Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Jun 1958

Vol. 168 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vóta 37—Oifig an Aire Oideachais (d'atógaint).

D'atógadh an díospóireacht ar an dtairiscint seo mar a leanas:—

"Go gcuirfí an Meastachán ar ais chun athbhreithniú a dhéanamh air."—(Risteárd Ua Maolchatha; Dr. Browne.)

Pádraig Ó Fachtna

D'éist mé anseo ar feadh ceithre uaire a chloig nó mar sin leis an Teachta Dochtúir de Brún ag caint faoin gcóras oideachais atá againn sa tír seo. Bé an méid a fuair mé as, go raibh barúil aige go bhfuil an córas oideachais is measa sa domhan againn, go bhfuil dúil ag na múinteoirí sa phionós corportha. Labhair sé fá dtaobh de phionós corportha agus dúirt sé gurb é an fáith go raibh an oiread sin "Teddy Boys" ann ná chionns go raibh na múinteoirí ag bualadh na bpáistí.

Mhol sé an córas oideachais atá i Sasana agus i Meiriceá; ach tá a fhios ag gach duine sa tír seo nach bhfuil comparáidáidir an méid "Teddy Boys" atá sa tír seo agus atá i Sasana nó i Meiriceá. Fiú amháin, ar na mallaibh, tá scéalta ins na páipéirí go raibh ar na póilíní i Meiriceá dul isteach ins na ranganna agus gunnaí acu, le smacht a choinneáil ar na páistí ann, le seans a thabhairt dos na múinteoirí teagasc a dhéanamh. Níl a fhios agam cad é mar a thig leis a rá go bhfuil an córas oideachais ins na tíortha sin níos fearr ná an córas oideachais againne.

Rud amháin a nrahothaigh mé, go ndeama sé iarracht athrú a dhéanamh ar an sean-chaighdeán críostúil a bhí againne sa tír seo—sin go mba cheart dúinne ómós a thabhairt do na seandaoine agus smacht a choinneáil ar pháistí. Mhol seisean go mba cheart bheith umhal do na páistí agus na seandaoine a chaitheail amach as an mbealach ar fad.

Sílim gurb é oráid an Aire Oideachais an óráid is tábhachtaí a tugadh le blianta, chionns go ndearna sé athruithe a bhí á lorg ag Cumann na Múinteoirí le tamall maith. Bé an chéad cheann acu san ná an cose ar mhnápósta teagase a dhéanamh, a chur ar ceal. Tá a fhios againn go bhfuil argóintí in éadan deire a chur leis an gcose seo. Is é an aidhm atá ag an Aire agus ag an Roinn Oideachais, oideachas cóir a thabhairt do pháistí, is cuma iad a bheith ina gcónaí sa chathair nó in áit iargúlta sa tír. Tá a fhios againn go bhfuil cuid mhaith páistí ins na háiteanna iargúlta nach raibh ag fáil oideachais chóir, go raibh ar na bainisteoirí daoine a chur isteach ins na postanna sin, daoine nach raibh cáilíocht ar bith acu.

Sa tarna áit, tá socrú déanta ag an Aire go dtoghfaí na hábhair múinteoirí as na scoláirí a fhaghann na háiteacha is airde ins an. Ard-Teistiméireacht. Gabhann sé le ciall nach dtiocfadh leat na daoine is fearr fháil, dá dtoghfaí na hábhair múinteoirí uilig as ceantar comh beag leis an nGaeltacht.

Tá rud eile ann fosta. Tá an tAire le triall a bheith aige chun a fháil amach an bhfuil na hiarrthóirí le haghaidh na gcoláistí ullmhúcháin fóirstineach. Labhair an Teachta Mac Cuinneagáin an lá fé dheire fá dtaobh de na daoine sna coláistí ullmhúcháin. Séard a mholfainn féin sa gcás sin an triail a chur ar na scoláirí sna coláistí ullmhúcháin tar éis na meán-teistiméireachta. Thabharfadh sin seans do na scoláirí gur theip orthu sa triail an Ard-Teistiméireacht a dhéanamh ach a n-aghaidh a bheith dírithe acu ar shlí bheatha éigin eile in áit na múinteoireachta. Má fhaghann daoine sna coláistí ullmhácháin post sa Stát-Sheirbhís bíonn orthu an t-airgead a caitheadh orthu a aisíoc ach sa chás seo ní ar an scoláire féin atá an locht agus mar sin ní ceart aon airgead a bhaint de.

Ba mhaith liom an tAire a mholadh cionn is go bhfuil ar intinn aige scrúdú béil a bheith san Ard-Teistiméireacht. Is mór an chéirn ar aghaidh é sin. Bhí cosúlacht ar an scéal nár theanga bheo í an Ghaeilge taobh amuigh de na scoileanna náisiúnta. Dá leanadh an dearcadh sin do bheadh an teanga caillte mar theanga bheo. Ní bheadh suim inti ach amháin imeasc na scoláirí nach bhfuil dúil acu ach i dteangacha marbha.

