Caithfidh mé a rá gur áthas mór agus móracht liomsa an méid seo Gaeilge do chloisint sa díospóireacht seo inniu. Tá mé sa Tigh seo le blianta fada agus chuala mé a lán Gaeilge á labhairt ar feadh na mblianta sin ach ní dóigh liom gur chuala mé riamh an oiread sin Gaeilge á labhairt chomh tuigseanach agus chomh bríomhar agus chuala mé sa díospóireacht seo. Tá súil agam gur comhartha é sin go bhfuil suim cheart á chur i gcúis ár dteanga náisiúnta, mar bhí sórt scamaill le déanaí ann i dtaobh dul chun cinn na Gaeilge. Caithfimid rud éigin a dhéanamh chun an scamall sin do scaipeadh.
Tá a lán daoine ag labhairt agus ag scríobhadh i dtaobh na Gaeilge agus gan mórán eolais acu uirthi. Is beag suim atá acu sna rudaí atá uainn agus caithfimid an Gaeilge do choimeád chun na rudaí bheith go maith agus go láidir againn. Táim buíoch dos na Teachtaí ó gach taobh den Tigh seo a labhair le deá-thoil dom féin. Tuigim uatha go bhfuil deá-thoil acu don obair atá ar siúl againn sa Roinn agus go bhfuil siad toilteanach cabhrú san obair sin le héinne go mbeidh cúram Aireachta air.
We have had a fairly wide discussion over a large number of points on matters connected with education. I am grateful for the spirit in which that discussion has been carried on and particularly for the atmosphere of good will that has been displayed to myself as the Minister dealing with the Estimate in present circumstances.
It has been complained by Deputy Donnchadh Ó Briain that he did not get much information from the statement I made when introducing the Estimate. I can quite appreciate that. No one appreciates more than I do how much was left unsaid, or had to be left unsaid, in the statement I made to the House when introducing the matter, because I am more keenly aware than perhaps any Deputy in the House is, except possibly Deputy Derrig, of the enormous amount of ground that has to be covered and reviewed before anyone can hope to stand up and in a comparatively short Parliamentary statement put into proper perspective those things that must be put into perspective if we are to understand where educational policy is leading, who those people are who must control and guide it and the obto understand where educational policy is leading, who those people are who must control and guide it and the objective towards which it should be directed. Certain questions of various kinds have arisen as to what we have done for the teachers and as to what extent promises of one kind or another have been kept, or not kept, as the case may be. These are questions that will inevitably arise in the aftermath of election and a change of Government. I would like to say, with reference to any suggestion that has been made about anything that I have promised to the teachers or about anything that, I have done for the teachers, that I myself am not conscious of having done anything for which I particularly deserve credit. I am not conscious that I have failed in any way to face up to the implementation of any promises made to the teachers. I am not cognisant of any specific promises that were made.
In facing up to the work of the Department of Education I have set out to try to get clear in my own mind what the function of a Minister for Education—the political head of the Department of Education—is. I am not yet quite clear as to what it is but I am shaping towards moulding a decision in my own mind in regard to that matter. I do not regard myself as a leading educationist and I do not regard it as any function of mine to become a leading educationist. My primary function is to deal with the educational establishment which is here, to take the moneys that are provided by the State here and see that these are used to the best advantage and that the Department itself is moulded in such a way as to be an inspiration and a help to those in the country who must be regarded as the educationists; that is, the men and women who stand in our schools and teach our classes and who are trained and educated to the work of teaching and who carry out that work with devotion. It has been stated that conditions in this country are different from conditions in other countries. Therefore, it has been said, some of the things we are proposing to do are wrong and are not necessary. If there is one thing that stands out in my mind as marking the difference between this country and Great Britain or Northern Ireland it is that in this country the people who are the real educationists and the people to whom we must look to forward and organise and improve education are away in the background. They are not known by name. They do not appear on public platforms. They do not appear on committees. In Great Britain and Scotland you have local councils of education in respect of every little county and shire. On those councils educationists sit down side by side with the representatives of trade and industry and the representatives of the ordinary people and discuss openly educational problems that come before them. In that way the people know who their leading educationists are.
