Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 10 Jun 1958

Vol. 168 No. 10

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."—(Risteard Ua Maolchatha, Dr. Browne).

Mr. Sherwin

I want to make my position clear. I am not speaking as an authority on education. I am not an educationist. I am not a B.A. or a B.Comm. I am just a self-educated person. However, I know many working-class people and particularly their children. I was privileged to get to know these people by various means, by my membership of the Fianna and because I was in the dance business. My business necessitated my meeting 300 or 400 young people every night for 30 years. Because I know the people, especially the children of the workers, I wish to comment on our educational system, particularly as regards the Irish language.

Irish has been a controversial subject for a number of years. I hold that very little Irish should be taught to children in the primary schools. Seventy or 80 per cent. of our schoolchildren case to go to any school after 15 or 16 years. It is said that 66,000 attend secondary schools, although it is admitted that only about 7,000 stand for the leaving certificate annually. It does not follow that 7,000 are successful. Large numbers of those who go to secondary schools leave after a year or two and consequently their education is not much further advanced than the primary stage.

In my own way, I have tested quite a lot of young people by asking them to read simple statements. Within the past fortnight I made this test with two young people, aged 14, about to give up school. I also made a test with two other children, aged 16, who have been employed for the past two years. I asked them to read a three-inch column in an ordinary daily newspaper. Most of the words used were simple, everyday words. In almost every case those children pronounced from 12 to 15 words incorrectly. There were at least 20 to 25 words in that short three-inch column which they could not spell. I asked them to read a headline in Irish. I happen to be a councillor and I get correspondence with the headings in Irish. These children could not read those headlines. I asked them: "Do you not learn Irish?" They said: "Well, we can read what is in the school books, but we cannot read anything else."

Now, as we all know, when children leave school it is the ordinary, everyday language which matters. From my own knowledge and experience I am quite satisfied that the vast majority of children are semi-literate in English and illiterate in Irish when they leave school. Very few of them could do clerical work. They would not be able to write even a simple letter. They cannot read a simple piece of newsprint correctly. They cannot spell correctly. They are incapable of expressing themselves. They are destined then to be manual workers. That is my point; they know little Irish and they are not very good at English. The majority of them have to seek employment through private enterprise, where Irish does not matter. In the case of boys, their chances are nil. Whatever hope there may be for girls, there is no employment for boys unless they go to the technical schools and are phenomenally lucky. They are not always lucky. From my experience I can say, without fear of contradiction here or elsewhere, that the vast majority of the children of the working-classes never speak Irish once they leave school. I have never heard the children of the working classes speak Irish.

I have nine children. They do not speak Irish at home. I have never heard a word of it. The street in which I live is more or less a playground and there are always upwards of 100 children playing there. I have never heard a single word of Irish. Yet, I heard one Deputy state here that there has been an improvement and that he has heard Irish spoken. It appears he hails from the West. There is very little Irish spoken in the towns and cities outside the West. If there is a certain amount spoken in the West, I am quite sure it is in the rural areas it is spoken and not in the cities and towns. I was in Galway City last year and I heard very little Irish while I was there.

My point is that we should try to give children who will cease to attend school at 14 or 15 years of age a fairly decent education in English so that they will be able to make some little headway in life and climb a few steps of the ladder either here at home or in England, if they have to go to England. It is the young people who are going away. There are no jobs here for them. Do not forget that. When these young people go to England they must take any job that offers, the rough and the ready jobs, just as their forebears had to take the rough and the ready jobs in America.

Last week I was reading a school history dealing with the Continent of America, built up by our emigrants. I know how it was built up—sweeping the streets, guarding the people with the money, but not making the money. That is the kind of employment our people had. It is because of that that I want our children now to be given a decent education, particularly in English. Irish should be taught as a subject, and nothing more. What is the use of having our children practically illiterate in English and with a semi-literate knowledge of a language that they never use afterwards? What advantage is there in that? Irish should not be taught to any great extent until the children go into secondary schools.

Remember, those who go to secondary schools are ambitious. Their parents have ideas. They are interested in the language because it is the "open sesame" to the Government service and to teaching. The child of the average worker has no intention of remaining in school—has, indeed, no opportunity—after 14 or 15 years of age. It is most unjust that they should be turned out semi-literate or illiterate.

I am in touch with the people and I know what I am talking about. A teacher is in touch with children, but they are children under discipline. They cannot say or do what they like; if they do, they may get a box on the ear or a belt of the cane. I meet children when they are not subject to discipline. I know what the position is.

I value the language as our heritage, but I do not value it quite so highly as some people appear to value it. I do not attach such great importance to it. I am not speaking as an ignoramus in this matter. I have a very good knowledge of Irish history. I never read fiction. To me it is nonsense. Everything I read is factual. For the hundredth time, in the past few weeks I went over ancient Irish history. It is not because I am ignorant that I am not interested.

The language is of no value to us in a material sense. It may have some value in a sentimental way. When our people go abroad, Irish is not required. Reading some history recently, I saw it stated that, following the famine, thousands of people in the Gaeltacht got down to learning English of their own volition, realising the handicap they would suffer in the States if they were ignorant of English. They were advised to learn English in letters home from those who had gone before them. English was not forced upon them. The impetus was not from the one direction only, where English was concerned. I do not disapprove of the teaching of Irish, but we should not push it too far. We should go slowly. We cannot do in a few years what it took 700 years to undo. We should not put those who are already under-privileged at an economic disadvantage. Let those who want a superior education learn Irish. At least they are lucky enough to have a good knowledge of English too. They have the best of both worlds.

