Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 8 May 1952

Vol. 131 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 39—Office of the Minister for Education (resumed).

General Mulcahy

I regret that I was not present when the Minister was making his statement. There are a certain number of things which I should like to mention. The first is that I was somewhat disturbed by a statement that I read in the speech of the president of the Irish National Teachers' Association at the congress in Tramore when he said that the machinery for the adjustment of salary questions which was introduced by the previous administration had come to an end some weeks ago, that it was being reconstructed at the moment. I am sure that it is pretty generally appreciated that under the machinery of conciliation and arbitration set up it has been possible for the representatives of the primary teachers, the Department of Education and the Department of Finance to come, at the conciliation level, to an agreement reasonably satisfactory to all parties. When that machinery was set up it was intended to be a permanent machine which would eliminate as far as possible friction and agitation in relation to salaries and other matters affecting the financial position of the teachers. I do not know what can have happened when it can be stated that the machinery came to an end some weeks ago. I should like to have from the Minister an assurance that there is no gap or difficulty there such as I understood from speeches made in the House appears to have arisen in relation to the Civil Service.

For a very long period the lack of satisfactory machinery of that kind has militated against the teaching profession devoting themselves to what I call the clinical work of pedagogy and the development of the professional approach by giving to the public in the best possible way the fullest possible advantage of their professional experience. The same assurance is required with regard to the secondary and vocational teachers. I felt that, with the establishment of that machinery and the satisfactory way in which the present Minister found it to work for him, we had definitely arrived at a time when the friction with regard to pay and salary scales would be eliminated and not only would there be more satisfactory co-operation in purely educational matters between the teaching organisations generally and the Department, but the teaching organisations generally, who are the people with practical experience of the work in the schools, would be better able to devote their individual and organised attention by mutual exchange of opinions and experience to educating public opinion on the work that is being done in the schools and inspiring more satisfactory confidence on the part of the people in the work being done. I feel there is a very definite ministerial function to be operated by the Minister for Education in that matter.

Without going into matters that might appear to be critical or controversial I want to say that my experience in the Department of Education rather suggested to me that the purely ministerial function, as such, was somewhat absent from the Department to a fairly substantial extent for some years past with the result that other ministerial influences invaded the Department. Various pet notions of the Minister here and the Minister there introduced matters that were not necessarily a proper part of the pattern of the general departmental approach and distorted the approach of the Department to general problems and deprived, shall we say, the Civil Service side of the Department of Education of the assistance that is undoubtedly the proper discharge of the pure ministerial function.

It is imperative for the Department of Education that the Department itself be relieved of the charge of being bureaucratic in its approach. The Minister has now sufficient experience of the Department to appreciate that the Civil Service side of the Department of Education is as devoted in a vocational way to the work they have in hands as many of the members of the religious orders who carry out the work of education throughout the country. They require that the ministerial function will be properly exercised alongside them and part of the ministerial function ought to be the protection of the Department from the fads of other Ministers here and there.

While there has been a lot of satisfactory comment, there has also been a lot of criticism of the approach to the new spelling of Irish. I was very much surprised to find that the Department of Education, and the experience of the Department of Education, was hardly sought at all in connection with the initiation of that work and that the matter was finally decided almost entirely outside the Department of Education. I do not want to discuss the excellence or otherwise of the decision but it is almost inconceivable that that was done.

The matter of university scholarships for students doing their examinations entirely through the medium of Irish was, I think, introduced without any serious consultation with the Department of Education on the one hand or the universities on the other hand and modifications might be necessary in particular schemes of that kind to which it might be useful to give some thought.

The Minister mentioned that certain examination was made to see what can be done to increase the number of trained primary teachers. I am rather disappointed that the Minister has not been able to avoid the thorns put in his path by, say, the Minister for Finance in that matter. I feel that there is no more urgent problem in the Department than the provision of at least additional women national teachers. I was very sorry that I was not able to succeed myself in that connection 12 months ago. I think it must react very much on the general educational system that the Minister is not able to make a definite statement on the matter. I hope the Minister will be able to assure us in his reply that provision will be made immediately for the training of additional women teachers. In our whole educational scheme, the only teachers who get fundamental training in their work are the primary teachers. The difference between the results achieved in later years by students who have gone through the primary schools and been taught by teachers who had two years' training in the primary training colleges and the results achieved by students who went, say, through the junior schools, and were taught by teachers who had not got systematic training in the art of teaching, such as is given in the ordinary training colleges, is in my opinion very marked. I feel that the private schools reflect in the results they are able to achieve a lack of systematic training of the teachers.

You have a problem in the junior private schools and you have a problem throughout a fairly large part of the country in the matter of untrained primary teachers. We want additional training for women, particularly, and more training facilities for men. However, you may not want an additional college for men in the same way as you want it for the women.

A more definite approach is needed in the case of unqualified primary teachers throughout the country. There is a large number of them. A number of them have many years' experience, won their spurs, and reached a very high stage of qualification. Something may have to be done to establish them as qualified teachers, but something must be done to prevent the appointment, year after year, of additional girls, in particular, who are not qualified. They are put into primary schools and will, perhaps, be permanently retained there through the lack of qualified teachers.

I feel that when there is a lot of opinion as to the different ways in which primary teachers should be prepared for their avocation, there is no better way than to pass them through training colleges specially designed for them. In that connection, I suggest there is a necessity for raising the status of the professors in the training colleges and reviewing, in the light of improved status, the class and the character of their work.

I am glad to know that the Minister is directing such a determined advance in the work of building new schools. There is, however, a problem in relation to the repair and maintenance of schools which I think requires, say, a conference between the Department and members of the Hierarchy. The Minister has drawn attention to the usefulness of the consultative committee set up in Dublin in regard to new schools. I think something on the same lines might be attempted in regard to the repair and maintenance of schools. There are one or two disgraceful cases of lack of repair of schools that have come to my own notice, particulary in the last few months. I know of one Irish-speaking district in which the language is flourishing, and in which the long traditions of our race, of a literary and linguistic kind, are fully maintained. The school there is really a disgrace to civilisation. I should not like to put down a question to the Minister to ask how many panes of glass out of the total number in that school were completely broken, how many were cracked, how many were stuck with pieces of cardboard and wood, how many slates were off the roof, how many bricks out of the wall or how many holes there were in the floor.

Mr. Moylan

And when that school was built.

General Mulcahy

That would be an interesting reflection possibly.

Mr. Moylan

Very interesting.

General Mulcahy

But the Minister appreciates what a tragedy it is in an Irish-speaking district—where you have the language vigorously maintained, where economically everything possible is being done to uplift and strengthen the people in surroundings in which we are endeavouring to nurture what is their real tradition—to find school conditions so disgraceful. I do feel that some kind of conference, some kind of systematic co-operation such as has been brought about in Dublin with regard to new schools, might be attempted in regard to the repair and maintenance of schools in the country. We do know that in many parts of the country the burden which falls on the ecclesiastical authorities in the maintenance of such institutions under present-day conditions is very great. There is one particular type of building, of which perhaps there are a few specimens, for which I would ask the Minister's special consideration. It has been noted in the traditions of our race that after every national disaster there did come a period of uplift in the form of a literary renaissance. On some occasions the laity were the prime movers in the matter, on other occasions the lead was given by learned ecclesiastics, and at other times we had a combination of the two. It has also been noted that these movements were in the past conducted mainly through the medium of the Irish language. The development and the foundation of our modern educational system and the rise in our literary and educational activities which came with the advent of the Christian Brothers, the Mercy Order, the Presentation Order, the Sisters of Charity and the Ursulines, I feel are in keeping with the periodic rhythm of our nation. Many of the laity, devoting themselves to the work of the education of the poor in Ireland found themselves called to the path of religious life. Buildings that were put up in the very early days of that movement are still in use and are perhaps in a poor, dilapidated condition but never in 100 years or more have they caused to the State, for their maintenance or to replace any part of the fabric, any cost whatever.