We are moving towards a situation in which we are going to change the organisation of our educational machine in that particular respect. In my opinion we must move in that direction by making it clear, first of all, that those who are the actual teachers in this country are the people who must guide and direct and be the ultimate force in strengthening the development of our education. In a general way I have indicated the lines along which I am going in present circumstances. At the present moment I am engaged in the task of setting up a council of education. Deputy Cowan considers, as do some others, that that council should be directly representative of a certain number of organised educational bodies in the country. I have indicated the reasons why I do not think that would give us the kind of council for which we are looking. I want a council of people who stand out pre-eminently as educationists with a general broad experience in the various spheres of education in the country, and not bearing a label as belonging to this particular body or that particular body. I want a council of people who will inspire confidence that they are the people who have had experience in some particular branch of education; that they are competent by that experience, by their disposition and by their character to sit down in complete harmony and co-operation with others to review the entire field of education in the country; and who will be in a position to exchange experience and judgment in such a way as to bring the whole road over which the normal people of the country may expect to travel from the educational point of view under review and to ensure that at every rung of the educational ladder there is a proper direction based on the fundamental fact that education must ultimately lead to an adult population who will carry out the various avocations of their natural lives with competence, with dignity and with character based on a truly Christian foundation.
I have discussed with many people throughout the country this particular problem. The more I have discussed it the clearer I have become as to the first radical work that the council of education must do and the more I am satisfied that I am travelling along the right road. I appeal to Deputies to give me my head in this matter and to wait until I set up my council and see what it will produce after it has been at work for a year or two. Part of their function will be to find out whether they as a council are organised on the best and most appropriate lines. Various bodies have come to me suggesting that they should have representation on the council. When I discussed with them the problem they realised that there is a wider point of view than perhaps the view they held. There are details in connection with the matter which I do not think it would be profitable to discuss at this stage. We could spend quite a long time here discussing how we would set up such a council of education. We could take the various classes of teachers and the various organisations connected with them. If we attempt to set it up in a representative kind of way, in my opinion we would have too big a council and we would have a council scattered over too broad a field. I want a council concentrated on the real kernel of the education problem in the country.
A question has been asked as to what has been done for the teachers and what is going to be done for them in the future. In anything that has been done for them my attention has been mainly directed to the primary schools during the short time in which I have held office. Anything that has been done has been done in order to streamline the relations between the Department and the teachers and to free the teachers from the irritations which have proved so obstructive to educational work and which come between them and their complete devotion to actual education. Other matters are still under consideration and will require a certain amount of attention. As I said before, I regard the Department and the inspectors as having one main function. That is to assist the teachers to do their work. Therefore, I am trying to remove the irritations and the friction and to free the teachers, as Deputy Palmer said, from fear; in other words, I want to give them what Deputy Palmer asked for them—namely, freedom from fear.
The inspectorial system has been criticised. Deputy Lynch of Cork criticised the method by which the system of inspection is carried out. Other Deputies criticised the inadequacy of it. I am prepared to admit that a closer touch between inspectors and teachers would have very good results. I understand that elsewhere the term "inspector" has fallen into abeyance and it has been substituted by "director". The particular individual goes into the school as a director, a helper and an adviser rather than as one who goes in with a notebook to criticise. I hope that when certain things are done we shall have a chance of reviewing the situation more fully in the future in order to establish a more harmonious relationship between the supervisory officers, the Department of Education and the teachers. I hope to establish a relationship where the supervisor will appreciate that his function is to help and stimulate and I hope that in time the teachers will come to realise that that is the spirit in which the so-called inspection is carried out.