Ba mhaith liom a iarraidh ar an Aire cúpla rud a dhéanamh fá dtaobh den Ard-Teistiméireacht. Ba mhaith liom dá ndéanfadh séisliú ar an gcaighdeán sa scrúdú scríofa sna páipéirí Gaeilge agus, chomh maith leis sin, nach mbeadh an scrúdú béil nua seo deacair. Ag caint fé scrúduithe béil le haghaidh poist ar bith, ba chóir go ndéanfaí an scrúdú simplí i dtreo is nach dteipfeadh ach ar bheagán. Níl aon dabht ná go bhfuil a lán daoine ag gearán go gcailleann siad postanna cionn is nach bhfuil Gaeilge acu. Ba mhaith liom, dá bhrí sin, go mbeadh an scrúdú simplí i dtero is gur beag duine a theipfeadh air san scrúdú. Tá na páipéir scrúdúcháin ró-dheacair, ró-liteartha. Táimid ag lorg an chaighdeáin chéaima i gcás na Gaeilge agus atá ann i gcás an Bhéarla. Ní dóigh liom go bhfuil sin ciallmhar.

Tá a fhios agam gur chuir an tAire Coimisiún ar bun i dtaobh na Gaeilge. Ar dtús, shíl mé gur cuireadh ar bun é i gcás teagaisc na teangan sna scoilearma. Tá áthas orm nach mar sin atá mar ní sa teagasc atá an trioblóid. Ní mian liom mórán a rá i dtaobh na ceiste seo cionn is go mbeidh an Coimisiún á hiniúchadh. Ba mhaith liom dá rachadh an tAire isteach i gceist an bhun-theastais chun go bhfaghadh sé amach an bh'uil sé ag déanamh díobhála do labhairt na Gaeilge. Tá cúrsaí san gciondargairtín agus ceol ag dul ar aghaidh go maith. Ba chóir don Roinn rud éigin a dhéanamh ar son na Gaeilge ar an dóigh céanna. Ba cheart múinteoirí oilte agus cigirí oilte a chur i bhfeighil na gcúrsai seo. Tá a sciar féin á dhéanamh ag Cumann na Múinteoirí sa mhéid seo.

Ba mhaith liom dá rachadh an tAire isteach i gceist mhúineadh na staire. Tá barraíocht le foghlaim ag na páistí i rith na bliana. Níl an rud ceart á fháil acu. Ní fíricí atá uathu. Séard atá uainn ná spiorad náisiúnta a chur isteach sna páistí agus saoránaigh mhaithe a dhéanamh díobh. Níl ach uair sa tseachtain ann le haghaidh múineadh na staire agus, dá bhrí sin, níl na páistí ag foghlaim ach aimaneacha daoine. An aon ionadh é go gcastar daoine orainn adeir nach raibh aon eolas acu fá dtaobh de Phádraig Mac Piarais? Tá cúis ann go bhfuil an scéal amhlaidh. Níl am ag na múinteoirí an cúrsa a chríochnú. Tá barraíocht míon-eolais de dhíth. Ba chóir an cheist uilig a iniúchadh.

Do labhair Teachta éigin fá dtaobh de na meán-scoileanna inniu. Tá barraíocht de na páistí ag freastal ar na meán-scoileanna. Ba cheart dúinn níos mó béim a chur ar oideachas gairmscoile. Tá fíor-bheagán postanna sa tír seo le haghaidh daoine a thagann amach as na meán-scoileanna. Ní thig ach leis na páistí is cliste postanna a fháil. Níl aon tréineáil ann dóibh ach i gcóir postanna sa Stát-Sheirbhís. Mura bhfaghann siad iad sin níl a dhath acu.

Sílim go bhfuil an tAire ag iarraidh deire a chur leis na leabhair Chigire. Is rud maith é sin. Sna scoileanna fé láthair tá rudaí scríofa fá dtaobh de mhúinteoirí atá marbh le 100 bliain anuas. Bliantaó shoin scríobhadh rudaí suaracha fá dtaobh de mhúinteoirí go bhfuil gaolta leo beo inniu féin. Dá dtéadh éinne isteach sna scoileanna agus na rudaí seo a fheiscint d'fhéadfaidís bheith ag caint fá dtaobh de dhuine atá marbh leis na blianta. Tá mé cinnte nach bhfuil sin ceart.

Rud amháin eile. D'iarr an Teachta Mac Cuinneagáin ar an Aire gach arbh fhéidir leis a dhéanamh ar son na múinteoirí atá imithe amach ar pinsean agus ar son na múinteoirí úd nach bhfuair an deontas. Ba mhaith liomsa dá gcabhródh an tAire leo fosta. Ba mhaith liom a iarraidh ar an Aire fosta deontas a thabhairt don pháqipéar Amárach. Páipéar tábhachtach é a léitear go forleathan ar fud na Gaeltachta agus ba chóir cuidiú fiúntach a thabhairt dó.

I regret I feel obliged to continue speaking in this debate in English, particularly when my remarks are on the Irish language and the language revival. We have in the main three groups of critics. There are those who would like to see the language destroyed. There are those who for materialistic reasons are opposed to the revival. Finally, there are those who, while they are not opposed to the revival of the language, are opposed to the present methods and who are convinced that the methods are educationally unsound, that they harm the child's mental make-up, cause inhibitions, and so on.

Having enumerated what appear to me to be the three main groups of critics, I find myself in a quandary. Those who are anxious to restore the language decry only one of those groups, namely, the group which would have the language destroyed. It is extremely difficult to differentiate between the groups because this particular group rarely, if ever, argues along the lines that the language should die but rather uses one or other of the other groups' arguments, that is to say, that the language has no material value or is damaging to the child.