There are too many people trying to tell the youth, especially the children of the worker, what to do and how to do it. These people are all right. They have a good knowledge of both languages and can get good employment here, in America or in England but as far as the children of the working class are concerned, live and let live comes first with them. Therefore, we should not be too ambitious. We should give the children a fairly good training in English and let those who want to follow up Irish go into secondary schools or to classes outside.

English is a very important language. It is the language of 250,000,000 people. The world is getting smaller in every sense and anyone who has not a good knowledge of English would be considered a very ignorant person. Irish is an advantage to people who want Government employment—a system to which I object. This country can improve economically only if everyone pulls his weight. It does not follow that because a person has academic knowledge he should be put into a position of responsibility regardless of his ability. We do not hear the Minister for Industry and Commerce talk about Irish in his propaganda for promoting exports or in relation to tourism. We hear people talk about saving the language. There is no evidence that it is lost. There have been big improvements and there will be, but we must not exaggerate its importance at the expense of the English language.

Another point to which I should like to refer is the shortage of schools on the perimeter of Dublin City. I had it from the housing director at a meeting of Dublin Corporation last week that 1,000 children in Finglas and 1,200 children in the Ballyfermot area are obliged to take a school bus into the city every morning. There is no school in Finglas or Ballyfermot for a large number of the poorer citizens.

Mr. J. Lynch

The biggest school in Europe is in Ballyfermot.

Mr. Sherwin

I said that 1,000 children from Finglas and 1,200 from Ballyfermot are compelled to go into the city by school bus. There are not enough schools in those areas to cater for them. Apart from that, 600 other children come in by ordinary bus paying the full rate, including the extra increase, because they go to schools other than those where the school buses stop.

Furthermore, there are at least 500 children in Ballyfermost and Finglas whose ages range between five and seven years who should be at school, and cannot attend because of the lack of schools in the area. These are the children who are supposed to have a good knowledge of English when they reach 14 years of age, not to speak of Irish. It is not the business of the Housing Committee to build schools. It is the business of the parish priest, the school director or the Minister. Because there are not sufficient schools 3,000 children have to rise at seven in the morning, line up at the bus stop in cold and inclement weather, and in most cases they are not allowed on the bus until they have paid their fare. These children are expected to go into school with a fresh mind, to sit down and study. I am asking the Minister to give this matter serious consideration. It is not hearsay. The information comes from the housing director and the acting city manager who should know.

Another matter about which I wish to speak is the removal of the ban on married teachers. We hear comments about the national cake. Here is another example where some families are getting two portions of the national cake while others are getting only part of a portion. The Minister may say he has no choice. It is an extraordinary situation, when we have so much unemployment, that there is not a sufficient number of females to take up teaching and that married women have to be brought back into the schools. Somebody is slipping up somewhere. If the Minister finds himself compelled at this stage to reengage married women, he should make it his business as soon as possible to get a sufficient number of people who are not married and thus do his part to relieve unemployment. One of the things wrong with this country is that too many people are getting too many pieces of that famous cake. I understand there are 30,000 or 40,000 people in this city with two or three jobs. People who have a month's holidays and who can take days off, are employed on the Tote.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on the Vote for Education.

Mr. Sherwin

I admit that, but it all has to do with lifting the ban on married teachers. Another question is that of physical training in the schools. I notice that there is provision in the Estimates for music, drama, and so on, but there is no provision for instructors of physical training in the schools. In many northern countries physical training plays a big part in the school curriculum. Seeing that the vast majority of our people have to depend on their physical well-being for a livelihood, the Minister should take this question of physical training seriously. When I was going to school it was the schoolmaster who brought us out on the square and put us through physical exercises, but I should like to see qualified instructors in physical training engaged by the Department. These instructors could in turn instruct the teachers in the art of physical training.

Very often children through lack of physical exercise are "donaidhe" and not able to concentrate. Any little defect can distract a person's mind and anyone who observes children will see the difference between one child and another. You will see children with flat chests, with their stomachs sticking out, and their heads poking forward. I did a course of physical training myself and I know the need for it in the schools. Bad habits, such as standing on one leg or something like that which can be the cause of defects or deformities in later years, can be remedied through physical training. We should not depend on one Ronnie Delany coming from a college. We could have thousands of Ronnie Delany among the poor if the Minister would take some interest in this matter.

As I said at the outset, I am interested in the children of working class families of whom I know many. It is no exaggeration to say that if I know one person in this city I know 50,000. The children want a good education so that they can get jobs without advantage being taken of them in England and elsewhere and being able to avail only of the worst type of employment. Let us have Irish by all means but let us provide an education that will protect our children's economic interests in their future life.

Mr. Lindsay

We hear so much criticism every year about the Department of Education that I am now driven to the inevitable conclusion that what has been happening in that Department must have been, in the words of Deputy Sherwin, that they have been standing on one leg for very many years. If one were to go through the Dáil Debates over the last 35 or 36 years since the State was founded, one would find a considerable amount of repetition, some of it good, some of it mere padding. But the tragic thing about the repetition of the good is that the repetition has been found to be necessary in that constructive proposals made year in and year out, not alone by Deputies but by people outside, both interested and having a direct voice in the matter of education, have been ignored down the years.

