine ar bith gur mhian leis í fheiceáil nó í chloisint, gur féidir an clár dá-theangach sin a mhúineadh agus gach adhbhar a mhúineadh chomh héifeachtach, ar a laighead, is a múineadh é i mBéarla riamh roimhe sin. Agus ní i gcoláistí san Ghaeltacht agus ní i n-ollscoileanna atá an méid sin á dhéanamh, ach ins na bun-scoileanna i mBaile Átha Cliath i measc na scoláirí is bochta dá bhfuil le fagháil.

Ba cheart dúinn a rá leis na daoine nach bhfuil i ndáiríribh san cheist sin agus na daoine a bhíonn ag cainnt 'na naghaidh annseo, gur beag an tairbhe dúinn bheith ag éisteacht leis an gcainnt a bhíonns le cloisint ó Theacthaí áirithe annso.

Rinne cuid de na cainnteoiri tagairt do cheist amháin, agus cloistear in áiteacha eile, taobh amuigh den Tigh, an bharamhail chéadhna, sé sin, an bharamhail a bhíonns imeasc cuid de na daoine—nach bhfuil oideachas i gcúrsaí talmhaidheachta le fagháil fán dtuaith. B'fhéidir gur ceart an bharamhail sin agus is dócha go bhfuil baramhla éagsamhla ann 'na thaobh, ach ba cheart don Aire an cheist seo d'fhiosrú go cruinn agus go beacht go mór mhór i dtaobh na ndaltaí is sine ins na bun-scoileanna. Badh mhaith liom, freisin, a mholadh dhó go bhféachfadh sé le léigheachtaí do thabhairt do na daltaí sin agus, má deintear é sin, ní bheidh na gearáin chéadna le cloisint agus a chloisimíd go minic anois.

Tá ceist eile ann gur mhaith liom cúpla focal a rádh 'na taobh. Ó 14 go dtí 16, sin iad an dá bhlian inar mó is tairbhe dhó teagasc in adhbhair de'n tsórt sin, cuir i gcás, i gcúrsaí talmhaidheachta. San dá bhliain sin, freisin, iseadh a théigheann a lán de na h-ógánaigh fá láthair ar seachrán. Chímíd na daoine sin ins na bailtí móra agus ins na cathracha ina seachránaithe gan maith, gan éirim aigne. Nár bhfeárr dóibh sin bheith ins na bun scoileanna fá smacht, ag foghluim céirde éigin, ag foghluim talmhaidheachta, cuir i gcás, ag foghluim, nó ag daingniú a gcuid Gaedhilge? Badh mhaith liom go mbeadh an cheist sin a pléidhe an Aire arís nó, más maith leis, an cheist sin do chur fá bhreithniú ag an gCoimisiún fén Dr. de Brún, atá 'na suidhe fé láthair.

Ar cheist gheinearálta an oideachais, is mian liom a rádh go mbeidhmíd páirteach leis an Aire agus leis an Roinn in aon ghluaiseacht ar aghaidh eile a bheidh ar intinn aca a dhéanamh agus i dtaobh na hoibre atá á dhéanamh aige agus ag an Roinn fá láthai deirim "Bail ó Dhia uirthi."

Professor O'Sullivan

I simply rise to call attention to one matter—a really urgent matter—and to ask the Minister to give it not merely his sympathetic consideration, but also that he would bring sufficient pressure on what, in most other matters, is a very yielding Department, namely, the Department of Finance, but one that seems to develop extraordinary granite qualities whenever the expenditure on Education is in question. I refer particularly to some aspects of the teachers' pension fund. This is the first year, as I gather, that any payment has been made in by the Department to this particular fund. Perhaps the Minister may be able to tell us what is the actuarial state of the fund at the present moment. I know that actuaries are slow-moving bodies, extremely slow-moving. Still, I think the Minister will remember that when this question was raised over the last couple of years the general reply, as far as I can recall, was that the matter was in the hands of the actuaries and that their report was not yet ready. I doubt if a fund that has been only established for a couple of years should present all that particular difficulty, at least, in reaching a conclusion. As to whether the actuary will ever be able, with the material now at his disposal, to give a verdict on the state of that fund, candidly, I am not quite sure how he can, seeing that the Government contribution is a purely haphazard contribution, limited, and, too, no amount being compulsory. Naturally, if the fund is expected to carry on from the contributions of the schools and the teachers alone, it is quite obvious that it could not be self-supporting, and that very early it is bound to get into difficulties. Another reason—and I think the Minister will bear me out— is that the fund had this particular drawback, so far as the younger teachers are concerned—that is, young when the scheme started some years ago—that they were practically paying in their contributions to provide pensions for a number of older teachers who deserved them, but who themselves, owing to the non-existence of the fund, had been able to make practically no contribution. It was inevitable, therefore, that there should be difficulties in the start of this fund.