As I said, it is difficult to decide who genuinely believes these arguments and who is using them to destroy the language. There have been some vicious attacks on the language and on our educational system generally over the past few months, none the less vicious because of their subtlety, from O.B.E.s, retired British naval officers and so on. We can say without fear of contradiction that these people are actuated simply and solely by their antagonism to the language and to all national movements. They have been reared and steeped in the tradition that the British Empire is the be all and the end all of existence and that the mere Irish are Lilliputians living in a tin-pot Republic. We have no intention of being led or said by these people. I feel that what was worth fighting and dying for is worth fighting to keep.

There are those who say that the Irish language has no material value or, as is heard very often from one particular group in this House, that it is of no value to our emigrants. The Irish language has an educational value but, of course, the interjections that are made about emigrants are designed to give the impression that if the emigrants did not have to learn Irish they would reach a standard of education which would enable them to secure better jobs in exile. To anybody who has made a study of education. that, of course, is nonsense. While the vast majority of our children leave school at 14 years of age, it is a fallacy to suggest that their standard of education would be so much higher, simply by dropping Irish from the curriculum, that they would reach a standard of education which would enable them to get better jobs.

I do not accept the defeatist attitude of those who by that type of supplementary question and interjection admit that they see no future for an Irishman in his own country. It would be a very poor spirit, indeed, who would plan the future of the country on such a supposition.

With regard to those who are opposed to the revival of the Irish language by present methods, I am glad that it has been decided to inquire, among other things, into these methods, not necessarily that I believe that the methods are educationally unsound, although I admit that I have many criticisms of the system, but rather because the misgiving of many people will be allayed and a weapon, which has been wielded indiscriminately over the past year and prior to that, would be removed from the hands of those who are deliberately intent on destroying the language. Where flaws are found by this commission, those flaws can be rectified and I admit that there are flaws in the system and am not in entire agreement with the present methods. That does not mean that I decry them entirely.

Has the effort to revive the Irish language failed? In my opinion, it has not. I believe that the language is like water in a main, ready to flow out when the tap is turned on. What we have to discover is how the tap can be turned on. As far as I can remember, Deputy Mulcahy had the same idea. Thousands upon thousands of our young people to-day know the language. They do not speak it in any reasonable proportion to the number who know it. The reason is something that we must try to discover. The commission may help to do that.

Personally, I believe there was too much optimism in 1922, that the matter was over-simplified and that when the rapid progress which was then visualised was not achieved many people were inclined to go to the other extreme and to say that the revival was impossible. We have plumbed the depths and the years to come will show a revival of the spirit of our people. Unfortunately, the attitude of defeatism towards the language is symptomatic of our attitude as a people towards practically every other important problem, social, cultural or economic. That attitude is responsible in no small measure for our present unemployment and emigration problems.

I read recently a statement by a learned professor in Dublin in a debate, in which he said that it was fallacious to think that we could not be a nation if we had not got a language of our own. I wonder on what basis the professor made that statement. I do not know. What I do know is that conquerors have always believed the opposite to be true. After the Norman invasion of this country, for example, the Normal Government in England endeavoured to build a wall around its own people in Ireland by forbidding them to speak the Irish language and to adopt Irish customs and so on, realising that if their people here adopted the Irish language and customs, it would eventually lead to their assimilation in the Irish nation. In fact, that is what did happen for a very considerable number of centuries. Later, they endeavoured, and succeeded to a large extent, to substitute their language for our own.

Does anybody suggest that the reason the English Government did that was for our good? Obviously, they realised that, if they could destroy our language and customs, eventually we would be assimilated as part of the English race. There were many examples of that in world history. If we go back very far in history, we find that many nations disappeared from the face of the earth simply because other nations succeeded in conquering and eventually assimilating them.

Occasionally, when I listen to certain Deputies who claim to espouse the cause of Republicanism and in fact to be the only Republicans in this House, I am led to ponder as to whether a person can be a genuine follower of a particular teaching or ideal while at the same time reserving to himself the right to divest himself of part of that teaching or ideal as it suits him.

We can sum up the teaching of our greatest hero, Pádraíg Pearse, a teaching for which he laid down his life in his words: "An Ireland not free merely but Gaelic as well, not Gaelic merely but free as well." Can a person consider himself a true follower of Pearse if he says he wants Ireland free while at the same time he is averse to its language or its customs? Or must he believe that the language is a fundamental prerequisite of freedom as Davis did, when he said that a country without a language was only half a nation——

Mr. T. Lynch

Did Davis know Irish?

Mr. Faulkner

If he did not, he knew its value. Presumably he did. I know it can be said that Tone and Mitchel and several others of our greatest leaders did not speak the language but it is an altogether different matter to suggest that if they had been successful in freeing our country they would have decided to destroy the language. Let us not judge what these great men might have done if they had succeeded, but let us remember that it was those men who put the saving of the soul of the nation on a par with its physical freedom who did, in fact, win for us our freedom. Those were men like Pearse, Clarke and MacDonagh and the rest who believed it was as essential that the soul of our nation should be saved as that we should be physically free.

The Irish language is not dead and those who want to see it revived will do their utmost to revive it. The revival of the Irish language does not mean the exclusion of other languages. We appreciate that English is a very useful language and we would be very foolish people if we decided to do away with that language. That is not the case. We are anxious to make this country bilingual and when I say that, I know the policy is one which is supported not just by one Party but by every Party. We have a number of people in the different Parties very anxious that the language should be revived. There is a considerable number in Fire Gael, notably Deputy General Mulcahy, Deputy Manley and many others; Deputy Corish, and I am sure others in the Labour Party. There are very many in my own Party. It is not a Party matter at all and it would be very wrong for any Party to suggest that saving the language was a policy peculiar to them. It is not, and it is in that fact I feel the greatest hope lies.