In my view, the first essential with regard to education in all its phases, is that there should be much more consultation, co-ordination and cohesion between the administrative side— the Minister, his Department and his inspectorial staffs—on the one hand, and the organisations of the teachers —primary, secondary and vocational— on the other hand, including the school managers and such representative educational bodies as might claim to be heard from time to time.

I do not think there is enough of that kind of discussion and consultation. There is something rather peculiar—that does not mean that there is something necessarily wrong— when you find the President of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation —not one president alone but the president of each year—in addition to the presidents of secondary and vocational teachers' organisations, saying that our system has got very many defects and pointing out in many instances the actual defects themselves, as seen by these people of not alone administrative experience but teaching experience as well. Against all that, we find the Minister—I do not recollect now whether he said it in his opening speech or not, but certainly he said it at an outside meeting within comparatively recent times—saying that our system is sound. That is where the consultations and deliberations are necessary. If the Minister says the system is sound and if people in those responsible positions, leaders of various organisations and different teaching avocations, say it is not sound and actually point to defects, there is considerable need for further concentrated deliberation and discussion on those points.

I do not know upon whom the blame should be put for such a state of affairs. In a national matter of this kind, each one should direct his mind and bend his energy and will towards discovering—at least by way of amendment—a system that is as perfect as we can hope to achieve.

It is regrettable—and the explanation appears to be plausible enough— that there has been a reduction in the amount for the building of national schools this year to the extent of £174,000. I do not know how that fits in with the desire for additional teachers and smaller classes. With an already overcrowded programme, it is the desire of people who profess to know, and who do know, that there should be additional subjects in the school curriculum.

I am extremely desirous of seeing adequate school buildings and—as I have said each year since I came into the House—larger sites for national schools. I know that some teacher Deputies have objected to the reason I gave as to why larger sites were necessary, not alone as playgrounds for the children but to become the centre of sport for the village in question.

I agree wholeheartedly with Deputy Sherwin on the desirability of physical training at as early an age as possible. Of course, I see the difficulties in procuring qualified people; but I think the parish councils should be encouraged to work in conjunction with the F.C.A., so as to obtain a drill instructor who could visit the national school once a week or even once a fortnight. That would give the children an added incentive towards their physical development and would promote a livelier interest in local sports and local athletic activities.

I do not believe there is any necessity to impress the desirability of physical prowess upon the present Minister for Education, he having played a very full and vital part in the athletic life of the country. It is a matter to which he should direct his attention in relation to the primary schools, if he has not done so already.

In most secondary schools, physical training is done to some extent, if, perhaps, not adequately. I can say from personal experience that in the vocational schools, particularly in this city, physical training is extremely well done and great thought and energy is directed towards procuring the best physical instructors and instructresses.

If I might digress and follow Deputy Sherwin's line about the City of Dublin, I will give my experience, which probably has been limited in a way, although I have taught in a considerable number of schools in this city, both vocational and secondary, before I discovered I did not have a vocation for teaching—a matter to which I will return on the question of vocations and professions. I never saw in the vocational schools in this city or in the secondary schools the semi-literacy to which Deputy Sherwin referred and which according to him, is so rampant here. Deputy Sherwin, possibly, is unlucky to meet a considerable number of exceptions concentrated in a particular area.

I remember the pupils of one vocational school and it has always been a matter of regret to me, thinking of some of them individually, that we did not have a country more endowed by way of scholarship and opportunity of advancement for those less well off, having regard to the great ability which I came across in the vocational schools in this city and the great ambition which could not be realised to the extent to which it would be realised in a country of greater wealth, where education would be endowed to a greater extent.

Last year, and every year since I was elected to this House, I spoke on behalf of the retarded children. I do not mean mentally defective or mentally deficient children. I mean retarded, backward children who, in the larger classes, cannot get a chance, through no fault of their own and through no fault of an already overtaxed and very harassed teacher, because those more easily educated will have a tendency to come forward. The backward children may be mistaken as shy children, whereas they are children who develop late. That is a matter to which attention should be paid, particularly in the larger centres of population where it would be easy to deal with it.

Another matter to which I have constantly referred is the training of national teachers. The preparatory college system is the system from which primary teachers are recruited, in the main. There are some vacancies in the training colleges reserved for open competition on the results of the leaving certificate examination and for university graduates, but in the main, the trainee teachers come from the preparatory colleges. I am sure that teacher Deputies here will agree with me that, through no fault of their own, the present younger generation of teachers do not occupy the same position of status in the community in which they work and live as did the older teachers, say, the teachers who retired even within the past ten years. The national teacher, even in my time in the primary schools, was a man of great status in his community. He occupied that status because he was regarded, not as a man who had passed examinations of high standard, but as a man of learning, a man of real education, a man who had seen something of the world, whose training was of a broader character than that now permitted to our primary teachers.

