asked the Minister for Education if he will state, in view of the fact that 39,000 children were absent from school during the month of June owing to the teachers' strike, what are the prospects of their schools being reopened on the 2nd September.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - The Teachers' Strike.
asked the Minister for Education if he proposes to open negotiations with the parish managers and school teachers of the Dublin schools closed for the past three months owing to the teachers' strike; and if he will assure the parents of the 40,000 children deprived of their education that the schools will be reopened in September when the school holidays are over.
I propose to take Questions 36 and 37 together.
I have repeatedly indicated the Government's position in relation to the teachers' strike. I have no information as to the teachers' intentions other than the various statements and reports which have appeared from time to time in the public Press and, in the circumstances, I can only again express the hope that despite the nature of these reports and statements, the teachers will decide in the interval before the schools are usually due to reopen to reconsider their attitude with a view to enabling the work of the schools to be resumed.
Is the Minister prepared to take any definite steps in this matter to help to bring about the end of this strike? The strike has gone on for several months and the situation has now become stagnant. I ask the Minister could he not offer some basis for negotiations?
Appeal to the teachers.
There are about 40,000 Dublin school children away from school on account of the strike. Those children are being deprived of their education and already they have lost a long period. Is the Minister not prepared to open the door in some way?
Let the teachers open the doors.
Let the Minister keep out of it. He is not making such a brilliant success of his own Department.
There is plenty of goodwill.
I have no statement to make. I have explained the Government's position in this matter. I would suggest that the Deputy and other interested parties might address themselves to exercising their persuasive powers on the teachers who are on strike. I do not know what Deputy Dockrell thinks the Government ought to do in the matter. One thing is certain, that it is not going to alter its attitude, which it has already stated clearly in this matter.
If the suggestion is that the Government ought to adopt, or consider adopting, an alternative arrangement for the education of the children who are now absent from school owing to the strike, that is a pertinent suggestion, but I hope it will not be necessary to consider such a course.
I did not make that suggestion. What I said to the Minister was that he ought to take any other steps possible to end this situation, for instance, to resume negotiations.
There is no use in taking steps that will not be in the national interest. The Government has stated its decision, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the interests of the community generally. They considered it would be fatal to these interests if they were now to depart from the attitude they have taken up, and for which they have given very good reasons.
Is it in the national interest, or in the interest of the community, to have 40,000 children going around the streets of Dublin?
It is not. Does the Deputy consider that I am responsible for that?
I do.
The Deputy ought to apply his eloquence to those on strike.
I asked the Minister if it was proposed to open negotiations with the parish managers and the school teachers. Is the Minister during the next six weeks prepared to open negotiations with the parish managers and teachers? Will he communicate with them in any way or, at the end of six weeks, is the strike still to continue because he is adamant?
I do not know what right the Deputy has to speak for the managers. I do not see how the question of negotiations with the managers arises. There is no dispute so far as I know between the managers of the national schools and myself or the Government. As regards the remainder of the Deputy's supplementary question, I have already answered it.
In view of the fact that the Oireachtas is at present engaged in enacting the Industrial Relations Bill, would not the Minister consider, as a constructive proposal for the present deadlock, that he should invite the teachers to collaborate with him in setting up an ad hoc labour court to investigate this particular dispute, and to give a detached judgment on what are the equities of a fair settlement, without in any way binding himself or the Government in advance to accept that finding, but, at least, to afford the public a detached and objective report of what three men or one man, on the terms of reference of a labour court on industrial relations, would declare to be a fair and a just arrangement? Is not that a way out of the present deadlock, without either side losing face or committing themselves in advance to an abandonment of the position, or without a concession of any principle? Will the Minister consider that?
No.
Is the Minister's last word that his is a non possumus attitude?
Is the Minister aware that at a meeting in this House of Deputies of all Parties an appeal was made to the teachers to resume their duties, and that Deputies agreed to take up the question of whether there would be negotiations with the Minister, but the teachers refused?
Now an appeal is being made to the Minister.
I do not know if Deputy Briscoe's statement is an ex parte one, with reference to a meeting which I also attended.
No.
If it was, and if it was made to the clerical managers, no such proposal was made in my presence. It might have been made otherwise. Does the Minister think it desirable that members of his Party should meet the teachers and other bodies in good faith, and then purport to come to this House with their own version of what passed at the meeting, without affording the other side an equal opportunity?
In what way could any national interest be injured or endangered if the Minister invited the representatives of the teachers to come and reopen negotiations with him, with or without any representatives of the managers?
The position is that the offer made by the Government to the teachers was the result of negotiations and correspondence over a prolonged period of several months. The offer which was made by me in the first instance to the teachers was quite substantially improved. Finally, at the request of the teachers' representatives, the Government formulated its final offer. That final offer was communicated by me to the teachers' representatives. I made it quite clear both in writing and personally in interviews which I had with them, that it was final and could not be changed or reconsidered. I need not go into the question any further, beyond saying that quite obviously in its relations with persons who are paid from State sources, the attitude of the Government must be quite different—and I hope it will continue to be different— from its attitude when it is asked, through the Minister for Industry and Commerce, to act as mediator in ordinary industrial disputes between private employees and their employers. The Government has a certain responsibility in regard to this matter, as to who is going to determine the remuneration which public servants are going to draw. Is it the public servants are going to determine the question by coercing the Government, by strike action, or is it the Government who is going to determine it, having given it full consideration?
Next question.
It is a good job private employers are not so bullheaded as the Government.
Next question.