Finally-I think Deputy Dr. Browne made some reference to this—we all agree in this House that the material well-being of our people is of the utmost importance. We know it transcends most other things but what we do not agree with is the suggestion that efforts to improve the living conditions of our people are in any way impended by our efforts to revive Irish. In fact, I feel the very opposite is true because the revival of the spirit necessary to revive the language would help in no small way to overcome the great problems with which we are faced of unemployment and emigration.

Mr. T. Lynch

It was customary for Deputies like myself when addressing the House on the Estimate for Education to go through a kind of rite. It was like entering the temple. You had to abase yourself, make your declarations of good faith; you had to say that you were not attacking the. Department of Education or its officials and that you were not attacking the Minister or the Irish language. Where that would bring you I do not know but when I came into this House first, I found perhaps one or two people getting up to say a few words in Irish on the Vote for Education and they were mainly members of the teaching profession.

The burning topic in education to-day is the language and its revival. I think the revival movement has not met with the success that it should have achieved in the past 25 years because if anybody dared mention that the revival was not going as well as it should, he would be trampled to death, howled down as a traitor, a West Briton or I do not know what else. We were told to-day that we strove for physical freedom. Was it a good thing, in the movement to revive the Irish language, that it should be put as a shackle on the majority of our people who were unable to speak it, and on their children? The young Deputy who has just spoken, and who is so full of crusading ardour, said he did not believe that there was no future for an Irishman here. I am with him, but there are many people who fear there is no future for the Irishman who speaks only English and for his children, and who fear there is a Brahmiclass being created here by the language movement.

Deputy Dillon mentioned this afternoon that when he wanted to employ a higher veterinary officer when he was Minister for Agriculture he wanted a man who would have reached great scientific attainments and have had great experience. The Appointments Commissioners sent him a man with great experience in foreign universities—as we must describe English universities at present—and in foreign research. Then Deputy Dillon was told that, of course, there would have to be another appointment and he was sent a young man just qualified, who was well ahead of the real scientist because he had a knowledge of the Irish language. These are the things that have bedevilled the language movement. The Irish language was used as a fence or stumbling-block in that case to keep the most efficient and most suitable man for the position and for the training of future agricultural scientists out of that position.

I have experience of that myself. Some years ago, in my constituency, the post of art master was advertised and on qualifications we selected an art master. We were told some time later that we must get rid of him because he did not have a competent knowledge of Irish. I said then—and rightly—that if Michelangelo or Raphael could have been resurrected and applied for that job, we would be compelled to turn him down, but if some payment artist came along with a competent knowledge of Irish he would get the job.

We should be realistic about this. If we want Irish teachers and apostles of the Irish language, let us look for them, but if we want people in other walks of life and in other professions we should give these positions on merit. That is one aspect in which the Irish language movement has not been helpful. It has debarred merit many a time. If the present system is continued, merit will be debarred again.

I do not give two rows of pins for anybody in this country who tells me I am a traitor to my country. I am tired of people talking like that at me. I can only reply that I am in very good company with a lot of very fine patriots who have been branded as traitors by persons who were not fit to lick their boots. It is not right to come in here, talk about Republicanism and to bring the memory of poor Pádraig Pearse into all this. Another thing that has done the Irish language revival movement an immense amount of harm is the bringing of Pádraig Pearse's name and memory, and the bones, relics and records of fine people to the hustings, debasing their memory for political gun-powder purposes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister would have no responsibility for that matter.

Mr. T. Lynch

I know that. However, if the system were changed there is no doubt that a lot of this could have been stopped. It is slowing down a bit, I will have to admit. I would point out that great liberty was allowed to other speakers. They were able to talk about the Republic at large and a lot of things for which I did not consider the Minister had responsibility. At the same time, when they were allowed the licence, I thought I might be, likewise.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The manner in which elections are conducted does not arise on the Estimate for the Department of Education.

Mr. T. Lynch

Deputy Dillon gave the Minister a system to-day which he said would revive the Irish language. His idea was to build up a great hard core of Irish scholarships, Irish speakers and Irish writers. I think that that would be a good idea. Deputy Dillon says that if children in the primary schools are competent enough in Irish, they should be given a free secondary school education and that if they are competent enough to pass in honours Irish they should be given a free university education. I am not against that. However, I am against using the Irish language to rule out other boys and girls from the National University. I am against putting up the Irish language as a bar to other boys and girls in entering any kind of a Government position.

People use the expression "compulsory Irish". I shall defend that in this way that you have compulsory English and compulsory arithmetic. We were all compelled to learn everything in school. The teachers did not appeal in any psychological way either to myself or to my contemporaries when I was going to school. We were compelled to learn what was put up to us. I would prefer to say that Irish should not be essential if a man wants to earn his livelihood in Ireland. Just because of an accident of birth and geography, if a young man comes from an Irish-speaking family or an Irish-speaking place and goes into a school and is not half as good as another boy or girl-just because he is able to speak Irish—he is uprated in his marks and his examination is downrated for him. These are the things that have done the language harm.

This country always thrived on volunteer movements and not on conscripted armies. A young man over there spoke about reviving the spirit and about plumbing the depths. As far as the language is concerned, we are going down and I only hope we do not go down any further. I hope the Minister will try to gather this even at this late hour. The whole policy should be overhauled and approached in a graver manner.