On the question of salaries, Deputy Butler seemed to issue some kind of challenge that something had been left undone in that matter. When the change of salaries was brought about at the end of 1946 it was stipulated in the provision then made that there would be a review of salary scales not later than November, 1949. Beyond whatever special things may arise in the meantime, I have not in mind that there would be a general review of the primary teachers' salaries between this and 1949, but I have in mind that the arbitration body that would act as a permanent piece of machinery, arbitrating in matters of salary or conditions of service for the primary teachers, would be set up possibly towards the end of this year, so that there will be plenty of time to have whatever considerations that are to be reviewed fully reviewed before the period contemplated in the last scheme will have concluded and, whatever changes in conditions of service or salary are going to be introduced, the teachers will be quite clear with regard to what these are by September, 1949, so that there will be no lag in any change that will then take place.
The question of the pensions of teachers, as I have said in reply to a Parliamentary question, has had very careful attention and I have put certain proposals before the Minister for Finance. It ought to be easy to understand, having listened to the discussion on the Budget and the presentation of the picture of national finances that the Minister for Finance has had to put before the Dáil, that there are hesitations in taking decisions that affect pensions over a fairly large scale, but there is nothing that it is within our capacity to do that we will not do, and no time will be lost in the doing of it. Whatever we can do to ameliorate and improve the conditions of the teachers will be done.
There has been a considerable amount of talk with regard to the position of the language in the schools. As I understand it, the criticism is with regard to method. We have had talk about compulsory Irish and I think it has been made clear that by compulsory Irish a lot of people mean teaching through the medium of Irish. Some people say that we ought to hear no more about compulsory Irish. That was said, I think, in relation to people criticising the fostering of Irish in the country. I do not think that you will hear the end of the talk about compulsory Irish in relation to the fostering of Irish until you put the facts of the situation broadly and openly before our people. There are two things that can be done with Irish—Irish taught as an obligatory subject in the schools and Irish used as a medium of instruction.
Whatever doubts any Deputy may have with regard to the use of Irish as the language of communication or of instruction in the schools, I think it is definitely accepted that the national language will be an obligatory subject in all schools. I have heard no dissenting voice from any part of the House with regard to that. Where a conflict occurs is as to the use of Irish as a medium of instruction. Deputies have spoken about the teaching of infants through a language which they do not understand. The modern theory apparently is that in the infants' schools the children are not taught at all; there is no question of teaching them reading or writing. There is a question of teaching them speech and habits of one kind or another.
In order to clear the situation for myself and everybody else, I have asked two primary inspectors, together with an inspector of the secondary schools and an inspector of the technical schools to report under certain headings to me after an examination of a fairly wide sample of primary schools. I have asked them to report what is happening in the primary schools in all the classes from the infants up in regard to the use of Irish as the language of communication. I was quite clear that the inspectors who had been in touch with this work could tell me what the situation was in relation to the actual facts as well as in relation to the instruction and the regulations that were in force. But I said that I did not want that. I wanted them to go to the schools for a month and stand in the schools where the work was being done and have consultations and discussions with the teachers. They could in that way refresh their minds, observe what was being done there and report on the facts.
In associating a secondary inspector with them and an inspector from the technical schools, I did that in order to broaden the outlook of those who were accustomed to the insides of the primary schools. At times I have suggested that there ought to be a focal point from the primary to the secondary schools and on to the universities; that there ought to be a review of what had resulted from the teaching of Irish in the primary and secondary schools. I felt that by combining the secondary and technical inspectors with the primary inspectors we would get a broader and more balanced view of things. In an inspection carried out over a month, 14 counties and two cities have been visited. Schools that are excellent schools, together with poor and middling schools have been examined. The examination will be concluded at the end of this month. I hope then to be able to give information to the House about the situation in the schools as a result of that inspection and what modifications or changes I propose to bring about in schools for the year that will begin after the holidays. It might be thought that it might be proper to leave to the council of education matters of this kind, but I regard the particular work of the council of education in its initial stages as being a broader and a higher one than a mere examination of what is the position of Irish in the schools and of what should be done in regard to it. I hope as a result of this examination to clear the minds of many people, both in this House and in the country. Some doubts have been raised in their minds as to whether the work in the schools has been done right or done wrong; whether the children are being injured in any way or not. I think that a type of examination of this kind will give us a picture of the situation in a more precise and competent way than would a committee set up of people who were interested in Irish.