They are now not only historic monuments to an episode in our national life that has yet to be fully recognised in connection with what we are doing in the educational life of our country, but they served a modern purpose for the carrying on of education. Because of the fact that they are regarded, as not exactly the type of school that would be built in a modern way or a type which could be adapted without more cost than architects think should be applied to them at the present time, they are being left there neglected, left as a burden and a problem to the religious authorities who built them. I think that that consideration of the past, a consideration of what they mean by way of national monuments breathing a particular type of spirituality and a particular message, should dictate that exceptional steps should be taken to assist either a remodelling of these buildings, if the authorities who own them require them to be remodelled, or that special sympathetic consideration should be given to the aspects which I have mentioned.

It is some time now since the report of the Commission on Youth Unemployment was issued. I do not know if I have missed any references to it in the Minister's presentation of the Estimate to the House but I should like to know whether that matter is receiving the attention of the Minister. Perhaps it is a matter that should first arise in connection with the first report of the Council of Education but I should like to know from the Minister whether that is so or not.

I was disappointed that the amount of money provided in the Estimate for adult education is being reduced. I am sure the Minister is sufficiently closely in touch with the work that is being done in the vocational schools to realise that the work done nowadays in the vocational schools is awakening the people to the necessity for taking full value out of the work done in the primary schools and that the work done in the vocational schools has had a new light thrown on it by the courses that have developed for what would be called adult education under the fostering influence of the university colleges and the fruitful influence of co-operation between the vocational education committees and the university colleges.

When one sees the social objective for which these courses were originally developed and when one sees the mixture of social and economic objectives to which those courses are being directed, one must appreciate how valuable it is to encourage the purely non-State initiative that has moved in this direction. One must appreciate how little direct demand is being made on the State for the cost of this scheme. Even if the local authorities make a substantial contribution to the work—I do not know whether they do or not—there are also voluntary bodies outside with fully equipped minds on the university side and the machinery of the local authorities. They form a valuable and inspiring body and they are responsible for giving to our people of all classes a very full appreciation of education. I feel that the work of the adult education committees is both valuable and progressive in the economic and social life of our country. There is a movement back from the realities that are touched there to the actual work of the schools. I would ask the Minister to listen sympathetically to the complaints regarding the reduction of grants and to be sympathetic about any extension of facilities or of finances that may be required for that work.

What I say with regard to the conciliation and arbitration machinery on the one hand in relation to primary teachers is equally applicable to vocational and secondary teachers. I am gratified to know that the Minister has been able to reach agreement with the secondary teachers at the conciliation level. The vocational teachers have recently demanded, I believe, to be included in that scheme. At least 25 per cent. of those teaching in vocational schools are qualified in exact detail to teach in secondary schools. Somewhat more than an additional 25 per cent. are qualified in a way that departmentally is regarded as being analogous to the qualifications required for secondary schools. It was quite inconceivable to me that there should be radical differences in the payments made to a vocational teacher on the one side of the road and the payments made to the teacher in a Christian Brothers' schools or a convent schools on the other side of the road. I felt that the pattern that applied to the married and the unmarried and women teachers in secondary schools should apply to vocational schools, and that both should have the same machinery for conciliation and arbitration.

I know there was the difficulty that the local authority was the paymaster of the vocational teachers—though the State paid half the cost—and it was felt reasonable that those who are paymasters would be included in the machinery for conciliation and arbitration. I feel that there is a way out of that. When the difficulties arising with regard to conciliation and arbitration at present are being settled, I hope it will be possible to have a scheme that will include vocational and secondary teachers to the satisfaction of both of these groups, and that the equation of their work and qualifications will result in bringing their scales and general conditions somewhat into equality.

In regard to the higher institutes, I feel that one thing which is particularly missing from our primary and secondary schools is some of that warm appreciation of Irish historical tradition and folklore that in some way or other we managed to grow up with as a result of reading weekly national papers. Our higher institutes are decimal-pointing learning in a valuable and important way, but unless they turn out a by-product that will colour the imagination and paint our national history and social and folk traditions around us in our daily lives, we are losing something that we should expect from the higher study of history and literature. I would suggest to the Minister that the bodies which look after the work of the Celtic School in our Institute for Advanced Studies, the Royal Irish Academy and the Royal Society of Antiquities, should all be asked to give their assistance to see in what way some of the colour and the warmth of our national folk and historical tradition could be brought into our school books and into our schools.

Seán Ó hUrmhumháin

Bhí ceist na teangan á phlé ar an Meastachán seo agus ba mhaith liom cúpla focal a rá ar an gceist sin. Ní foláir a rá go bhfuil i bhfad níos mó eolais ag muintir na hÉireann ar an nGaeilge anois ná mar bhí triocha bliain ó snoin, agus go bhfuil níos mó daoine i ndon an Ghaeilge a labhairt. Tá a chion féin déanta ag an Aire chun an Ghaeilge a shábháil agus tá cúis na Gaeilge slán faoina chúram. Mar sin féin, ní féidir a rá go bhfuil gluaiseacht na Gaeilge ag dul ar aghaidh mar ba chóir. Is cinnte gur féidir le níos mó daoine an Ghaeilge a labhairt anois; ach má sea, cén fáth nach labhartar níos minicí anois í imeasc na bhfear óg agus na mban óg a bhfuil neart Gaeilge acu? Orainn féin agus ar an Rialtas atá an locht, im thuairimse.

Is iad na daoine óga, idir 16 agus 30, na daoine is tábhachtaí i ngluaiseacht ar bith. Bíonn siad san i ndon an Ghaeilge a labhairt nuair a fhágann siad an scoil agus dá dtugtaí aire chóir le 30 bliain anuas do sna daoine óga, do bheadh i bhfad níos mó Gaeilge á labhairt anois. Ní foláir iarracht a dhéanamh chun siamsaí cluichí; céilithe, coirmeacha ceoil agus mar sin a chur ar fáil dóibh. Ba cheart, freisin, faichí imeartha a sholáthar dóibh ins gach aon pharóiste. Tá fhios agam go dtógfaidh sé a lán airgid chun an obair sin go léir a dhéanamh, ach más dóigh leis an Rialtas gur fiú iarracht a dhéanamh chun an teanga a shábháil ní mór airgead a chaitheamh chun é sin a dhéanamh.

Anois, cé go bhfuil an tAire Oideachais féin ag déanamh a dhíchill ar son na Gaeilge, is oth liom a rá gur beag gríosadh atá ag teacht ó aon Roinn Rialtais eile chun é sin a dhéanamh. Chím neamh-shuim agus neamh-aithne ag gach Roinn, beagnach, ar an bpobal a bhfuil Gaeilge acu. Cuir i geás, tá obair ar siúl ag gach Comhairle Contae, ag Córas Iompair Eireann agus ag gach Roinn, beagnach, inniu agus níl siad ag tabhairt a ceart don teangain in san obair sin. Bíonn litreacha, cártaí agus foirmeacha dhá gcur amach acu go dtí an Ghaeltacht agus is i mBéarla ar fad a bhíonn siad. Ní foláir no tá sé sin ag déanamh a lán díobhála don cheist. Ba mhaith liom go bhféachfadh an tAire chuige go gcuirfí stop leis an droch-nós san. Ba cheart gur i nGaeilge amháin a clóbhuailfí agus a foilseofaí gach foirm a bhaineann leis an nGaeltacht nó le daoine a bhfuil Gaeilge acu. Ba cheart gur i nGaeilge a bheadh gach foirm agus gach fógra ag lorg iarrthóirí ar phostanna a bhfuil an Ghaeilge riachtanach lena n-aghaidh. Má thugann gach Roinn Rialtais faoin obair sin i gceart is mór an feabhas a thiocfaidh ar cheist na Gaeilge.

The future of the language depends almost entirely on the efforts and the initiative of our young people and on the preservation of the home of the language and the reservoir of the language in the Gaeltacht areas. I have no doubt that the young people to-day will play their part provided they get every help and encouragement by example and in monetary aid. A generation has left our schools during the past 27 or 28 years since the time when Irish was first made a compulsory subject. That generation had a good working knowledge of the language. Yet, only a very small percentage speak Irish to-day. I think I would be safe in saying that Irish is spoken less to-day that it was 25 and 30 years ago and the efforts of our teachers and of our children, therefore, are being wasted because of the failure of the Government to continue the good work done in the schools by making Irish compulsory.