But the most serious matter, from the point of view of the teachers, is this, and I would ask the Minister to consider it, as I say, very sympathetically. I know no more distressing event, and I suppose the older we grow the more the matter is brought physically so to speak to our notice, than attending the funeral of an official, be he a member of the Civil Service or of the secondary teaching profession. The case of the teacher is worse, considerably worse than that of the civil servant because, no provision whatever is made for the widow and family of a teacher. There is some provision made for the widow and family of the civil servant, but none for the teacher. I know a great outcry is sometimes raised on this question of pensions and by people who, when they die, leave a going concern as a business behind them to their family, but the unfortunate secondary teacher is not in that position. He dies. He has never had a salary at all equal to what the education that he has got should entitle him to. I know that it may be urged that the finances of the State do not allow us to do as much as we should like to do in this matter, but that is the teacher's position, whatever the excuse or the explanation may be. It is absurd, on the salary that he has, to expect him to marry, or, if he does, to educate his children in the way that he would like, at least to give them as good an education as he has got himself and to put by anything even in the way of insurance to provide against anything happening to him.

Take the case of the man advancing somewhat in years, from 40 upwards, faced with that situation. I cannot believe that it conduces to good work. I don't see how it possibly can. I think it will interfere with his work, and if for no other reason I think that ought to appeal to the Minister for very earnest consideration. If anything should happen to him his family, up to then living in tightened but perhaps by no means impossible circumstances is practically thrown on the world in the morning without a halfpenny. It is quite true that if he lives to enjoy it he gets a certain pension, but if he dies his wife gets nothing. In that way he is worse off than the civil servant. Provide him with the lump-sum payment and the widow's gratuity which the civil servant gets. His commencing salary is not at all equal to what his fellows enjoy, men of the same education in, say, Northern Ireland to say nothing of Great Britain. Furthermore, it is only fair to bear this in mind because it is a thing that we have to accept as a fact: that there is not open to him, as there is open, for instance, to secondary teachers in other countries, married secondary teachers in, say, Northern Ireland or in England, the prospect of ever becoming the head, and enjoying the emoluments as head, of a secondary school.

That in practice, is closed to him in this country. He cannot even reach the position that can be reached, for instance, by a successful teacher in a national school who can become a principal. His salary, I admit, is better than it was, say, 20 years ago. There has been an improvement there; but, even so, the salary is very tenuous, not at all, I am sure, as much as the Minister would like it to be. I put it to the Minister to consider one of two things—I do not know which will present the least administrative difficulty. From my own point of view, I may say that provision for the family makes a stronger emotional appeal to me. But I should like the Minister to consider, if he thinks there are some difficulties that I do not see quite clearly in that respect, remedying this in the other way, in connection with a somewhat higher basic salary and a somewhat different increment; but at least to put him in the position of the civil servant and his northern fellow as regards the lump sum, and so that, when a secondary teacher dies, his widow and family will not have to face the workhouse, because I think that is the situation before a number of men at present. You can imagine the anxiety of a man, with a wife and three, four or five children, who on reaching a certain age is no longer as vigorous as he was, or who sees his health breaking down, with the certain prospect that if he dies, every source of revenue for that family dies. In the Civil Service, where they also get the same yearly fraction, and in Northern Ireland and in England, there is a provision that there would at least be a lump sum paid to the widow, after the person had a certain number of years' service, varying from one year to one year and a half's salary.

I put it as strongly as I can to the Minister that it is not too much to expect that, if a man has devoted all his life to this work, and has been unable, owing to the circumstances in which he lives, to put aside anything, at least that much might be provided for his widow and children; that, according to the number of years of service, anything ranging from one year to one year and a half's salary should be paid to them. I understand that there is a provision similar to that in the Civil Service and in the pension scheme for secondary teachers in Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