In the years preceding the 1914-18 war, 100 per cent. of the children attending schools in Ireland were taking Irish. Nearly 60 per cent. of them were coming out of school at 3.30 p.m. or four o'clock in the afternoon and, after their tea, when they had finished their home exercises, they would go down to the Gaelic League to try to learn more Irish. We have lost all that spirit which was there in those days. The Minister can check on what I am saying. Notwithstanding the fact that, at the time I speak of, the children were taking Irish, 70 per cent. or 80 per cent. of them were taking French, German and Spanish as well. About 14 in 400 are taking foreign languages now.

If we are to be moved by any spirit of Republicanism and nationality, we should also be moved by the last words of Robert Emmet's speech from the dock in which he said he hoped his country would take her place some day amongst the nations of the earth. Now it is said that this country should take her place speaking the Irish language. This country, away back in the far-off days, took its place amongst the nations of the earth because the people going out from it spoke the languages of the countries to which they went.

There is something rotten in this whole business—99,000 publications in Irish by An Gúm had to be destroyed last year. They could not be given away.

Mr. J. Lynch

They were destroyed a few years ago.

Mr. T. Lynch

They were offered to schools and to various people who would be very vocal about the revival of the language but who would not be very quick to put their hands into their pockets to pay the scrap prices at which the Department offered these publications. If all those people who attack me, and people like me, are so true to the language, and if they are such great disciples, why did they not buy these books?

Deputy Dr. Browne referred to corporal punishment. We have a lot of trouble in this country and we read and hear about trouble in other countries with juvenile delinquency. I think the whole thing starts in the schools. The Minister and his Department, and some of the Minister's predecessors, were being encouraged and lobbied to prevent corporal punishment in schools. I do not agree with that at all. The type of people doing this and the idea behind it are ruining the whole world. They are afraid to punish people. They are afraid even to punish murderers in England to-day. The children now are being turned into tyrants and they tyrannise over their parents. The parents go to the schools and prevent the teachers from punishing the-children so that the teachers can do nothing with the children. That is leading to juvenile delinquency all over the world to-day.

I should like to relate to this House something that happened to me on one occasion in the Library of Leinster House, something connected with the late Senator Seán Moylan. He was then Deputy Seán Moylan. I happened to go into the Library where he was talking to some gentleman. They were talking grand Irish but he introduced me in English and the talk got round to corporal punishment. He referred them to me in his own puckish way. Before I could say very much, one of the gentlemen said that they wanted the teachers to use the psychological approach to the children.

Deputy Moylan said that he agreed with that to a certain extent and added that the teachers he had did not use either a stick or a cane and they seemed to get on all right. The gentlemen were delighted with that but before they could say anything else Deputy Moylan added that the teacher had an ashplant with a knob on it and if the boy did not do his work he got a blow of that ashplant. It was not necessary to use the ashplant; it was enough to know that it was there. It was a great thing for the discipline of the school. We all know the difficulties that teachers have in facing a school of 40 or 50 children particularly if they are deprived of the right of using corporal punishment. If that is the case they will lose all control, there will be no discipline in the school and that will tell against the children for all time.

I have seen many of these children whom the teachers were not allowed to punish. I have seen them when they left school, got good jobs and went into factories. Then it was only a matter of time until the mammas came to the local Deputy to say: "I am in terrible trouble, Johnny has been let go." Before the Deputy could say anything he was told that the foreman, the manager or the managing director was the most impossible creature that ever lived. The Deputy on making inquiries would discover that the boy was an impudent and inpertinent young pup who could not be told to do anything and who had to be let go. The real cause of that was that there was no discipline in the school which the boy had attended. That boy was never in the habit of taking orders and of doing what he was told.

The fact that the Minister has removed the ban on married teachers is a confession of the failure of the policy under which teachers are recruited. There must be something fundamentally wrong with that policy when more boys and girls are not offering themselves as teachers. I have been informed on very good authority that out of one school 14 boys were called to the training college and only six of them went. There is something the matter there. Perhaps it is that the commencing salary is not big enough or that the boys considered they had to take on too heavy a load. I have asked several boys about the matter and their answer is that they consider the whole drudgery of school teaching too much. Of course, these boys have not a vocation for it and school teaching is a calling for which you must have a vocation.

Here, again, I must bring in the question of the Irish language. If one were to ask oneself what would be the best qualification a young boy should have to take up the teaching profession, one would be inclined to say that he should be capable of going into a classroom, taking control of 40 or 50 children and of being able to control them without punishing them. Here we see again a matter that Deputy Dillon has already mentioned. You would have, on the one hand, a young man who is possessed of that qualification as far as the approach to teaching is concerned, and, on the other hand, you would have a young man who is well able to speak the language but may not be able to control children. The man better able to speak the language will walk off with the job every time under present conditions.

All these things have to be considered and it is up to the Minister and his officials to weigh up the results of the policy of the last 25 years. They should ask themselves if these policies have produced the results for which so much money has been spent— although the money might not matter —and for which so many tears have been shed by schoolchildren over the last 25 years. I would agree with Deputy Faulkner when he asked if it was possible for this young Minister for Education to take away from the language the objection which a great number of children have to it—that it is a stumbling-block and a penance to them. If you can convince the children that the language is no handicap at all to them, then you are on the way to a revival. If you cannot do that you are not on the way to a revival.

People will say that I want to have the Irish language destroyed. I have never heard anybody say that but the protagonists of the language have got their way for the last 25 years. They have got everything they wanted—they have got all the money they wanted and they got power to inflict any hardships they liked on students. We can judge by the results.