Our young boys and girls when they leave school meet only English speakers in their homes and in their work. They lack the opportunity of continuing the work done in the schools. The Government should make an effort to provide an opportunity for these people to continue the use and practice of the native language after leaving school by making available facilities for céilidhthe, Irish concerts and other amusements, by providing halls in which nothing but the Irish language will be spoken, by providing playing pitches in every parish in the country, by making more use of the radio to bring the spoken language into the homes, the halls and the clubs and by ensuring that short Gaelic features will be heard in every cinema. All that will probably involve the expenditure of quite a big sum but it will be money well spent and it will justify its expenditure by ensuring the continued progress of the language after our children leave school through the provision of facilities for the continued use and practice of the language.

The Minister is to be congratulated in helping to implement the recommendations of the arbitration machinery set up in connection with teachers' salaries and in bringing about some measure of contentment in the teaching profession. The Minister might now go a step further in helping to allay the resentment and dissatisfaction among a certain section of our teachers that has not been too fairly treated. I appeal to the Minister to consider the salary claims of the pre-1946 single male teachers who, when the single men and women were placed on an equal pay basis in 1949, seemed to be unjustly treated. Some of them received as little as 5/- a week increase on the 1946 scale.

It is to be presumed that they were penalised for not taking on the responsibilities of marriage. It must be remembered, however, that some of these unmarried male teachers have as great a burden to bear as their married colleagues because of having to care for aged parents, invalid brothers and sisters, and maintain a house and housekeeper. Many of these teachers are in the heart of the country, where there are no facilities for lodging, and they have to maintain a car, at great expense now, to take them to and from their work. I believe they are entitled to salary increases in conformity with the increases granted to persons in other State-paid services.

There is another appeal I must make to the Minister on behalf of those teachers who retired prior to January, 1950, and who were denied the retiring gratuity awarded to teachers who retired subsequent to that date. I understand that the principal reason for creating a dividing line between these two groups was the cost of extending the retiring gratuity to all existing pensioners. I hold that the award of a retiring gratuity to any admits the right of all to a similar gratuity. All serve in the same capacity and under the same circumstances, and no line of demarcation should be drawn between them. In the interests of justice and equity those who have been denied a retiring gratuity should now be awarded it. I do not know what the cost will be, but cost should not be a hindrance in meting out justice. I appeal to the Minister to give active consideration to that matter.

The Minister stated that it is his intention to establish a second training college in order to provide a sufficiency of trained teachers and he hopes to have that college in operation in the near future. That is welcome news. There is a great need of trained teachers at the moment, particularly of women teachers and teachers for the Protestant community. That need is due to the unsatisfactory conditions that have hitherto prevailed particularly in relation to the salary, which is at the root of the whole matter. The shortage of teachers is reflected in the size of some of the classes in our cities and towns. In some cases these classes are so large as to make any effective or worth-while teaching quite impossible. No obstacle should be allowed to remain which prevents prospective candidates from becoming teachers. Every effort should be made to bring into the profession the best intelligence in the country since the success of our educational system depends primarily on the quality of our teachers.

I notice that the grant for heating, cleaning and maintaining the schools is at the same figure this year as last year. That grant was considerably reduced by the last Government despite the protestations of both the teachers and the parents as to its insufficiency for the purpose. A Council of Education has been set up to remedy the defects in our educational system, and to put right the mistakes of the past three decades. I believe this council will be of little value unless the Government takes immediate steps to provide proper accommodation for the children and the teachers. The recent statement of the Minister as to the state of some of our schools and the necessity for providing decent schools shows a realisation of both the magnitude and the urgency of this problem. The steps which he outlined, and which the Government propose to take for the provision of decent schools for our children, give us hope that we will not have long to wait for a solution of the problem.

It is a fact that there are many schools throughout the country, some of them 100 years old, which are in a shocking state of repair. They are unhealthy and dirty. It is also a common sight to see, in some of our country schools in the winter time, the teacher and the pupils wearing their overcoats in an endeavour to keep themselves warm, in order to make up for the shortcomings of a very inadequate fire. Many of these schools are cold, damp, draughty and unhealthy, and neither the pupils nor the teachers can give their best in the condition of physical discomfort in which they have to work. The heating and cleaning grant for these schools is not enough. The children in most cases, because of lack of the wherewithal to pay somebody else to do it, are obliged after school hours to do the cleaning and the sweeping of the schools, when they get choked with the dust and dirt that has accumulated in the school during the day. That must be very injurious to the health of the children, and is a practice which should not be allowed to continue. Many of these schools are breeding grounds of disease, and so I think it is absolutely futile to be providing increased grants for health services while our children are obliged to spend the greater part of their school days in such schools.

I know that it is the intention of the Government, as it was of the last Government, to provide schools as quickly as possible for our children, but a considerable time will elapse before that can be done. In the meantime, something should be done to remove the sordid conditions under which our teachers and children have to work. A considerable increase in the heating and cleaning grant would help to remove the physical discomfort under which they have to carry on at present, and would provide an atmosphere for the normal healthy development of our children. I do not think there is anything else I have to say except to commend the few points I have made to the Minister's consideration.

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

Inné bhíos ag éisteacht leis an dTeachta Ó Duigneáin ó Ghaillimh. Dhein sé gearán nach mbíonn uainn sa Teach seo ar an Meastachán Oideachais ach "lip-service." Is dócha go bhfuil an ceart aige. Ba mhaith liomsa m'óráid ar fad a thabhairt trí Ghaeilge ach níl sé ar mo chumas é dhéanamh. Ní bheadh sé ar mo chumas labhairt go hiomlán trí Ghaeilge ar an gCáinaisnéis ná ar an Meastachán seo ná ar aon Mheastachán eile.

Is ceist thábhachtach í gluaiseacht na Gaeilge ach is tábhachtaí iad ceisteanna na Cáinaisnéise agus luach an bhídh. Chun mo smaointí a nochtadh ar an gCáinaisnéis agus ar na rudaí eile ní foláir dom labhairt i mBearla.

I listened to the speech that was made yesterday by a Deputy from Galway, and I suppose what he said is true, that the only thing which the majority of Deputies in this House do with regard to the Irish language is to give lip-service to the effort to revive it. I suppose he was perfectly correct in saying that. Now, I would like to be able to make my entire speech in Irish on this Vote, but if I were to do so I do not think I would be able to convey to the Minister what exactly I want to convey to him, because my knowledge of Irish is so limited. I would like, too, to be able to make my speech on the Budget entirely in Irish, because I believe that Irish is important and that its revival is very important. But, whether the Deputy likes it or not, I think that the Budget is much more important than the Irish language. The prices of bread, tea, sugar and butter are also important. I feel that I would not be able to convey the viewpoints of my constituents on the Budget entirely through Irish. I agree with the point made by the Deputy that there could be a little more Irish used in the House. It would be an encouragement if that were done, because the people at times do look to this House for encouragement in respect of certain movements, and more particularly, I suppose, in respect of the movement to try to-revive the language.

I am afraid that the ordinary individual outside who has not the same interest in the revival of the language as the Minister or the Deputy from Galway, believes that there has not been any advance at all made in the revival of the language over the past 30 years. I say that the ordinary individual outside would say that, and I think that is the general viewpoint. I suppose that is due to the fact that we have lost so much Irish in the last 30 years. I do not mean that we lost it in the Gaeltacht area. The point that I am making is that so much Irish has been lost in the Galltacht areas over the last 30 years, so much of the Irish that had been acquired by the pupils in the schools of the country over that period. They acquired a knowledge of Irish while in school, up to the age of 16, 17 and 18 years and then lost 75 per cent. of it. I do not look on myself as a perfect example in that respect, but I should say this that when I left school at 18 years of age I could have conversed quite freely in Irish with the Minister, with the Deputy from Galway or with Deputy Ormonde. But because Irish was not used in my town, and because there was no real effort made—I suppose I was to blame myself as well as others —to use it by those who left school with me, and because it was not encouraged in the proper way, I lost a substantial portion of the Irish which I had been taught at school.

P. Ó Duigneáin

Ní dúirt mé sin ar chor ar bith.

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

Cad é féin?

P. Ó Duigneáin

Nuair d'fhág tú an scoil rinne tú dearmad ar an Gaeilge tá faitíos orm.