I press on the Minister as strongly as I can that he should not merely give this consideration, but that he should use all his energies to push this through. As I say, I cannot attend the funeral of a civil servant, though I know there is a certain provision there, without remembering that when a man like that, with a salary which allows his family to live in a certain way, dies in harness, the whole method of life of his family must be changed. But what is the position of the secondary teacher, where there is no gratuity and nothing left? There are other anomalies in the scheme to which I need not refer at present. I came in here specially for the purpose of making this particular appeal to the Minister.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The matter I want to bring before the House at the risk of being misunderstood and, perhaps, of being misrepresented, is this question of the teaching, not of Irish, but through the medium of Irish. I am not going to take the line taken by one of my colleagues who spoke to-day. I do not want to be taken as being in any way opposed to the teaching of Irish, but I think that, as representatives of the people, we have a certain duty. Whether well-founded or not, there is a very big volume of opinion in this country that tends to believe that definite injury is being done to the education of the children. I am not in a position to say whether that is so or not. But the way I look at it is this. If the position with regard to teaching in the schools through the medium of Irish is such as we are told, what I want to know is where are we heading, what is behind the scheme, what is the object of it?

We have to remember that the vast bulk of the pupils in the primary schools get no education beyond the age of 14. We have in this country to-day greater competition than perhaps ever before amongst people to secure the right to live, in other words, to secure work. This Government, as well as the previous Government, started to industrialise the country, and one of the principal drawbacks, if I might put it so, in the development of industry was the fact that we had not skilled or trained labour available. I have given whatever thought it is possible for the ordinary man in the street to give to this matter, and the reason I ask the Minister what is behind this policy of teaching all pupils in primary schools through the medium of Irish is that I want to know how does that policy during the first 14 years of their lives fit in with the policy of preparing them to take their places either in the industrial or agricultural life of the country. Take a working man's son who goes to a primary school until he is 14. If he is lucky, at the age of 16 or 17 he secures employment, say, in one of the new industries. In that industry Irish is of no use to him. I am not talking about the fact that he has learned Irish purely as a language or that he is able to speak it. If he goes into a factory or any other employment, behind the counter or outside the counter, he is not going to be asked to make up a sum in Irish, to make out a bill in Irish, or to write out a receipt in Irish. He is going to be asked to do that, and will have to do that, in English and, if he is not able to do it in English, he will not keep his job.

That is the aspect of it which I should like the House and the Minister to look at. I can see everything that is to be said for teaching our native language to every child. But I want to be convinced, and the people want to be convinced, that we are benefiting children by insisting on teaching them other subjects through the medium of Irish. I am not going to go as far as a great of the people, perhaps the majority of the people of the country, go when they say that you are definitely injuring the children. But I want to see what good it is doing the children and whether we are fitting them to take their place either in the agricultural or industrial life of the country, leaving out altogether the fact that, unfortunately, a large number of those who have left school have failed to find employment at home and have had to go elsewhere. I am not urging that point at all. We are trying to educate our farmers, our farmers' sons and farm labourers to take the fullest advantage of the agricultural research work being done and paid for in this country. Take the son of a farmer or a farm labourer who has left school at 14 or 15 years of age. Does he know enough English to read and understand the Departmental pamphlets dealing with scientific agriculture or the improvement of agriculture? Is he capable of understanding the advice given regarding seeds and soil? Has he learned in school sufficient English even to read and understand the information turned out by the Department of Agriculture as a result of the research work which is being done? These are a few points with which I should like the Minister to deal. There are certain people who will not allow you to say "boo" once the Irish language is mentioned. If you do so, you are anything but a patriot; you are a base materialist. We have got to get down to the fundamental that if there is any reason at all for educating children in this or any other country it is that they may be better, more useful and more intelligent citizens and be able to take their places in agriculture, industry and commerce, better fitted, if possible, than were their predecessors.

The Minister and some Deputies may try to brush these few points aside but these are the very points that are causing very deep and grave concern to the parents of this country. Perhaps, because of lack of moral courage—they know they will be misrepresented or misunderstood—the parents are not as vocal as those who are, what I might call, whole-hoggers and who want to go the whole way with Irish, whether it will be good or bad for the nation. The plain fact is that it is only in Government service or in Government circles that Irish counts, so far as securing employment is concerned. We know that quite well. Is there any employer in the City of Dublin or Cork or in any town or village in Ireland engaged in ordinary commercial work who will insist upon an applicant for employment being able to transact his business through the medium of Irish? Do we not all know that there is not?