Deputies are always inclined to be parochial and to get down to matters which concern their own constituents. When there were too many teachers in this country in the 30's the powers that be decided to close down the training college. When anything is to be closed or taken away, if it is situated in Waterford, it will be taken from Waterford. They close the De la Salle College in Waterford and say: "That will do, take it out." They took other things out of it, also. I am only waiting for the Taoiseach's Vote when I shall relate the litany. I would be afraid if I referred further to it now that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle might tell me it did not arise on this Vote.

There is something else which is nearly on a par with the way the Republic is being shouted about. Did any Deputy ever hear of any shouting or writing on "our national heritage"? What is our national heritage? Does anyone know? Will someone tell me what it is?

Mr. Loughman

The Deputy has three guesses.

Mr. T. Lynch

I am asking the question. I do not know what it is, I am just trying to find out. There must be things we inherit. It is not just a national heritage. There is something which is in the bailiwick of the Minister that I want to talk about here. It is a matter of national interest. I refer to the treasures in our National Gallery, our National Museum and our National Library. Dublin Opinion, and all the papers that brighten our lives, often give an idea that civil servants are having a wonderful time up there. If anyone wants to see dedicated men, who are slaves to their jobs, they should go over to the National Library or the National Gallery or the National Museum and see people working under the most frightful difficulties. I am quite sure that the Minister will take immediate steps about it.

We have treasures there in the National Gallery and I make the deliberate statement here that we have no proper inventory of the treasures there. That is not due in any way to the curator or his Staff, but is due to the fact that most of the treasures of the National Gallery are piled up higgledy-piggledy and stored in cellars. There is no room to take them out and have a proper inventory made.

I would suggest to the Minister an idea of something he could find out. One often finds oneself up against the blank wall of departmental differences. There is another Department which has storage near at hand, but they might want this storage for shovels and buckets and "to blazes with the masterpieces." They can get damp and go into dust. Then perhaps some active newspaper reporter may find out what has been happening and there may be some holy horror about all this.

The same thing applies to the National Library. I do not know how the staff are able to carry on. Thanks be to God, there are still people who are able to present them with material, and they buy more very rare works. They do great work in trying to catalogue them and store them and also to have them made available to students and others who go in there to do research. They work under frightful difficulties. I would appeal to the Minister for the three places in order—the National Gallery, the National Library and the National Museum. The Minister could go there himself, go down to the cellars and see what the position is at present. I have no doubt, if I know the Minister's form correctly, that this will be remedied. Here I am appealing to a Minister for Education to change the policy of the Department.

I shall close with this point. Deputy Cunningham spoke yesterday about the pay and the superannuation of teachers and so on. I was at a teachers' congress some years ago and I could not help noticing that there were 58 items on the agenda for discussion. Five of them related to teaching, teaching methods and pupils; the rest of them related to superannuation, teachers' conditions and so on. I went to a teacher of long standing and of great worth and I said to him: "Look at that; that is not to the credit of you or your profession." He said: "If you were as long teaching as I am and if you knew the firm rock. that the Department is, as far as changing the system of education is concerned, you would realise that the teachers know their business and that they are right in putting down four or five harmless resolutions; it is better for them to devote themselves to their own conditions and to their own future because through the years they have been turned down so often that it is no use referring to other matters."

The Minister will have seen the result not only of the 35 years during which an Irish Government has been in office, but of the years previously-during which the Irish revival was on. If one adds up all those years one can ask oneself: What result has been achieved? Are we justified in continuing this policy for the results we have got? Perhaps the Minister might say: "If we continue the policy we have, we seem to be going down every year. We shall destroy what we set out to restore." Let me close with this observation. Irish should not be essential. Irish should not be a stumbling block. Irish should not debar any son or daughter of an Irishman born in this country from earning a living in his or her country.

Pádraig Ó Dabhlaoich

Ba mhaith liom comhgháirdeachas a dhéanamh leis an Aire agus leis an Roinn as ucht a ndearna siad i rith na bliana seo caite. B'fhéidir nach món é ach ar asn chuma chuaigh siad cúpla céim ar aghaidh. Dúirt an tAire féin go bhfuil a lán fadhbanna le réiteach fós agus is maith an rud é go dtuigeann sé go bhfuil na fadhbanna seo ann.

D'éist mé leis na Teachtaí a labhair agus is cuimhin liom cuid den mhéid adúirt cuid de na Teachtaí. Sílim go bhfuilimid ar aon intinn mar gheall ar cad iad na fadhbanna seo ach nílimid ar aon intinn conas ba cheart iad a réiteach nó sad iad na modhanna ar cheart úsáid a bhaint astu. Tá fadhbanna ann maidir leis na múinteoirí neamh-oilte, líon na bpáistí sna ranganna, na páistí mall-intleachta, teastas bun-oideachais, tógáil tithe scoile agus rudaí den tsaghas sin. Tá cuid acu ann leis na blianta agus tá siad ag dul in olcas.

There are so many problems, many of them long standing facing the Minister and his Department that it is difficult to know where to begin. One that has become progressively worse in the past few years is the problem of the number of untrained teachers taken into the service. The Minister has taken a step to remedy that—a controversial step-but yet it is an effort to remedy the position.

Deputy Dr. Browne referring to this problem seemed to think it would be a simple matter to overcome. He seemed to think it would be simply a matter of erecting buildings, filling them with prospective teachers and that in a few years the problem would be solved. I do not think it is so easy of solution as that, but whatever steps the Minister takes to overcome the position, I hope, as Deputy Cunningham reminded him last night, that he will not fall into the error made previously and run into the situation which the Deputy and I knew existed in the 1930s when there were teachers for several years without jobs.