We can look at the situation in a detached and technical way and we will then give to the people who are interested in it a clear base line, a clear state of affairs to criticise and to suggest changes in. I feel, whether people will be satisfied or dissatisfied after that, that the present situation is too nebulous to ask anyone to examine it or express opinions upon it. Whatever steps we will take as a result of this review, it will clear the situation and provide a situation more prepared for criticism and examination of a constructive and effective kind.
There has been a considerable amount of discussion about the new spelling; I think that nothing could be simpler than getting a satisfactory way to criticism the new spelling. A book has been published by the Stationery Office following an examination and a decision by a committee of the translation staff here specially set up to do it. The rules that have been adopted are clearly set out and words, or at any rate sample words, showing any changes in the spelling that have been made are given in the small vocabulary covering about 50 octavo pages of this book. I have had discussions with people who disagreed with this new spelling. I have met representatives of Comhaltas Uladh who have discussed the particular position of the Donegal and Six-County areas and I must say that I have found it very easy to discuss the matter with them. They were people who understood the difficulty, who were constructive in their approach and who were clear in their objections, but I think that I satisfied them that the progressive and systematic way to face the problem that is there—and there is a problem— is to take the proposals that have been set out now and to watch them systematically for the next year or two. I have indicated, and the House is aware, that at the time I took over the Department of Education, arrangements had been made with publishers throughout the country to have books printed in the new spelling for the first and second classes of primary schools, to be brought into operation this year at the beginning of June and progressively from next year two more classes would be brought into the scheme and so on as the years went on. There could be nothing but confusion if I did not let that system go ahead.
There is no doubt at all that the spelling should be adopted to the extent to which it was adopted and that the plans made to prepare books for Class I and Class II should be gone ahead with this year and for Class III and Class IV in the following years. We will watch carefully and I am open to suggestions and discussions with anybody concerned with the writing of Irish as to any of the spelling there that should be changed or any of the rules that should be changed. We will see these readers in operation in the early classes of primary schools within the next year or two. We are dealing with a living language and none of the people who spoke here to-day were troubled in any way as to how to spell it. We are dealing with a living spoken language; we are taking children in the infant classes where Irish, to whatever extent it is taught, is taught nothing of reading and writing and the books which they get into their hands will be books, a substantial part of which will be in the spelling agreed upon by everybody. I saw about 18 months ago a note from the International Labour Organisation regarding some publication of theirs dealing with maritime matters which had been published in two editions, one in English and one in American. I do not know if anyone in Ireland would have difficulty reading the American edition. Someone said here to-day dealing with our very difficult spelling —I think it was Deputy Cowan—that when you look at a word you would have to pronounce it to know what it meant. When you are dealing with a living language it is the living language that sounds in your mind as you read. Those of us who read Irish are not troubled by the spelling of Northern Irish, Connaught Irish or Munster Irish, because the eye travels along the line looking at the page, at the whole landscape, rather than at the individual letters.
I do not think that there is anything at all in the suggestion that has been made so dolefully by one or two people here to-day that any change in the spelling of Irish is going to kill the language. It might kill some of us older people if we had to learn the new spelling, and guard against the slips in spelling that we might make. It is very difficult to get any person to change his style of writing. We would have difficulties about it, but the same difficulties do not apply at the point at which this new scheme is being applied. I have seen letters in some of the evening papers and other papers about the new spelling and they were certainly written by people who never heard Irish pronounced in their lives. Do not let us make difficulties for ourselves and excite the minds of people who do not know anything about it by talking about our fears on the matter. The question I put is, if there is anything in this book you object to, where is the word in these 50 pages which you object to and how do you think it should be spelled or where is the rule which you object to? I do not think that it is necessary to mobilise the Irish scholars or anybody else to examine what is wrong in this book that should be corrected. I believe that a couple of years will do it.
I appreciate what Deputy Breathnach said when he stated that he wants to have preamh an fhocail kept safely. These are matters which intelligent discussion and careful discussion can put right in time.