Take the case of a young boy or girl going into a preparatory college, spending four years in Galway, Dingle, or Tourmakeady, with boys and girls of his or her own kind. They never see anybody from the outside world. At the end of the four years' term, they repair to a training college in Dublin or Limerick and are housed there for another two years and given comparatively little freedom. At the end of the six years' course, the grown man or grown woman returns to a primary school, very often to the parish where they came from, not having met anybody in the meantime and not having gained that experience of the world which is necessary for them to attain the status and stature to which I have referred.

It was having regard to that, and in commendation of the system adopted by the Church of Ireland Training College some time ago, that I urged that the mechanics of teaching should be taught in the training college and that, even for a year, through arrangement with the universities, trainee teachers should attend university lectures even without the necessity of taking an examination, in order to meet university people and thereby gain even from social intercourse with people of that kind. That would be a positive advantage. I know the difficulties that beset such a plan, the main difficulty being that there are training colleges situated outside Dublin, in centres where there are no university colleges. Nevertheless, if a beginning were made, it would have considerable advantages and the effects would be felt in the community in which the teachers would work afterwards.

Last year and the year before, I advocated the use of the newer kinds of mechanical devices in the training colleges, such as wire recorders for voice training and improvement of voice production. A great deal depends, not on what a teacher has to present, but the manner in which he presents it.

A great deal has been said every year on the question of the national language. Since I came into the House and before I came into the House, I have made no secret of the fact that I am an unrepentant bilingualist. Irish is an extremely interesting language, full of culture, full of all the kind of things we hold dear. As Deputy Sherwin has said and as I and others have said, one of the fundamentals of education is that the child should be taught, in the beginning at any rate, in the language of the home. I was quite pleased to hear Deputy Dooley of Kildare, in a restrained speech on this Estimate, say that it was educationally unsound to try to force anything else upon the child. I hope I am quoting the Deputy correctly. I was particularly struck by his statement at the time and I think it is the correct viewpoint.

Curiously enough, I learned Irish both in the home and in the primary school and, when I went to a secondary school, I learned Irish in a completely different way. I learned it through English. It was taught as a subject. It gave me a better appreciation of the beauty of the language to learn it in contrast with another language. However, that is a very vexed subject, but I think it is one that is better tackled by being tackled bravely. We should admit to ourselves that we are living in an ever-dwindling world, geographically speaking, and from the point of view of travel, and that it is necessary to have at least two languages, particularly English, the language of the two countries nearest us, Great Britain and the United States, where the great majority of our people have to go.

I do not agree with Deputy Sherwin that when our people go abroad, owing to the kind of education they get, they become mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. I think our people get on much better abroad—at least, a great many of them—than they do at home. It is significant when the names of those who distinguished themselves abroad come to our minds that they went abroad at a time when people were interested in education, not examinations. Whether we like it or not, there is an extreme difference between the standard of education and the standard of examinations. One may pass all the examinations in the world, one might even attain that wonderful level to which Deputy Sherwin refers—B.A. or B.Comm.— and still be, to a very great extent, uneducated. Examinations and education are correlated but not necessarily identical.

Probably those responsible for our educational system should direct their attention much more rapidly than they are doing to the necessity for advancing scientific education, having regard to the progress of science generally in the world of to-day. It would be of benefit not alone to those at home but also to those who have to go away. I do not agree that those who have to go are such bad people at all. I remember in December, 1956, having the honour of being invited to Birmingham to attend the opening of an Irish social centre there by the Oblate Fathers. As may be recalled, this was at a time when the English Sunday newspapers and some Irish papers were running almost horror columns about our people abroad. I should like to put it on record that I met two distinct crowds on that occasion, one in the afternoon and the other that night—it was mostly the married people and their families who were present at the opening of the hall, but later that night we met the younger people there dancing—and I can assure the House and the country that having regard to the terrible anticipations I felt as a result of the newspaper horror columns, I looked down from that platform on those Irish people, on their manners, dress, their general bearing and sobriety and I felt quite proud of them. I only wish our people at home would behave in a similarly excellent manner.

Everybody mentions the pre-1950 pensioned teachers. There is no harm in mentioning them and I think that when the financial position improves— I do not know whether it is showing any great signs of doing so at the moment, but at any rate it is quite obvious to anybody that, irrespective of the Governments in power, we have been going through rather difficult times in the last couple of years—the Department might see its way to grant these outstanding amounts. The number of people who would benefit is very small, while the contribution made by the applicants is not small. They are the older type of national teacher to whom I referred already and if their contribution is to be truly valued, we would not really value it fully by paying them money, but it would be some sort of recognition of the country's debt to them because they were teaching when things were difficult here, when it was necessary not alone to teach the three R's but to keep nationality alive. It is a great tribute to the national teachers of that era that nationality did survive and their part in its survival was no small one.

The subject of married women teachers is extremely dangerous. I do not know if it was ever a good decision 20 years ago to ban married women from our schools. One could make many arguments for and against, but I think it is a very important argument that where a mother or father is teaching, or both, there is a tradition of teaching in that family. I am not concerned about two salaries or even six salaries coming into one house, if the people are working for them; I do not think it is fair to criticise national teachers in this respect when we have in several aspects of life, trades, businesses and professions, several members of a family earning high incomes with no criticism. It is from the family with a teaching tradition one can expect to get the best teachers. That is not out of keeping with our history which shows that the old teachers, the poets and all the rest of them, were a sect to themselves. I am not trying to build up any kind of caste system, but I believe that, by and large, tradition plays an extremely important part in the development of any aspect of our lives, and particularly in teaching.