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

Deputy Ormonde says that the problem is to try and keep Irish in the Gaeltacht. That may be portion of the problem, but I think that the bigger portion of the problem is to endeavour to retain amongst young people in the City of Dublin, in the towns in Leinster and generally in those towns and places which we regard as the Galltacht areas, a knowledge of the Irish which they had acquired at school.

I want to say that I think that not only the present Minister but the last Minister and the Minister before him could have made some real effort and endeavoured to make the Irish language popular through the medium of the films. Deputies have heard this many times before, but I propose to repeat it again for what it is worth. Some people would have you believe that the film-going audiences would not suffer a two-reel short which would be entirely in Irish. I do not think that is correct. In any case, I think an effort should be made even to inflict it on those people, a lot of whom are antagonistic towards the Irish language. I am a film-goer myself. I have gone to see films and have had to endure for ten minutes or a quarter of an hour a "short" dealing with something in South West Africa, Peru or China. I just had to endure that. I rather think that if we had short stories portraved through the medium of the films in the Irish language, with Irish commentaries, our people would gradually acquire a liking for the language, and that even people who are antagonistic to it as well as young people who have just left school would pick up words and phrases in Irish. By that method the Irish they learned at school would be carried on. We may say what we like about cultural activities in other respects; we may talk about céilidhthe, Irish concerts and other things that are generally regarded as being typical of Irish culture but we must admit that the main form of amusement in the country are films. If we do not get the Irish language through to the people through the medium of the films I do not believe that we can get it to them successfully in any other way. What the Minister or the Government can do in that respect I do not know but everybody will agree that for propaganda purposes and for purposes of amusement the films are accepted as the medium.

The Deputy from Galway—I would be afraid to pronounce his name in case I would give it the English pronunciation——

P. Ó Duigneáin

Peadar Ó Duigneáin—sean ainm Gaeilge é. Ná bac leis an Béarla.

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

——was perfectly right when he spoke about lip-service because I have some little knowledge of the Club Leabhar which is promoted by Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge and I would like to discover how many Deputies who profess to be behind the movement for the revival of the language are members of that particular club. I do not say that the publications are super-attractive. They provide interesting reading all right but, apart from the reading and amusement that they provide, membership of the Club Leabhar would be in itself a gesture or contribution towards promoting the writing and the publication of these books and would provide some source of revenue for those courageous men—I think one could call them courageous—who at the present time are making their contribution to the revival of the language by writing these books.

There is another suggestion that I would like to put to the Minister with a view to keeping the language alive. Again, my interest is in the pupils who leave school at the age of 16,17 or 18. I would suggest, not necessarily the establishment by the Department of Education, but the encouragement of the establishment of Irish holiday camps. There are many Irish colleges throughout the country and anyone who has been in any of those Irish holiday colleges or holiday camps will readily admit that in the fortnight, three weeks or month that he spent there he learned infinitely more Irish than he would learn by spending six times as long in a school. The trades unions could do a lot in that respect. Various other organisations could do a great deal. I have particularly in mind the Catholic Boy Scouts of Ireland who should be induced or encouraged to form Irish-speaking troops.

I do not think there are troops within the ranks of the Catholic Boy Scouts of Ireland that speak Irish exclusively but it would be a good idea if the Minister could contact or make representations to that very good organisation with a view to seeing what help they could give in their annual holiday camps towards the promotion of the Irish language.

There is another matter about which I asked the Minister before. I am not aware what stage the negotiations have reached. I asked him, for God's sake, to try to provide some definite arrangement with regard to the salaries of vocational teachers. I said, and I think I was correct in saying, that they had been thrown around quite a lot, not only by the present Minister but by the Minister in the previous Government, that while the two other branches of the teaching profession, primary teachers and secondary teachers, had got some improvements over the last few years, the vocational teachers found themselves frustrated at every attempt they made to get finality with regard to their particular problems in respect of scale salary.

I should also like to support Deputy Ormonde and, I think, Deputy Peadar Cowan, in a plea for those teachers who retired prior to a particular date in 1950. It seems harsh that there should be a border between them and those who retired subsequently. If the Minister could see his way to do something for them, it would be an act of charity.

I would suggest that the Minister for Education—any Minister for Education—should say to pupils at the age of 14 years: "If you have no prospect of reaching a university, or pursuing a course that will enable you to fit yourself for the Civil Service, Córas Iompair Éireann, local government, etc., I would advise you now to leave school and to take up a trade or to enrol in a vocational school." There is nothing as pathetic as the number of young boys and girls who believe that they will be able to follow a lucrative profession and who continue at school until they get their leaving certificate. They find then that they have not the slightest prospect of entering a university. They have qualifications in Irish, English, history, and geography. They have a knowledge of algebraic geometry. They know trigonometry inside out. They can tell you everything about the binomial theorem. Having romped about for 12 months, answering every type of advertisement, they find they have to take a clerical post at 25/- a week or, in some cases, less. It takes them all those years to discover—because nobody pointed it out to them—that it is useless to continue at school until they are 18 or 19 years of age and get these grand sounding qualifications and acquire all that knowledge because they are debarred from taking up any real job unless they have the B.A., B.Comm. or some other degree.

I am not against university education. I have heard Deputies say that if we had less university students and more workers we would get on better. The number of university scholarships given by local authorities is a scandal. The meagre scholarships that they give do not do justice to the bright young pupils who, if they got a chance, would advance. In County Wexford for the entire county, there are five or, at the most, six university scholarships given to those pupils who continue at school and do the leaving certificate examination. It is not a considerable amount of money. The granting of university scholarships, outside Dublin, should not be confined to the county councils. I cannot understand why, say, the Wexford Corporation could not be induced to give or would not give voluntarily a university scholarship, or two, or three or four. I cannot understand why some of our bigger urban district councils should not be induced to give, or should not of their own free will give, university scholarships to the number of two, three or four.

The opportunities for the young people of our country who have not got the means to go to a university to do a university course are not sufficient. It is fairly generally accepted that a member of a family who is just normally intelligent, and in many cases who is below normal intelligence, can become a doctor, a solicitor, a barrister or enter any of the other professions, provided his family have sufficient money. I am not critical of that situation at all-it is a grand thing for him that his family can send him on to become a barrister, a solicitor, a doctor, a dentist or an engineer-but we should be a little more generous through the State and local authorities and through other organisations, and should be able to give to hundreds of young persons, bright and intelligent boys and girls, who cannot afford them, the facilities to get university education and to qualify for the type of degree I mentioned. Unfortunately, the scholarships are very few. Hundreds and, I suppose, thousands of young pupils who are above average intelligence discover, when they have reached the leaving certificate standard, that the only thing they are fitted for is some tuppence-halfpenny clerical job in which there is no future.

I do not know whether this last item comes within the jurisdiction of the Minister or not, but I want to advocate that a branch of the university be established at the State farms under the Department of Agriculture, mainly for the purpose of allowing the pupils who attend there to qualify for their degree in agriculture. So far as the particular college which I know is concerned—Johnstown Castle, five or six miles outside Wexford—it has all the facilities, and if branches of the university, with emphasis only on a degree in agriculture, were established in Johnstown Castle, in Ballyhaise and at the other State farms, it would relieve the congestion in the universities in Cork Galway and Dublin and would be a great boon to these places and to the pupils in the vicinity of these State colleges.

May I urge again that the Minister and the Minister for Industry and Commerce, the Minister for Justice or whatever other Minister is concerned should get together in regard to the revival of the language? If they want to make a substantial contribution to the revival of the language, I suggest that the best medium is the medium which is popular at present in practically every line of propaganda, the films.

Mr. S. Flanagan

I think the National Museum next door never survived the acquisition of this House as a neighbour. The Museum surrendered portion of its premises at the time to enable the additions to Leinster House to be made and £40,000 worth of fossils have since been lying packed in boxes in the National Museum. Bear in mind that I said "in the National Museum." There are £80,000 worth of fossils in this House, but the real fossils have been there since 1923, and I understand that they have never been unpacked. They say: "The nearer the Church, the farther from God," and I have to admit that I have never climbed the reek myself, though I have often disported myself up in Donegal at Lough Derg. In the same way, we have forgotten the National Museum next door while concentrating on things much farther away.