How many businessmen, if any, do their business and keep their accounts in Irish? How many of them, even in the Gaeltacht, do that? I do not object to the spending of money on the teaching of Irish, but I do think we are entitled to know what is in the mind of the Minister and what is behind the scheme for teaching every subject through the medium of Irish. What does he hope to achieve by that, either for the pupils or for the nation? Does the Government think that the present system of education is likely to fit our young men and young women to take their places in industry, agriculture and commerce? I have tried to raise these few points in a non-controversial way, and to present them in the most impartial way I can. I put the facts before the Minister as I see them and as they have been put to me by people in my own county and by people I met in other counties and in the City of Dublin. If the Minister were able to clarify the whole position, he might be able to relieve the minds of a lot of people, particularly the parents of the children concerned. This is a source of worry to them, and not alone to them but to a large number of teachers. For obvious reasons the teachers cannot be vocal in the matter, but a great number of them are doubtful about the benefits to be derived from the present system. I hope the Minister, when replying, will let us have his point of view and the point of view of his Department, and that he will tell us towards what end the present policy is being pursued.

Mrs. Redmond

I thoroughly agree with every word Deputy Morrissey has said on the subject of Irish. As he said, it is, unfortunately, the case in this country that when one speaks the truth it is often misinterpreted, and one is ballyragged around the country as being opposed to everything national. For a long number of years this country has heard a great deal about national culture in connection with this Irish teaching in the schools. I have no objection whatever to the teaching of Irish as a subject, but I am absolutely opposed to the teaching of every other subject in Irish. If the matter were really carefully considered and examined, it would, I think, be found that very few of the teachers were really capable of teaching every subject perfectly through the medium of Irish. I say this on the authority of people who are running schools—nuns, lay teachers and the clergy—that, as far as I can see, if people had the courage to say so, nobody wants this whole-hog system of Irish which we have at the present time. As I said before, you are misinterpreted, or likely to be misinterpreted, if you say so. I make my position absolutely clear. I am deadly opposed to the teaching of every subject through the medium of Irish. I do not object to the language, but I think that a large amount of money is squandered every year for which we receive absolutely no return.

We must realise that the children now being educated are those who will be running this country some day. I want to ask anyone interested in the subject are we absolutely certain that the children will be better fitted to do that through the medium of Irish than they were in the days that are past? We sometimes hear and read about self-made men. These were educated when Irish was not compulsory and the education they received in the national schools enabled them to work themselves up. That was at a time when education was not supposed to be at the high pitch it is at to-day. If Irish were being taught in the schools when these people received their education, and if it were compulsory there at that time, I doubt very much whether these men could have made the success of their lives that they did make.

I want to look at this matter apart altogether from politics and regardless of which side of the House Deputies sit. I know that the parents of the children all over the country are deadly opposed to this compulsory Irish. I believe if, to-morrow, a ballot were taken in every school in every parish in the country it would be found that a majority of the people were opposed to it. The teachers find that they are being given an impossible task. In the first place they are not succeeding with the children who have little liking for the language and, in the second place, there is a complete jumble in the minds of the children who do not understand what they are supposed to be learning. They do not understand what the thing is in English and they cannot understand it in Irish.

The main idea of education is to prepare the child for the future life. Certainly, as we have it at the present time, the children are not being prepared for the future life. If a boy at the age of 15 years is seeking employment and knows nothing but Irish, it is quite certain his services will not be required in many places, of which I have some knowledge. There is no objection to his knowing the language. But so far as taking his directions in Irish the boy will soon find that he will get no directions in that language; he will find that there will be no use for Irish where he is employed and, therefore, he will find that there was no necessity to know it.

In many cases in the schools it is a fact that English grammar and arithmetic are not really taught at all. I understand that in the future, arithmetic will not be compulsory in girls' schools. Surely that will not make for a proper education. I appeal to the Minister on that point. Arithmetic is as necessary for girls as for boys. I ask the Minister to have that proposed departure carefully examined. I ask him to have it examined not by people who are just simply prejudiced and are afraid to go back on what they have already said. Believe me, the people of the country are not behind the Minister in this matter. They believe they are not getting good value for the money that is being spent on education. It is the taxpayers' money and the children to-day are not being educated as children were in the past.

We are supposed to be advancing but everyone knows that the ordinary children in the schools at present are not getting the education in English, arithmetic, grammar and other subjects that was being given 25 or 30 years ago. Surely the idea of trying to learn algebra and Euclid through the medium of Irish is ridiculous. It is hard enough on the child to learn these through the language that he knows—English. How much harder it must be in Irish, which the child does not know? It has been said by previous speakers that the education, so far as boys are concerned, should be related to the particular phase of life or the particular calling which the boy is to follow in order to get his livelihood. With that I am in agreement. The boy should be prepared for his life as a farmer if he is expected to follow that calling, or for business if he is expected to make his living in that way. How much better that would be for the boys than being forced to devote their time in school to subjects which can be of very little use to them.