I do not know what has prompted the decision at this time, whether it is a decision based on reasoned argument related to the facts as they stand or whether it is a decision of panic taken at a time of panic in relation to the numbers of untrained teachers. If married women are to be given the option of going back to the schools, I respectfully suggest that the schools be thrown open to every woman teacher since 1936, when they had to go out—I think I am right in the date. There should be no gap left and we should not leave anybody or any group dissatisfied, because things will sort themselves out in the long run. On the other hand, neither would I like to place any difficulty in the way of excellent teachers, particularly untrained girls who have been doing and are doing excellent work in the smaller schools in the remoter areas.

I think the Department will find the inspectors in these areas will agree with me that the work of these girls, untrained, if you like, is good work, resulting as it does from a vocation rather than a profession founded on a standard of examination. That does not mean that I advocate untrained teachers for all schools. I agree with the decision to bring back the married women not as an ad hoc decision but because I think it was a mistake ever to introduce that rule. Let not the bringing back of these women teachers interfere with people who have become established as untrained teachers in small schools and in the areas to which I have referred who are the mainstay probably of aged parents or some other relative.

Education generally needs an overhaul, not because of any dilatoriness in the Department of Education, but because of ever changing times. Even ever changing times, however, do not call for ever changing text books in the schools. More care, more attention and, if necessary, more money should be spent on the production of good text books that will survive the school-going period of a whole family.

It is quite costly nowadays to supply a whole school-going family with books.

With regard to primary education, in particular, I think it was Deputy Dooley who mentioned that most of the time at congresses is taken up with a wailing about salaries, allowances and increases, when, in fact, such time should be devoted towards inquiring into the advancement of educational methods and the general betterment of prevailing conditions. It is a bad sign to find a body of people who play such a prominent part in the life of the nation devoting the time of their annual congress in that way, or even not having to devote it but finding themselves in the frame of mind that they are continually talking about salaries, allowances, increases, and so on, when all their deliberations should be directed towards the betterment of the system which provides them with their work and towards the ultimate betterment of the children for whom they are responsible.

Let nobody try to tell me or anybody else that the teacher alone can do the work in any school. A teacher's work is necessarily co-related with the conditions in the home. Only by full co-operation between the home and the teacher can we make the educational system as perfect as we wish it to be.

Much is to be desired in regard to secondary education. More pupils are now going into secondary schools. The buildings are no longer adequate, particularly in the small colleges and in the provincial centres. I suppose it is difficult to get money for them but some attention should be paid to that matter, particularly in view of the fact that the clergy—the secular clergy and male and female Orders—have given the advantage of secondary education to students over the years at an alarmingly low price.

I hope the Minister will deal with some of the points I have raised—retarded children, voice production, university opportunity for trainee teachers and a factual approach to that question of great controversy, namely, the teaching of Irish. I urge that all these matters be given due attention and that there should be a national approach to them. It is rather a shame that, over the years during which we have had our own say, education and other matters that should be purely national matters and dealt with in a broad national manner have become the subject of Party politics.

We must all wish the Department of Education well, as also everybody associated with it. On this Department, in particular the primary end, depends the ultimate success or failure of our people as a stay-at-home nation.

Micheál Ó Ceit

Ag caint dom ar an Meastachán seo, is mian liom ar an gcéad dul síos an tAire a mholadh as an obair tábhachtach a rinne sé féin agus oifigigh na Roinne i rith na bliana seo caite. Nuair a bhí sé ag cur deiridh lena óráid ar an Meastachán, rinne an tAire athchoimre ar na neithe tábhachtacha a rinneadh i rith na bliana. Ceann aca-san is ea an Coiste atá socair chun aithbheóchaint na Gaeilge a chur ar aghaidh agus chun léirmheas a dhéanamh ar na rudaí is cóir a dhéanamh chun an chuspóir sin do chur i ngníomh. Tá áthas orm go bhfuil sé socair ag an Aire an Coiste sin do bhunú. Ní abróidh mé mórán mar gheall uirthi, lena chois sin. Tá súil agam go raghaidh an tAire féin agus an Roinn i gcomhairle le dream go bhfuil taithí aca le blianta ar an gceist seo agus gur féidir leo labhairt go húdarásach air agus is iad sin na múinteoirí atá ag múineadh sna scoileanna náisiúnta agus go bhfuil baint aca le blianta le hobair aithbheochaint na Gaeilge.

I wish to make a few remarks on some of the difficulties that beset our educational system and to comment on the Minister's introductory statement. Before going on to that, however, I should like to refer to one of the seven matters which the Minister mentioned when giving a summary, towards the end of his speech, of the seven points of importance that had been dealt with during the year.