There are skins there which are unclassified, and, I suppose, a fortiori are not on exhibit, for the simple reason that nobody competent to classify them has ever been asked to do so. I have mentioned to the Minister the name of one person who is capable of making these classifications and I sincerely hope that he has taken the matter in hand, because the emphasis in all education in this country is rather too much on the practical rather then on the theoretical. Remember what Oscar Wilde said about art: “All art is useless,” and, to some extent, all learning is useless. I do not at all agree with anyone who says that a person who spends four or five years in a secondary school and then goes off, either by choice or necessity, to some ordinary job is any worse off for the four or five years he spent there after completing his primary education course. Indeed, if it goes to that there is far too great an inferiority complex about the things that are really worth while in life in this country. You are looked down on if you appreciate Beethoven; you are looked down on if you know anything at all about good painting; and you are regarded as a snob if you read anything but tuppence-halfpenny novels or Mutt and Jeff comics.

There is a duty cast on all teachers who are responsible for the formation of the characters of the young people of this country to try to mould their minds in such a way as to enable them to appreciate the finer things of life. I appreciate the fact that, as an individual free nation, we are very young, but, at the same time, there is no reason why we should continue to have the traditional inferiority complex which has been bred in us as a result of centuries of oppression.

Mr. Hickey

Would you attribute that to our system of education?

Mr. S. Flanagan

I cannot attribute the oppression to our system of education, but I submit that it is only those who are responsible for the moulding of the minds of the people who can eradicate the effects of that oppression. Included in those, I submit, is every person who is elected to this Dáil, but more particularly those who are responsible for the formation of a person's mind in the early days of his life. The national teacher is the most important cog in that machine.

Mr. Hickey

Hear, hear!

Mr. S. Flanagan

It is they who supply to some extent the position of the priest and to some extent the position of the father and mother. They stand as foster parents and as co-religious educationists during those vital years from four to 14. They control the destiny of children from 9.30 or 10 o'clock in the morning until 3 or 3.30 o'clock in the evening—a substantial portion of any person's day. The behaviour of the teacher, his methods of teaching, whether he is flogging mere learning into the children or whether he is inducing knowledge and appreciation of things into them, all leave a mark on every child who leaves that teacher's school.

In the same way, the rudimentary, fundamental religious truths are taught in the national school and many people leave this country without having much in the way of religious knowledge except what they get from their teacher at school, particularly those who leave between the ages of 16 and 17 and become migratory labourers. I could not appeal more than I do to everybody here, in so far as they have any power, to mould public opinion—the minds, the motives and the behaviour of the people. They, too, with the teachers should realise that, as a country, we still have an enormous amount of inferiority complex in the minds of the people. They are still carrying over that legacy from the years of oppression, and it rests on us to do everything in our power to eradicate that and make the Irish people look forward to the future, not as something black, hopeless and miserable, but as something to be worked for, something to be lived for. That is the root of the Budget trouble and that is why we have to ask so repeatedly our people to work harder. They should be proud to work in this country, but I am afraid that many of them are not. I am afraid they are not being given sufficient assistance by those who are responsible for their development.

Mr. Hickey

Would not the Deputy agree that the minds of our children have been fashioned on the old system —the system that has been handed over to us?

Mr. S. Flanagan

It is up to us to decide how our young people are going to develop. It is up to us to decide whether we are going to accept the methods that were used by our predecessors or whether we are going to hark back to the lesson taught by Pádraig Pearse. For that matter, I think the Labour Party of whom Deputy Hickey is a distinguished member would do well to ponder on the meaning of the word "worker." That has been bandied about in this House and outside as if it refers only to a person who takes a spade in his hand. It has been bandied about even as distinct from the poor, unfortunate student. I was a student myself and I cannot say that I worked terribly hard but I did a certain amount of work.

Those who teach in primary and secondary schools are workers also. Those who go to the university and have their minds moulded there and have themselves equipped to control the mental development of those who follow them are workers in their own way.

Mr. Hickey

We look upon them as being the most important workers in the country if they are developed properly.

Mr. S. Flanagan

I should like to deal with the case of the pensioned teachers to which reference has already been made by Deputies Ormonde and Corish. The position of these teachers is, I am afraid, rather unfortunate. There is a fallacy in logic known as the fallacy of the heap. It can be explained very simply. If you put a straw on the ground and another straw on top of it and then another straw on top of that you still have only three straws, one on top of the other. If you keep on doing that sufficiently long, you will eventually have a heap If, when you have a heap, you take off one straw and then another at what stage will you cease to have a heap and have only a number of straws?

Let me take a more homely example. At what stage does a person who is losing his hair—I am not to be taken as referring to any person near me— become bald? Is it one particular hair which makes a person bald? Before losing that hair he was not bald but after he has lost that particular hair does he become bald?

The application of the fallacy to the position of the pensioned teachers, I submit, is that the Minister cannot go back. He is now asked to go back a year or two and take in a certain number of teachers who retired in 1949. If he did that he would have to go back to 1948 and then to 1947 and eventually you would arrive at the position where it would be as well to take them all in. The fact is that teachers have had a rather long struggle in this country in the way of getting just treatment for themselves. They should be very grateful that they have now managed to extract from the State something by way of a pension and something in respect of a gratuity. If they do not realise that those who retired in 1947, 1948 and 1949 are debarred from getting the pension and gratuity, then, I am afraid, they should resign themselves to the fact that the amount of money involved would be far too much and that they cannot expect the State to give gratuity to every teacher who retired in those years. When those teachers retired they did so subject to certain conditions. They accepted them at the time and it was only when they thought that others had retired under conditions which were better than the conditions under which they themselves had retired that they put up their case.

I have every sympathy with the teachers and I regret that they cannot be accommodated. I make that statement because I have many friends in the teaching profession and among the pensioned teachers who are complaining and while it is all very well to stand up in this House to make a plea for something which you know cannot be done, I think it is straighter and somewhat fairer to the people involved to stand up and say that you think it cannot be done, that too much money is involved and that their case is hopeless.

Many of the residences provided for primary teachers are in very poor condition and I would suggest that the Minister should either sell them as they stand or have them pulled down and sell the woodwork and rubble. He should give the teachers a loan of the amount of money he realises on those transactions and allow them to repay it over a reasonable period. I cannot see any objection to that in practice because the monthly, half-yearly or annual deduction can be made at source from their salary. In that way many rather unsightly residences could be done away with. Some of them are situated in remote places which have become remote during the last 40 or 50 years since those residences were built. During that time unfortunately the number of pupils on the rolls of many schools has declined very sharply, so much so that some schools have ceased to be used as such while others have been reduced from four-teacher schools to two or sometimes even to one-teacher schools. During the passage of years, therefore, some of these residences have become either redundant or obsolete and at the same time, I understand, the official view is that they should be used, on occasion involving great hardship to the teacher. Isolated residences in remote places should be pulled down forthwith and the proceeds put into the kitty in the Department of Education. Others which are in a poor state of repair should be either sold or pulled down and the material sold. The proceeds should be given to the teachers as an inducement to build and the money should be stopped at source from their salaries over the succeeding years. While I am not suggesting that every teacher should have a palace, I do suggest that every residence in the country for which the Department of Education has any responsibility is a measure of its regard for its workers. Even tourists coming to the country who note the condition of some of these residences are shocked to think that the State allows broken-down, old-fashioned premises to house its teachers. Perhaps in that way too the State would make a useful investment because these new houses would stand for a long time to come.

Mr. Byrne

I disagree entirely with the previous speaker when he says that teachers should be very grateful for what they have extracted from different Governments. Some teachers may feel a little grateful but when one thinks of their long continuous fight even to get what they have to-day, one sees nothing to be grateful for. They have earned all that they have got; they have worked hard and anything they have got they are entitled to it.

With regard to the lump sum I think it regrettable that the Government does not do something for teachers who retired before the fixed date, January 1st, 1950. They were promised, I was promised—I raised the matter by way of question here several times—that something would be done but we were always put off, we never got a final decision and were told that they would get nothing. The Minister would be doing a very gracious thing if he reopened the matter and investigated the claims of teachers who retired within a reasonable period of that fixed date. They are entitled to it. Some of them, instead of being grateful, are very disappointed that they did not qualify for the lump sum.