Money should be alloted for additional technical schools, for such things as cookery, sewing and other domestic subjects. This would be far more beneficial for the children and the parents would welcome the change. I ask the Minister to take this thing very seriously and not to listen to people who tell him that everything in the schools is going on all right. It is now found that it is impossible to get the children to take an efficient interest in the Irish language because of its being forced on them. Nobody wants this compulsory Irish. One does not feel that one is less Irish because one does not know the Irish language. I know there are a few people who think it sounds well to talk about national culture but, in fact, all that sort of talk does not mean anything. Indeed I would not like to say about this forcing of Irish the things I hear people outside saying about it.

We are not spending the money voted for education in the best way. It is a miserable interpretation of the word "education" to teach children as they are being taught throughout the country at present. The people want this whole business revised. I hope the Minister will take steps to do that. I hope he will accept the sincere criticism of people whose only object is the welfare of the youth of the country and to tell him the truth about what is happening in the schools. I am speaking simply for the good of the children as a whole. I recently heard the head of a certain school in Ireland saying that in order to get the children to take Irish seriously there, there had to be established what is known as a particular feast-day. This was held once a week in order to encourage the children to take an interest in the Irish. The children, in order to induce them to take an interest, were to have something extra at this tea. It is not that the children were not properly fed on other days. It was considered a high-class school. The children flocked down to this tea. But it was not for love of the Irish language. That is a fact, and I mention it as evidence of what is the feeling in other similar schools and what is happening in the ordinary national schools. I trust, when the Minister comes to reply, that he will give us some hope that in the future working of his Department the points I have put before him will be considered.

Mr. McGovern

I would like to say a few words on this subject. I am aware that it is the general concensus of opinion that the standard of education is lower to-day than ever it was in this country. There can be little doubt about that, because both teachers and parents agree that the standard has been considerably lowered. Whether that is due to Irish or to some other cause I am not able to say. The general opinion is that it is due to the method of teaching Irish and to the fact that the Irish language is obtruded on the teachers and too much of the school time is monopolised by it.

The education standard at present is very low. There are very many useful subjects that pupils leaving the primary schools at the age of 14 years should know but they have never been taught these things at all. Many of these subjects relate to the ordinary business of life and the children are never taught them. The children know nothing about book-keeping, they know nothing about agriculture, they know very little about arithmetic, very little about grammar and nothing at all about geography. These are subjects in which a great many years ago the children were well instructed in the national schools. Many of these subjects have now been dropped and Irish substituted for them. If it were the case that the children leaving the schools had been made into Irish speaking children, then we would have been given something in exchange but we have neither the one nor the other. There are some people who are cynical enough to believe that the object of this Irish teaching is not to educate the children but to make them ignorant. Irish is being thrust down the throats of the children and the result is they know neither Irish nor English.

The strange thing is that anything that is Irish that the children do understand is not tolerated by the present Government. It seems there must be a difference of opinion in the Executive Council. For we find that the Minister for Justice is opposed to Irish and the Minister for Education is all for Irish. A question was put down last week to the Minister for Justice on the matter of Irish time and his reply was that he would not have Irish time in Ireland. Neither are we allowed to use Irish measure in Ireland. I live near the Border of Northern Ireland, and it is a simple fact that when you cross the Border into Northern Ireland, which is supposed to be English, you get Irish mileage. Go into the Free State and you have English mileage. They do not understand English measure or English time; they do understand Irish measure and Irish time, but they will not be allowed to have them. They do not understand the Irish language, but it is being forced down their throats, while they are being deprived of learning a great many useful subjects.

The main body of the pupils, who are not able to go further than the national schools, are being deprived of those advantages. Those who can afford to go further can get more generous education, and can recover lost time, but the unfortunate poor of the country have no opportunity of recovering it, and are at a serious disadvantage. Mind you, more than one of those people have to seek their living in other countries. Of what use to them is this half learned language, which they never spoke or never used or never could use? They are being deprived of knowing the very useful subjects that they ought to know, and that are necessary in any country in order to enable them to earn their living. I think the Minister should look into this matter, and that he should have some sort of inquiry in order to learn the opinions of people down the country who are entitled to give an opinion with regard to the whole matter of the teaching in national schools, how far Irish should be pursued, and what methods should be adopted in order to make Irish a success. If they want ever to make it a language that will be generally spoken there is need to improve the methods of teaching it, because so far those methods have been a failure. None of the children leaving the national schools speaks Irish. That proves how much of a failure those methods have been.