One of these was that the oral test in Irish was to be brought in for the Leaving Certificate in 1960. He said that he expected the examiners to be the inspectors of the national schools and the inspectors of the secondary schools. I should like to know how a uniform standard will be available in that test for secondary schools in the Galltacht areas as compared with secondary schools in Gaeltacht areas, and what standard will be expected. Deputy Lindsay mentioned tape recorders and I think that would be a very useful means, between now and 1960, of spreading the Irish language in the secondary schools in the Galltacht. Some of the pupils in those secondary schools will not be able to go to the Gaeltacht but, by means of tape recorders, we might be able to bring the Gaeltacht to the schools by having a definite programme and a definite standard of oral Irish, having native speakers record their voices and having those voices played over to the pupils by their teachers. I would ask the Minister and the officers of his Department to see if tape recorders could be used in that manner as it would be of very great benefit to the pupils concerned.

Another one of the seven points to which the Minister referred was the "gearradh 6 per cent. a chur ar ceal do na coisti gairm-oideachais," the 6 per cent. cut in the grants to vocational schools. The Minister was able to say earlier in the year that he intended to restore that cut, and I, as a member of a county vocational education committee, wish to compliment him on having restored that grant. It will mean, I hope, that we in Galway will be able to go ahead with the programme of work which we had to abandon. There was one school in my constituency for which we have been agitating for years, in a place called Glennamaddy, in North Galway. The local parish priest and the parishioners of that place have sent many deputations to the county vocational committee to show that it is a place in which a school is badly needed.

There is another required in Athenry and in other places throughout the county, all of which had to be left out of our programme, but I hope that, with the restoration of this grant, we will be able to carry on with our programme as originally planned. I hope that when we send that programme up to the Department, the Minister will sanction the building of these schools which are so badly needed. That is all I have to say as regards vocational education.

There are a few short points to which I will refer regarding other matters that are agitating the national teachers. Most people have referred to the removal of the ban on married women teachers. The only thing I have to say on that is that I hope that on the removal of the ban those teachers who will be coming out of training will not be left unemployed, as happened when I was trained myself in the early 1930's. People trained at that time never got a chance to start teaching and many of them emigrated because of the flood of national teachers throughout the country. I hope the removal of this ban will not give rise to a similar situation because people who will be coming out of training this year started upon their careers seven years ago, and the same applies to those who will finish their training next year. I hope the removal of the ban will mean that the extra teachers will be used to abolish the large classes and, perhaps, the school leaving age could be raised. Even the period of training teachers could be lengthened, a point for which the teachers' organisation has been fighting for years. As Deputy Lindsay says, a teacher would then have a university degree when he qualifies.

The inspection system has been mentioned by some Deputies who contributed to this debate. By and large, the Minister and everybody else wishes that general harmony should prevail between the inspectors and the teaching body. One of the big causes of dissension is the merit mark for each subject, a system which has been handed down to us from the old British days, and we are one of the very few countries that have maintained it. It has been abolished in 66 countries. In 66 countries, where the inspection systems of primary schools have been examined by an international bureau of education, under the auspices of U.N.E.S.C.O., according to its 1956 publication, No. 174, this merit mark for each subject has been abolished. Of course, in the Six Counties area, it has been abolished for a good while. The teachers' organisation cannot see any need for it and it would be a step in the right direction if the Minister were to examine that matter. Let the inspector come in and give a general appraisal of a teacher's work and give him advice, if necessary, as to what he should improve on and so forth.

There is another point that has been worrying teachers, and especially lady teachers. They are looking for a grant for needlework materials and for kindergarten. These have to be supplied by the teachers themselves or by the children. Sometimes it may be that in poorer areas some of the children may not be able to provide the money for these materials, and the teachers have to give it out of their own pockets. The Minister has officials of the Department to examine schools in these subjects and sometimes an official may take some of the material in a school from the pupils to illustrate work. It would be quite a simple matter if the officials brought some of the material with them and left a requisition in each school. It would not matter in the case of senior pupils who are making garments which they can take home. They can supply their own materials which will be of use to them, but the Department should supply the materials, or at least make a grant to school managers or teachers to provide such materials for needlework and kindergarten. Such a step would create better harmony between the teachers' organisation and the Department.

Another matter which has been referred to is the primary certificate. Deputy Dooley referred to it and pointed out that the Taoiseach at a conference on one occasion had said that he did not understand this was compulsory. I think there are few people who really understand this primary certificate. Even though children may be retarded or mentally defective, if they are in the sixth standard, the teacher has to fill in a form and they are supposed to sit for this examination. At least it should be voluntary, for of course it could happen that in one year a teacher might have a class composed mostly of retarded children. If the whole class fails, as it is nearly bound to fail, it will possibly militate against him or her later on.

Only those who are fit to do the examination or who wish to do it should have to do it. Educationally, to my mind, the primary certificate is completely unsound, because it is only an examination on three subjects, all written, and if we are to be serious about the revival of the language oral Irish should be included in the examination. It should be the most important subject of the lot.

I should also like to say that I am glad the Minister referred to the provision of £1,400,000 which, although it does not really come under his Estimate, is for providing new schools and repairs and extensions to schools. He gave us to understand that last year the Board of Works did not spend all the money provided for them for this work. I hope this year he will impress upon them that there should be no slackening off in this work and that all that money will be spent and that if they have to get additional staff, that staff will be got, because the case is urgent and the more quickly it is gone ahead with, the better.