My principal reason for rising was to ask the Minister—I think he has some views on the matter—about uniformity of holidays for children. I wrote to the Department last year about it. I know a mother with five or six children three of whom are of school-going age. One has reached the Christian Brothers' school, the girl is at a convent and the other little boy is in an ordinary school in the centre of the City of Dublin. The three children get holidays at three different times whereas they all could get them on the 1st July so that if the family wanted to go to Skerries, Balbriggan, Bray, or some other seaside place not too far from the City of Dublin they could all pack up at the same time, or if the children had an opportunity of visiting some country relations, they could all go together. I was asked to raise this matter.

I think that the day will come when the Government will see the desirability of giving all school-children holidays at a fixed time, say, from the 1st July to the last day in August. Then they will all know in advance when the holidays are coming. At present the parent asks one child when he is getting holidays and on asking another gets a different reply. The Minister should do something about it and also, as other Deputies have said, extend the holidays to two months. It is well known in this city—I am only putting the Dublin point of view—that most reasonably comfortable workingclass families take a small cottage somewhere at the seaside for the month of July or August. Do not break the months but give the children two months' holidays. Let the parents pack up and bring them all together, not separately. Let them know also when they must return to school as arrangements must be made for the children who are returning. Also, in districts where they have school meals the contractors should know when to have the meals ready.

The next point is the building of schools in new areas. In the City of Dublin we have cleared whole parishes of a very large number of tenement houses, depopulating the area, and have left some fine old schools without sufficient pupils.

I am hopeful that the municipal authorities will realise that it is not an unreasonable request, when they eventually get the sites, that they should rebuild the houses around the fine old schools and churches in the centre of the city and around the shopping centres. Such schools should not be left without their pupils while parish managers have to raise very large funds to build schools in outlying districts. It sometimes happens that there are hundreds and thousands of children living in new housing schemes for a year or two before any school accommodation is provided for them. I know the Minister's views on that. He thinks, in company with every other member of this House, that the moment the plans for a housing scheme are approved and the building starts a school should commence at the very same time so as to have it in readiness for the children who will come to the area. Large numbers of children go to housing schemes in County Dublin or to schemes adjoining the city, and I feel it is unfair to ask the parish manager, who up to this had only to deal with a few hundred people, to provide the sum that is necessary by Government regulations in order to build a new school. The Government should see to it that the grant for the building of new schools is increased in accordance with to-day's building costs.

Very few people understand or are acquainted with the system of purchasing sites for new schools. The moment the parish manager hears that a housing scheme is to be built in his area, by either a public society or by private persons, he has instantly got to pay a competitive price for land on which to build a new school. In my view that is most unfair. The educational authorities should provide him with a free site as part of their educational plan and, if they do not, power ought to be given by the Government to the local authority in a particular area to provide a site free of charge as part of the amenities of the whole area.

Having provided a free site, the next thing is to make sure that there is a contented staff in the school. As one of the Deputies who has just spoken pointed out, a contented staff to impart knowledge and a contented pupil at the receiving end is the best possible thing for the country. In these days of difficulty for teachers and pensioned teachers, the Government should recognise the difficulties themselves, and make awards and payments accordingly without waiting for agitation for improved conditions.

We have fairly well provided in this country for the mentally defective. Brothers in many parts of the country look after them very well, but what about the education of the physically defective? A child whose arms, legs or body may be defective could quite possibly be capable of absorbing a good education but, unfortunately, he is confined to bed and can never attend school. I must compliment the Government for having done splendid work in providing education for the mentally defective child, and I would recommend to them that the physically defective child's education should also be looked after. I understand that there is a polio organisation in this country which is doing something for a fair number of such children. A deputation saw the Minister or some members of his Department about this matter of providing education for the physically defective child, and I would impress on the Government that this is an urgent matter.

I heard Deputy Corish and one or two other Deputies talking about the boy or girl who leaves school at 18 years of age. These boys and girls are very fortunate to be able to stay at school until that age. I have in mind the case of the boy or girl reaching 14 or 15 years whose parents cannot afford to keep him or her at school any longer. We have seen photographs in the newspapers of queues of boys and girls awaiting admission to vocational schools. We do not pay the vocational teachers a sufficient salary, nor have we a sufficiency of vocational schools. I would implore the Government to make matters easier for the boy or girl seeking technical education. There is not room in the professions for everybody, and a good tradesman can go to any part of the world as long as he is skilled. He can build houses in Canada, in Australia or in Dublin City, or anywhere else. I am not advocating emigration, I can assure you, but in case people have to emigrate it would be well for them to have a trade. I came across a few boys who were emigrating within the last few months, but they were fortunate in being skilled men and were confident that they would be a success.

I would like to draw attention to the means test for scholarships. I notice that one of my colleagues in the Dublin Corporation who is a very prominent, active and useful member of the scholarships committee is in the House at the moment. I am sure he knows something about this matter. The means test for scholarships is too high and the classification is too keen. Therefore, many of the boys who could compete for these scholarships if the means test were not enforced so severely, are debarred from doing so. There may be some little easement of the position, because I have not got any complaints during the last few months.

Mr. Breathnach

It has been modified for over a year.

Mr. Byrne

I have not heard any complaints for the last few months, at any rate. May I remind the Minister that the principal reason I stood up was to ask him about the uniformity of holidays? If he has any good news to impart I would ask him to impart it quickly so that it can be availed of for the summer holidays commencing probably 1st July. It has been suggested to me—and I just mention it— by fairly sensible people that from the end of August to Christmas is a little bit too long for school attendance without a break of a day or two. I wonder would the Minister consider the question of making some arrangement to have a week's holidays, say, at the end of October. I was requested to put that suggestion forward. The idea is not my own.

Captain Giles

This is a Department on which a Deputy would need a fair amount of courage to speak, in view of the fact that there are so many lawyers and teachers in this House. However, we who have lived our lives down the country can speak on many of the problems of education affecting us. I am glad that the bad name which the Department had in years gone by is being left behind and that it is now getting the respect of the country to which it is entitled. In years past teachers had grievances about salaries. That situation has been relieved and I am satisfied that the Minister's predecessor gave him a good headline. The present Minister is a worthy successor. In him we have a balanced man and a man of character. I am confident that he will have a good pull with the teachers and I believe the people all over the country will have faith in him. If he carries on the work in hands as he has been carrying it on, I think education will be put on a good footing.

We all know that education, as far as this young State is concerned, is merely on a try-out. We have had only 30 years of native government and we have not much opportunity to look back and see what are the results. It takes some decades, or perhaps 100 years, to form the character of a nation. I am satisfied that things are going reasonably well, as well as in any other country in Europe, or perhaps in the world.

The other evening I was listening to Deputy Cafferky and I must say that I do not agree with him at all. You would think that this was a country of illiterate people, that the teachers were useless and that the pupils could not read or write. If Deputy Cafferky could go back 40 years, as I can, he would realise that in our young days there was hardly a man or a woman who could read or write. Only one in every ten persons could do so. The majority of the people were in a semi-educated condition. While it cannot be said that we are an overeducated people we are turning out of our schools well-educated pupils who can read, write and think for themselves. Of course, we must admit that that is not everything that is needed. What we are most in need of is greater emphasis on character formation. That is more important than grinding children in various subjects. What we should aim at is turning out good, balanced men. Possibly, we are lacking somewhat there. It is of no avail to blame the Department or the teachers. The fault does not lie entirely there. I lay the blame on the type of family life in which there is a looseness and a drift away from the home. If we could get many of our parents to realise their responsibilities and duties, to inculcate a proper sense of behaviour in their younger children before they come to school, then the teachers would have a much easier task. There is a lot to be desired in the raw material our teachers are getting in our schools in the way of children at the ages of six and seven. They are not reared in a proper way at home; they have no manners, no culture and no sense of proper conduct.

Many of the children who come to school at those ages conduct themselves like wild Indians or wild boars. Therefore, the teachers have responsibility to exercise strict discipline and guide their pupils in regard to elementary conduct. This is no easy job for the teachers, and they would want a great deal of patience. I would like to impress upon the people throughout the country that the children would make much better pupils if they were brought up properly during the impressionable years, from, say, three to six. At those ages you can give children a good foundation.