Another matter to which I want to refer is the fact that there is no agricultural trend in the teaching in rural districts. The children are taught to disregard the occupation of their parents, the occupation which they ought to be taught something about. Forty or 50 years ago, and up to a later date, the children were taught something about the business of the rural districts, that is agriculture. Now there is not a word about it in the schools, and I think that that is a terrible neglect and a terrible fault in the system at the present time. I believe that, if a commission were set up to deal with this matter, nine out of every ten who would give evidence would recommend a change in this direction. We see a good deal in the papers from people who are qualified to give an opinion—clergy and others who have given the subject a good deal of thought, and have the interests of the country at heart—and they all deplore the lack of an agricultural trend in the education. The children are being taught to prize the city life instead of being taught to have some regard for the occupation to which most of the people in the rural districts have been brought up, and which they should be encouraged to pursue. That is a very serious mistake. The people are flying from the rural districts because there is nothing to encourage them to stay there. They are not even taught the elements of the business in which they are engaged, and therefore they have no interest in nor taste for it. Their minds are directed towards other occupations. I think the whole question of education in the national schools needs to be examined, and a different curriculum introduced. When speaking to the teachers privately, there is not one of them who does not admit being of the same mind. They all say there is something wrong in the system of education; that they cannot do the work which is imposed upon them; that they are dissatisfied because of the fact that they are turning out the children from the national schools who are not in a position to make their way in life.

Mr. P.J. Fogarty

A great deal has been said here, and there has been a great deal of criticism, with reference to the system of teaching through Irish. We have been told that the standard of education is lower as a result. We have heard that the parents are against it, and that the children are getting muddled. I can quite understand that it is the aim of people on that side of the House to criticise every Estimate that comes in here, but from inquiries which I have made I find that those people who spoke about the parents and about the children have no reason for expressing those opinions. I think only two teachers spoke in this House, and neither of them had anything to say against the system. Deputy Hurley spoke here, and gave his own experience as a teacher and as a father of a family, but he did not offer the same criticism as we have heard from the opposite benches. Personally, my experience is quite different from what I have heard from that side of the House. Last Sunday there was a children's football match in Balbriggan, between the Swords children and the Balbriggan children. Having a fairly big car, I promised the children that I would bring them to the football match. While going down to the match they seemed to take great delight in chatting in Irish. Even out on the field, playing football, they spoke to each other in Irish. From my own experience of listening to little children, I can say that they take great delight in repeating their nursery rhymes in Irish—"Eeny, meeny, miny, mo" and "Hididdle-diddle," and all those other nursery rhymes. Also at their various games, such as hop-scotch, and so on, they have got into the habit of using the Irish language.

Mr. D. Morrissey

What is the Gaelic for "Hi-diddle-diddle"?

Captain Giles

That is a "bookie" term.

Mr. Fogarty

And there might have been many a good horse of that name. There is a horse of the name of Blue-shirt, too, if you know anything about him.

Mr. Morrissey

What are the odds?

Mr. Fogarty

A tip for him came in in a bottle down in Stradbally, and I am going to back him to-morrow. I do not agree with the people who criticise the system of teaching through Irish. The statement by the Minister was very welcome. Any increases that there were in the Estimate were, I think, very welcome. There was an increase in the amount for heating and cleaning of schools. In the rural areas, where charwomen and labourers are employed, that is very welcome. The State will bear half the cost, and there has been an increase in the Estimate to meet that charge for the coming year. There has also been an increase for the provision of new schools. As far as my own constituency of County Dublin is concerned, I must say that good progress has been made both in the provision of new schools and in the improvement of other schools. It is true that there are odd schools here and there which are a disgrace. St. Margaret's is one of which I would like the Minister to take particular note.

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, and apart from the standard of education, the system, and everything else, I should like to remind the Minister that there are other aspects to be looked at, such as cleanliness of the children—seeing that the children should be given every chance in the matter of cleanliness—and sanitation in schools. I quote from an extract from a report from the county medical officer of health of the 31st January, 1939, stating that of the 109 schools in the county health district 61 had no proper water supply; that in 29 other schools a water supply was available within a reasonable distance, and that in nine of them it was necessary for the children to cross the main road.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps the Deputy would move to report progress, as we are taking the Town Planning Bill at this time.

Mr. Fogarty

I move to report progress.

Progress reported.