I should like to add my voice to the opinions expressed by other speakers on a subject to which I also referred last year, that is, the question of the teachers who went out on pension before 1950. They got only one-third of their gratuity and they were teaching when salaries were much smaller than they are now. I know some of these teachers myself and they are receiving only a little over the weekly old age pension rate. The pensions are miserable and at the teachers' congress in Galway, his Lordship Most Rev. Dr. Browne, Bishop of Galway, spoke on their behalf and pointed out how they had borne the heat and the toil of the day and, having spent their time teaching, retired on very low pensions. I hope that if they cannot be given the full amount, at least they will be given some part of it and that finally they will get the full gratuity which those who retired since 1950 have received.

Lastly, I should like to advocate the teaching of civics, which could be incorporated in both Irish and English textbooks. If civics were taught, with the co-operation of the parents in the home, it would be a big factor in curing the Juvenile delinquency about which we hear so much. The teacher could combat it by having civis taught in the schools, in conjunction with the teaching of our history and our traditions. It would elevate the pupils and show them that they had a proud tradition and that it was necessary for them to grow up good Irish men and women and to work for their country. To my mind, it would be one thing that would give them a great hope for the future. I know that in co-operation with the officials of the Department the teachers would be only too glad to undertake this work and it would benefit the Department, the pupils and the nation in general.

Mr. Desmond

Like other speakers, I wish to add my voice to those of the Deputies who have spoken on behalf of the teachers who retired prior to 1950. There is no need for me to say that I agree with Deputy Kitt and other speakers in relation to these teachers and I would ask the Minister to consider their position. Deputy Lindsay mentioned the untrained teachers and while I would not, under any circumstances, advocate a system whereby we would continue to depend on untrained teachers, it is only right to say that there have been instances where the standard of the pupils who have come from schools where untrained teachers were employed—untrained because of various reasons and personal difficulties attaching to their period—showed that the untrained teacher has not been as bad as some people would wish to paint him. As I said, under no circumstances, would I say that it is right to adopt a system whereby untrained teachers would be continued in employment year after year, but it is unfair to say, as some people try to state, both here and outside this House, through the medium of the national newspapers and through some of the teachers themselves, that all of them have been failures, and to try to paint everybody with the same brush.

I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the complaints which are made year after year in relation to the conditions of schools in rural Ireland. While I know that many such complaints may be exaggerated it is correct to say that conditions in many rural schools are very bad. I am not blaming the present Minister or the present Government because conditions in these schools have been bad for many years. It is only fair to say, in defence of the Ministers for Education in each Government, that they tried to do their best, but unfortunately much remains to be done.

I believe that many of these complaints in relation to the problems in rural areas could be tackled by co-operation between both the national authorities, through the Minister and the Department of Education, and by the people locally. I consider it unfair that the people locally should expect everything to be done, without at least throwing their weight behind the effort to improve conditions. It may be possible in the future, if all parties concerned realise their obligations, to form some sort of parish committee representative of the Department, the revernd managers and the parents.

These people are not aware that, because of the financial problems besetting the various Governments, they have to take their places in the queue for schools. If it were possible as a result of discussions by the Minister with the various parties concerned, particularly the teachers' organisation and the organisation representing the reverend managers, to devise some way to bring all the local representatives of these interests together to work in harmony, we might hear less in the future about the terrible conditions in our rural schools.

I wish to draw attention to another matter. Like other Deputies, I have drawn attention to this problem previously, but we have not got anywhere. It is the problem of school books. I stated here before, and I say again now, that it is scandalous to expect parents of children to-day to be able to provide them with the necessary school books. One Minister—now gone, God rest his soul—went so far as to say that the children damaged the books so much in one year that they could not be used by other children coming after them. The present Minister comes from an area where considerable complaint has been heard about this problem. In our time we were able to use the books of the children of the previous year and it did not do us any harm. If a book is good enough for one boy, I do not see why it should not suit his brother the following year. That would mean much to the parents trying to meet the terrible cost of books at present.

I want to refer now to the matter of bringing back married teachers. Like Deputy Kitt and Deputy Lindsay, I have no interest in saying whether I believe it is right or wrong. All I am interested in is to ask the Minister what the number of pupils to each teacher will be. I can see the difficulties of the young men and women leaving the training college. The Minister has gone a certain distance, but I think it is essentail for him to go the whole way. If we continue as we are at present and if we do not make a genuine effort to relieve overcrowding in our schools, it will mean that fewer will go into the training college. That will mean a saving for whatever Government is in power. But it will not help solve the problem of overcrowding and of providing our children with a proper education. The Minister should see to it that, now that there may be an easement in regard to the number of trained teachers available, we should be in a position to avail of their services and not have young trained teachers going abroad to seek a living or have a reduction in the number of those in training.

I am not very conversant with all the problems of our training colleges, but Deputy Lindsay made a very clear statement of what he considered were the problems affecting those in training. I agree with him, but there is another angle. I believe that it is unfair that a greater number of boys and girls are not able to avail, under the present system, of the opportunity of going to training colleges because of the system of favouritism in relation to preparatory colleges. We have abused the position. The result is that many boys and girls, who succeeded in their leaving certificate and who would make excellent teachers if given the opportunity, have been defined that opportunity under a system that has ultimately done harm, not to the teachers, but to the children in the rural schools.