Take the case of the ordinary man and woman who take their responsibility as parents seriously and bring their children to that state of conduct and character that is needed. You will always find the teacher saying: "I wish to God every child in my school was like those parents' child." The teacher need not worry about such children from the point of view of their ordinary manners and behaviour and can start right away on the very important process of character formation. We need not try to throw the entire blame for any deficiencies in the children on the Department or on the teachers. I hope these few words, rough and ready as they are, will take effect among all the families throughout the country. If not, I am afraid the drift which is in progress will not be stopped and we will be brought into the same position in which other countries have been brought, who have different ways of living, are carefree and irresponsible, and do not worry what becomes of their nation as long as they have a good time while it lasts.

The national teachers are the pivot of the whole activity of this country. Ninety per cent. of the pupils with whom they deal never go any further than the national school. I do not worry so much about those who go further, because their parents have sufficient cash to take care of them, I prefer to consider that very large percentage whose education finishes in the national school. They are the largest part of the nation. They have to do the hard work and the rough work down the country. They have to carry on the nation. We should spend all the money we possibly can on them. I am afraid we are taking them away from the school at a wrong time. Fourteen years of age is a wrong time to allow them to leave school, because they are at a loose end between the ages of 14 and 16. They are too young for employment and they are not much use at home. I think the school-leaving age should be extended for two years. I do not know whether the Department has that in mind, but I believe myself it should be done. I see young people from 14 to 16 years of age going around the country no use to anyone. They cannot be well controlled and they would be far better off at school. Even if they were only being disciplined it would be worth while. To offset any disadvantage in extending the school-leaving age by two years the children could get a longer school holiday in the summer, say two or three weeks extra. I imagine this would be of considerable advantage to parents down the country who need their children to help with the crops, thinning turnips, making hay, and so forth. I would ask the Minister to carry out the promise of a few months ago that he would favourably consider giving a longer summer holiday and, in conjunction with this, to increase the school-leaving age to 16. In so doing he would be performing good work for the nation.

We are living in very changed times. We need not think, however, that to-day's generation is any worse than the generation of 30 years ago. I do not think they are. We are living in a mechanised age and we are fast going into an atomic age. It is a race with life. Nevertheless the character of the people is just as good as it was 30 years ago. I know there were harder times years ago than exist to-day. Children had more discipline. The parents had a harder life and they were harder on their children than the parents of to-day. The present generation has an easier way of life. They have come into a free country. They had not to face the hazards which the people of 30 or 40 years ago had to face in securing the freedom which we enjoy to-day. I believe that there should be more taught in the schools to demonstrate what past generations have suffered and the sacrifices they had to make to bring about the conditions which are our heritage. The children of to-day should be made proud of those achievements. Many of those people were stripped of their possessions and endured many hardships to give the oncoming generations a chance to live in peace and comfort.

The teachers to-day have many problems. After the vocation of our clergymen the teaching profession is the most noble profession in this country. It should be the most honoured and the most respected profession, as I believe it is. Up to this it was not. Previously most people looked down on the teacher as a person with a big salary who had done well for himself. We realise that they are the hardest working men and women in the country. As I said, they have the very serious responsibility of forming the character of the young, rough material entering the schools. I am satisfied that our teachers are making every effort to turn out good recruits and get good results.

Many of our teachers are not allowed to slap the children. If they slap children the parents come in threatening them. The result is that they find difficulty in controlling the children. If the children got more correction at home the teachers would have an easier task. It is no wonder that at times teachers lose their patience with such children. I am only saying that about the minority of the children. The majority of them are good and are sent to school regularly. But you cannot expect teachers to get results when a child comes to school for two days in one week and one day more for the remainder of the month. The Guards are supposed to get the children to go to school, but they never do it. That is certainly never carried out.

A good attendance at school is essential. Children should not be kept at home except they are unwell or are needed for some very important task. The place for the young child is in the school. After all, he is only there from 10 o'clock until 3 o'clock, and he is more of a nuisance at home than anything else. There are parents who will make no effort to send their children regularly to school, and yet they expect big results. When, after many years at school, these children do not learn anything, the parents try to blame the teachers. Why should they not blame themselves? If a child is kept to school regularly, he will be able to read and write unless he is a real dud.

There are many children who do not attend the school for more than one or two months in the year. When the teacher reports that they are not attending a Civic Guard takes a note of it. The Guards visit the school periodically, but there is nothing done about it. The teachers are not getting results. They cannot get results if the parents will not do their duty. Regular attendance at school should be enforced. Something should be done about children whose parents will not send them to school. There should be special classes in the schools for this type of children. There is no use in putting them into any standard if they do not attend regularly. It is not fair to other children or to the parents of the other children if a good class in a school is held back owing to this irregular attendance. When an inspector comes to examine the school he finds five or six of these duds in every class. I expect he blames the teacher and perhaps makes a bad report on the school. That is very unfair. There should be a dunces' class for these children who do not go to school regularly. There are, of course, some children who are lacking in brains but the teachers cannot do anything about that. We must only do the best we can for these children. They should not, however, be allowed to hold back the classes of those who are attending regularly so as to provide for their future lives.

As to the revival of the Irish language, I am satisfied that immense progress is being made although we may not always see it. It took 100 years to kill the Irish language and it will take 100 more years to bring it back. Since I was in the national movement 30 years ago a new generation has grown up who have a knowledge of the Irish language. I have not got a knowledge of it myself as I was engaged in other activities. My own children, some of whom are over 20 years of age, when the news in Irish is given on the radio and I am waiting for the news in English, are able to tell me every word of it. Although they have not much contact with Irish speakers since they left school they are retaining the Irish language.

What we want now is more moral courage in our people. With the Gaelic League, the national teachers and the young clergymen who are fostering the Irish language we should be able to lay a good foundation so that we will hear the language spoken in the fairs and markets, at the church gates, and in this House by the people who know it. I am satisfied that the Irish language is making progress. It may be dwindling in the Irish-speaking areas in the West but it is not dwindling throughout the country. All we want is courage and confidence and the putting down of those who say: "What good is the Irish language? They are only turning our dunces." The people of this generation are living in freedom, peace and comfort, and they should take up the task of reviving the language. This nation has its independence but it has not its own language. If we had our own language we need not worry about foreign periodicals or anything else. The nation would be stamped with its own individuality and could defy the world. Until we reach that position we will always be fighting to retain our own identity. We will never do that unless we are a separate nation and have a separate language. I am saying that as one who cannot speak the language but who would love to see it spoken generally by the children of the present day and those who will come after them.

One of the best ways of furthering the language is by the Gaelic League. That is the pivot around which we should build throughout the country. The Gaelic League in the past did not do its work well. If it did, it would certainly have made more progress. It got around it a whole set of narrow cranks. I knew them myself. Behind that set of cranks there were hundreds of job-hunters.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is not responsible for the Gaelic League.

Captain Giles

These people did a lot of harm. They drove out the enthusiastic people who would not show themselves in the forefront. At the annual gatherings of the Gaelic League people were saying that somebody was on the platform last year but he was not on the platform this year, that he had got a good job. We want to get away from that. We want a position in which the people will take part in the movement for the sake of the country and the love of the language.

There are some of the old Irish teachers who are now employed in the vocational schools. They laid the foundation for the Irish language and Irish culture and folklore but they never got any proper recognition for it. They are in the same position to-day as they were 30 years ago. Because they have not the higher educational qualifications, they are only employed in a temporary capacity. They did trojan work in the days of the I.R.A. They worked day and night for the promotion of the Irish language, Irish culture and Irish folklore. These people should be put on a permanent basis. They should get the recognition to which they are entitled. When they retire they should get pensions based on their years of service. People, however, are only waiting to shove them out because they have not the academic qualifications of the younger men. They did their work in hard times. Although they are doing their work very well at present they are not getting the recognition to which they are entitled. Some of these old teachers are in my own county. They are men of the finest type who would not speak English to anybody. They kept the Irish language going even in the worst of times and in the remotest areas to which they were always sent.