There were many who never taught and who gave up looking for jobs after acting as substitutes here and there for a few months and being a few months idle. Eventually, they gave up in despair and took up other jobs. I hope we shall not fall into that error again.

I think there should be some reform in the training of teachers for primary schools. I should like to see the position where there would be a common basic training for all teachers and in the final year a specialised course for those who would opt to go as primary, vocational or secondary teachers. All teachers should come from the training college with a university degree. I do not think it would be an insurmountable difficulty to achieve that. It would give us a unified body in the teaching profession. It would help to give us an integration in education which I believe to be lacking.

When speaking of university degrees for teachers, I should like to see a university education more readily available to those who are, capable of assimilating such education. Deputy Dillon made a suggestion which I think is well worthy of close consideration. That is in regard to making not alone university education but a secondary or any other type of education more readily available for a child who showed aptitude for it.

In the cities and in most large towns it is not so difficult for a child to receive secondary education. Those who live in towns are lucky in that there is, in most big towns anyway, secondary education readily available at very little cost. But there are many areas in which it is not so easily available. The question of increased scholarships to make it possible for the child with ability to make use of that ability should be more carefully considered.

I understand that night lectures are available in the National University for those who wish to go for a B.A. degree but if one does a B.A. degree through night lectures an honours degree cannot be taken. Perhaps the Minister might have some say in that matter. He might look into the question to see whether those who take a degree in that manner might be able to do an honours degree.

Another problem of which Deputy Dillon spoke was the problem of the retarded child. The ordinary child of slow intellect is a problem with which we all meet. He mentioned some in the City of Dublin. Possibly it would not be difficult in the City of Dublin to make provision for children of that kind. We have that difficulty in small rural schools. I wonder whether it would be possible in one of the larger schools in such rural areas to have a suitably qualified teacher to give such children in the area an opportunity of making something of themselves?

It is impossible to teach properly in small schools in the rural areas where the teachers have to deal with four or five classes with almost 50 children. It depends on the run of children. You get a good run and a bad run. It is impossible to give them any individual attention. The child is more or less neglected through no fault of the teacher but as a result of the system, if you like. The Minister gave the figure 37 in relation to the size of the classes. It is an unrealistic figure. In a small country school the average number with which the teacher has to deal may be anything up to 50 or more. Certainly, in a school which is bordering on a three-teacher school but has not yet reached the average for three teachers, frequently the teacher would have 50 children to deal with.

There is the problem also that all children, whether retarded or otherwise, who reach the sixth standard must take the primary certificate examination. The Taoiseach expressed surprise a couple of years ago that it was compulsory for all children who complete the sixth standard to sit for the primary certificate examination. I thought then that something might be done about it but nothing has been done. I do not know whether it is sound or not to ask a child of that age to sit for a written examination or whether or not the examination proves anything. Many of the children who take that examination are in the 12-year-old group.

Many children consider that when they have done the primary certificate examination, whether they pass or not, their education is completed. From my experience there is no School Attendance Act in force as far as that is concerned. The question of raising the school-leaving age is often discussed, and I would like to see it raised, but the school-leaving age at present is not even 14. My experience over a number of years is that children leave the primary school when they have taken the primary certificate examination. Some go to secondary schools, some to vocational schools and others remain at home and nobody bothers.

Reference has been made to the teaching of history. That is a matter to which I referred last year. The history course that teachers are expected to cover in two years, devoting one hour per week to the subject, is from earliest days to the present time. That is completely unrealistic. The texts issued for primary schools are even more unrealistic. This year, for the first time, a new text was published which would bear some relation to the amount of work that could be covered in two years at one hour a week. A very bare outline of the history of ireland is all that could be covered in that time and most of that could be covered in the ordinary reading lessons in Irish or English.

The course I should like to see followed, and which would be capable of completion in the two years, would be the making of modern Ireland, say, from the 18th century. In that way more detail could be given about the making of modern Ireland. That would be better for the child who would have no opportunity of higher education. It would be better to give such a child a course in the making of modern Ireland rather than a scanty outline of Irish history from earliest times to the present day which would be the bare bones of history and could not be anything else in the circumstances.

While the texts in Irish have improved over the last few years, they still leave a great deal to be desired. Deputy Corish referred to the introduction of the new spelling and said that he disagreed with it. It is something with which I agree, something that was long needed. Teachers have experienced difficulty in teaching Irish because of the various types of spelling, various grammatical usages, and so on. The problem was great enough without that added difficulty.

I was glad to hear a Deputy from the Gaeltacht, Deputy Cunningham, say that he agreed with the standardisation of spelling. A standardisation of spelling and grammar and a standard language which could be taught in schools would help in the teaching of Irish. A student of Irish in a Galltacht area, where there is no Irish tradition at all, is in the difficulty that he first learns, possibly, Munster Irish, later Connaught Irish and, later still, a smattering of Ulster phrases—a meascán of all the dialects. There should be a standard Irish taught in the schools. There is a standard English taught and that does not interfere with the dialects of various areas. The same could apply to Irish.

In that respect, a booklet on grammar has been issued, the Caighdeán Oifigiúil. I have seen two or three books published which profess to follow that caighdeán but which do not follow the same rule, as far as I can see. It is a matter which should be examined as to whether we should have a standard Irish which could be taught in schools and which would make the work of teaching Irish easier.