In my own county far more could be done for the Irish language. We have a big number of migrants in that county from the West of Ireland who are nearly all Irish speakers. There should be some way of linking them up with the language movement. There should be classes or schools started. There was a time when the Meath people and the migrants did not like each other very much but that day has gone. Although most of these people are Irish speakers no facilities are provided for them to spread the language amongst the people generally. When the first colony of migrants was established 20 years ago a big school was built for them and they were facilitated in every possible way. They are kept away from the mass of the people. They are there as a little unit in themselves. Unfortunately, most of them did not settle down in our county. The young people have left home and have gone to different parts of the world. Only the old parents remain at home. The aim of the Government was to spread the Irish language. What effort was ever made to spread the language from those centres? Tens of thousands of pounds were spent on those colonies. They should have been a focal point from which to spread the language in this part of the country. Instead, they were left there and neglected. The language is not radiated to all the people in that part of the country. There are scattered colonies of Irish speakers all over the county. They love and speak the language. In some areas there are ten, 15 or 20 Irish-speaking families but people who do not live in or close to these colonies have not an opportunity of getting a knowledge of the language. Something should be done to remedy that matter.

Irish classes are taught in the vocational schools throughout my county. I consider that that is a waste of money and a complete farce and a failure. The average attendance at these classes is three, four or five people. Sometimes the teacher has to wait hours before they come. That situation is not bringing us anywhere. The position will have to be reviewed.

Ten or 15 years ago I was very strong against vocational schools. They were regarded as white elephants at the time, and for ten years or more people could not be got to attend the classes. The average attendance at a class was six or seven persons. That was a waste of time and money. Since then, however, the people have come to realise the importance of vocational education. We now have full schools and we are proud of the pupils they turn out. Year after year there is a big queue of candidates for each class and, as one year succeeds another, we have better attendances.

I want a review of vocational education as far as my county is concerned and, I suppose, as far as the country in general is concerned. Is it right to build big schools in certain areas and, at the same time, neglect the vast amount of people in other areas? We have three in the principal towns in my county and there are three in other areas. However, there are people with young families who live long distances from these schools and who have no hope of sending their children to attend them. We must face the expenditure of large sums of money to attach to our national schools an extra classroom so that people in different areas will be able to get the same type of education at the same time. It is most unfair that taxpayers in certain areas should have to pay for the education of children who are lucky enough to be near a school while their own children, because they live a long distance from the schools, cannot avail of the same facilities. Millions of pounds should be spent on that work, because the character of a nation depends on the education of our children.

Our vocational schools are most important and they will continue to be so. I realise that it will be a big expense to attach an extra classroom to every national school and also to pay the teacher, but we shall save in other ways and it is important that our children should get the proper vocational education which they require. A fine type of pupil is being turned out by those vocational schools. Unfortunately almost all of them are training for a job and do not intend to live in rural areas. All our boys want is to be an instructor or a technical officer in some other area. They will go to Dublin or to Cork but not one of them thinks of going back home and imparting some of the knowledge which he acquired to the people in a rural area. Unless we can focus the minds of those living in the country on earning a living in the country instead of in the big towns we shall not get very far as a nation. We want the minds of our people to veer towards the land. The drift is away from the land.

The Department of Education is doing good sound work. There is peace and progress at present. While our teachers are reasonably contented they are not contented in the full sense of the word. They are going to fight for their rights and they believe that they have rights. They deserve everything that the nation can give them. They deserve the respect of the Department and the people, because from them will spring the learning of future generations. They are doing a good job. It is not the fault of the teachers or of the Department if there are duds to be found in this country. The fault lies with the parents who allow their children to run unchecked around the countryside when they should be at school, where, if they are not able to learn, they would at least get character —and character is the foundation of any nation. I hope more heed will be given to the matter of children who are running wild around the country areas when they should be at school. I do not know if the Gardaí are supposed to took after this matter, and if they are not they should be. If a Garda sees that a child is not attending school and is instead running wild around the country, and asks the parents why the child is not attending school, the parents tell him that Johnny was beaten to-day and that his legs are full of blisters. That is a lie.

A teacher cannot teach a child who will not go regularly to school. Children who go regularly to school, except in the case of illness, get a good foundation and can read, write and do their sums. But the child who goes to school only three or four days a month will get nowhere. He is holding back the class and getting bad results for the teacher. The inspector will say that the pupils are not as good as they should be. If there is a law in connection with the absence of children from school while the children are in good health, and if that law is not enforced, surely somebody is not doing his duty. The matter should be looked into.

Mr. Butler

I think the primary school programme is very good and reasonable. We hear people clamouring for the teaching of additional subjects such as drawing, manual work, and so forth. I think the primary schools are meant to lay the foundations for knowledge—to equip the pupil, as it were, with the tools of knowledge. I think it is right, in the main, to confine the primary school programme to reading, writing and mathematics. The programme in the secondary school is quite varied. I think there is too much of a tendency in the secondary schools to pick out those subjects which tend towards the procuring of a clerical situation such as a position in the Civil Service or in some local authority, and so forth. I should say that 90 per cent. of the programme taught to the children in our secondary schools in the City of Dublin points in that direction. I think it is a pity that more pupils are not taught chemistry, physics and possibly rural science even in the town schools. Very often pupils who have done the full secondary course and obtained the leaving certificate are seriously handicapped when they come to enter the professions by lack of knowledge of such subjects.

The medical profession, for instance, has now become so overcrowded that in their preparatory courses the universities allow only two chances to students. I think that is the case in the College of Surgeons and in University College, Dublin. Because parents generally do not know the importance to their children of chemistry and physics, very often quite inferior students—I mean educationally infer-ior—get through just because they chanced to follow the right road, as it were, in their secondary course. I should like the Department of Education if possible to use some influence to persuade secondary schools not to canalise their courses so much as they are at present.

I now come to the question of the ban on married lady teachers. A number of them are in the service still but I think one of the greatest mistakes made was putting that bar against the continuance of ladies in the profession after marriage. Strictly speaking, one cannot call it a marriage ban but it is a ban against remaining in the profession. That ban has already done a great deal of harm because parents are not nearly so ready now to encourage their girls to enter the teaching profession. When girls finish their secondary course at the age of 17 or 18, they can take a short grind and go into a clerical job—a shorthand-typist, clerk or some post of that description—without any further expense or any further waste of time. For that reason, parents are more reluctant now to allow their girls to enter the teaching profession than they previously were. That is one side of the question. I think we are not getting as good material as we did in the old days because we have not such a wide choice in the selection of candidates. One thing at least which I think the Minister and the Department should do straight away is to cancel the application of the ban to those who had actually entered the preparatory colleges at the time the rule was brought out. The application of the ban to these ladies amounts to a breach of faith, as it were. When they were going into these colleges they went there on a certain understanding, believing that they were entering a profession which they could follow till the end of their working days. Then this ban was introduced with the result that the very best of teachers have been removed from the service. I think that is a great loss.

Another aspect of the question is that married lady teachers on the whole are, I think, better teachers than single lady teachers. You have excellent teachers among single lady teachers, but my own experience and the experience of those with whom I have conversed on the matter is that the married lady teacher was a wonderful asset in the schools. They understood children and they had sympathy for them. The married teacher herself was contented, as it were. I think the service given by them was simply excellent. Some people might argue: "Why not allow girls to remain on in the Civil Service and elsewhere after they get married?" There is, however, a big difference. These girls are not dealing with children, and I think the married lady teacher who has to deal with children, and children only, in her work is a most valuable asset. The matter does not affect me or any relative of mine in any way, but looking at it quite objectively, I think it was a great mistake that the ban on remaining in the service was ever introduced.

On the question of pensions, I have great sympathy indeed for those teachers who went out on pension some few years ago and previously. The older teachers who went out on very meagre salaries have pensions that could not be dignified by the name of pensions; they are simply doles. I think if it is right to adjust salaries and wages to the cost of living and living conditions, there is an equally good case for the adjustment of pensions to prevailing conditions. I am very glad to say that I find general assent on every side of the House to that proposition. In regard to the gratuity, I think in all justice teachers who retired just before January, 1950, should get the gratuity. It may be a costly thing, but it is just to them. We ought to be able to do as well as they have been able to do in the Six County area. Deputy Palmer, speaking for the other side, stressed the question of salary and emoluments, and some criticism was passed on him for doing so. I think that was unjust, as when he was making the plea for additional emoluments he was really making a plea for the betterment of education. There are more opportunities now for getting clerical and other positions than there were formerly. There is a large extension in the Civil Service and under county authorities.

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.