I do not agree with those who say that no progress has been made in Irish. Progress definitely has been made although the aim that we set before us may not have been achieved. It has been said that we have failed to achieve the objective. The difficulty was that we set ourselves too high a target. We set ourselves out to do too much instead of attempting a little at a time and moving step by step. The reaction as in the case of a pendulum of a clock which is swung too far to one side is to swing back violently again. In the case of Irish, we tried to move too far and the reaction against that effort was all the greater. The aim should have been to make it possible for people to speak Irish or, as a Deputy has already said, to have the country bilingual. If that had been the aim earlier on, more success might have been achieved.

The difficulty was that the schools were asked to do too much. The schools did not fail. The teachers did not fail. The pupils did not fail. It was afterwards that failure came. It was educationally unsound to ask that the use of the English language should be cut out in the lower grades of the schools. One of the principles of education is to lead from the known to the unknown. Obviously, in the schools in English-speaking areas, the English language should have been used.

Irish was only coming into use when I was coming towards the old junior grade and the only Irish text that we used was the old Irish Aids through Irish and English. Afterwards, when I went to a school where Irish only was spoken, I did not find any difficulty in following the lessons done entirely through Irish but then I had reached an age when it was possible to do that. To try to impose that on a younger child is, I think, quite wrong.

I referred already to the desirability of making of the profession a unified body, so securing more integration in teaching and co-ordination between the various bodies. At present we have primary, secondary, technical and university education, four separate compartments. I think the Minister said last year that there was co-ordination. There may be co-ordination of a kind but certainly there is no integration. You have the position, say, where a child lives in a rural area, has done the primary certificate and gone into a vocational school. You have some children who have done a couple of years secondary education and who may have reached or passed the intermediate certificate examination and who then leave the secondary school to go to the vocational school.

You find all these in the one class —I am speaking now of the rural towns; it may not happen in the cities. You have the position of the teacher trying to teach children of primary certificate standard and of intermediate certificate standard in the same class. It is an impossible task. If the school leaving age were raised to 15 and primary education went to 12 or 13—12, I would say—then, from 12 to 15, children would go into a secondary school and from 15 on into a vocational school or remain in the secondary school but there would be no break between the completion of the primary course and the age of 15. There would be continuation of the subjects they had been doing in the primary schools.

If we are to achieve any success in our education we must have a satisfied body of teachers. We must give them school buildings that will help them in their work, a system of inspection that will help in the teaching of pupils and opportunities for teachers to secure promotion, opportunities which are denied to them to-day. Deputy Lynch referred to the number of items on the congress agenda referring to salaries, pensions and gratuities and the small number referring to education. That is because teachers over the years have found less and less time at these discussions to devote to educational topics. It should be the other way round; they should be almost entirely concerned with matters of education and improved methods of teaching.

The question of parity was mentioned and perhaps the Minister would consider it further. Perhaps he would also consider further, if he has not already done so, the limited opportunities for promotion which teachers have. In the Six Counties and in England, teachers have opportunities for promotion which we do not have here and they also have opportunities to get bonuses or payments in respect of numbers attending school.

With regard to the inspection question, I may have had differences with inspectors but I cannot say a great deal against them. I found them all right on the whole but I would suggest that an inspection, especially for young teachers, should be more in the nature of help and advice to the teacher and should be used to demonstrate to the teacher, who is not using proper methods, how a particular subject should be properly taught and the proper methods to use.

A problem on which Deputy Dr. Browne spent much time was that of replacing school buildings, building new schools and reconstructing old ones. It is a big problem and I agree that the number of schools built may not be sufficient to overcome the deficiency but the blame should be placed where it belongs. I understood from the Minister's opening remarks that the Board of Works is almost £4,000,000 worth of work in arrears in respect of plans already sanctioned. That is where the blame should be placed and, if the Minister has influence or power over the Board of Works, he should try to get them to increase their rate of building so that in the foreseeable future we could overcome the problem of supplying new schools.

Deputy Dr. Browne may have been misled by the figures given him in regard to the number of new schools required. In answer to a Dáil question the other day the Minister said, referring to County Kildare, that certain new schools were needed and I noticed that the very first on, the list was one in my own town which is now practically complete. There may be many more which are in the course of building and which the Deputy may have regarded as not even started yet.

I would join with the others who asked the Minister to do something in the case of the pensioners. Let us not have to ask year after year until they are all gone. It would cost little to give them the balance they consider justly due to them and I would ask the Minister to come some of the way towards meeting them, if not the whole way.

In regard to the programme in primary schools, I suggest these schools should not be asked to do the impossible. These schools are supposed to give the bun ábhair, first training in moral behaviour, then principally the three R's and history and geography. Beyond that the primary schools cannot go if they are to do that much effectively. If they can do that much effectively, they are doing good work. I hope the Minister and his Department will continue the advance made this year and increase the rate of progress.

Mr. Sherwin

My interest in this Vote arises from the fact that it affects the 80 per cent. of the school-children who are children of the workers. I am not against the teaching of Irish and I have no great feeling about it. I do not feel I am less an Irishman on that account. I want to see English preserved. I should like to see this country bilingual, not just speaking Irish only. English is of great economic value for the 80 per cent. that I have referred to. Perhaps the other 20 per cent. of school-children will find all the opportunities they require here but there is only just about enough employment to satisfy that 20 per cent. The remaining 80 per cent. must depend largely on manual work, on trades, and the majority of them leave school at the age of 14.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 10th June, 1958.