We hear criticism about the bad points of our education system here, with much of which I do not agree. I would say to the Minister there is one subject on which we should concentrate. Not enough consideration is given to the importance of mathematics. It is essential to succeed in Irish. It may be helpful to succeed in other subjects, but why is it that mathematics do not get the important place they should in our educational system? At times I am amazed when I come across old people who were educated under a different system and who can show us in no uncertain manner the way the educational system operated in their day to give them a solid grip on mathematics. This is one instance of the old people being right in saying: "God be with our time!" because, if anything, we have failed grossly in our neglect of and our carelessness towards mathematics in the school curriculum.

Deputy Kitt mentioned the compulsory primary certificate examination in the national schools. I endorse everything he said. Successive Ministers for Education have made it clear that examinations are the be-all and the end-all as far as education is concerned. I do not agree with that policy. I agree with Deputy Lindsay when he said that examinations are important, but examinations are, after all, only part of education. We seem to have gone stone mad on examinations. Every little boy and girl in the primary school must now concentrate on three subjects. Is that the purpose for which these children go to school?

It is not so very long since I left school, but I am grateful that I had the good fortune not to come under the present system. We were lucky in that our teacher, through his determination and his broader outlook, gave us something more than just a grind in three subjects for the purpose of getting a primary certificate. He was wise enough to appreciate and understand that every pupil leaving the school required to be equipped to deal with the ordinary everyday problems of life, either here or abroad. He realised that it was not enough to equip a pupil to pass in three subjects in the primary certificate. These certificates mean nothing to the pupils. Indeed, they represent a loss to the country ultimately. The failure of education at the present time can be directly attributed to successive Ministers for Education. Teachers have now no opportunity of equipping pupils to meet the hazards of ordinary adult life, and the pupils are leaving school armed with a miserable little certificate saying they passed in three subjects.

I wish to raise a matter now which is common to all our educational systems. I refer to the lack of common courtesy and good manners. It is vitally important to inculcate courtesy and good manners into children. Unfortunately, we cannot altogether blame the very young because the failing is all too common in those in the thirties and forties, and it is from them the lead has come. Politeness is lacking everywhere. That was not so long ago. This lack is equally apparent in the secondary, schools and universities as it is in the primary schools. It has become more noticeable since the war. Surely some effort should be made in our educational establishments to remedy this defect.

The Irish language is a subject of controversy. There are people, here and outside, who have no hesitation not alone in giving their views but on insisting that their views should be accepted. If anyone tries to take a middle course, he is attacked by one side as a renegade and proclaimed a hero by the other side. It is tragic that so many should be so fanatical. One can approve of genuine enthusiasm, but fanaticism is something of which no one could approve. I had Irish before I had English and I do not approach the question of the language as one who has never wished for its revival. I think it is a glorious language, the loveliest tongue that can be heard.

Again, as far as Irish is concerned, I was singularly lucky in my school. Irish was taught as a subject. We learned to speak in Irish, to read in Irish and to write Irish. But we were never called upon to carry the burden that the children are expected to carry to-day. We were not asked to learn French, Latin and so forth through the medium of Irish. There was no force. There was no coercion. Unfortunately the greatest language enthusiasts to-day are placing in the hands of the enemies of the language a weapon they themselves are forging to destroy the language.

The children are finding it very difficult to continue under the present system. Most of them come from homes where nothing but English is spoken. Are we being fair to them? If we cast our minds back to over 100 years ago before the misfortune of the Famine, when the population of Ireland was much larger than it is now, we shall find that the majority of the Irish people spoke Irish and thought in Irish, but were they able to read and write in Irish? Unfortunately, they did not really have the opportunity of being literate in Irish, but it did not prevent them from being able to converse and to express themselves through the medium of the Irish language.

In the twenties, elderly people who had no Irish went to night classes to learn to express themselves in the Irish language in conversation and to a certain degree in reading and writing. That was because that glorious period brought to the minds of the people at that time the importance of nationality and all that goes with it. Unfortunately, since, let us say, 1930, all the money that has been spent on education, through Irish has not given the results that we would wish for. The tragedy of it is that the majority of boys and girls coming out of the primary schools at the age of 14 have a good knowledge of Irish, but it is left there. Are we making it more difficult for those who are anxious to converse in the language to do so? Many children who leave school with a good knowledge of Irish do not speak it out side because of an inferiority complex in relation to their knowledge of the language.

I would wish that everyone throughout the length and breadth of the Twenty-Six Counties and of the other Six-Counties, where there is a fair proportion of people with a knowledge of Irish, would be able to converse in the native language, but I am afraid we are not playing our part in encouraging its use by making it a little easier to learn. After all, most of us were not geniuses at school, and the majority of children at the present time are perhaps no better than we were. The past 20 years have been 20 years of failure in this regard, and it is essential for the Parties forming both the Government and the Opposition in this House to seek improvements in the situation in some other way.

I have no time for those people who in some slick manner show their hatred for the Irish language. It is because of my love for the language that I would like to see it more widely spoken. However, whether we like it or not, in our intercourse, through commerce and otherwise with other countries, especially English-speaking countries like America, England and so on, it is essential that our children have a thorough knowledge of the English language. Nevertheless, more progress would be made if we had a greater spirit of co-operation in this House instead of having divided forces. Divided forces are the cause of our failure in regard to the language.

Finally, there should be some co-operation in relation to parish councils or parish committees, which would help in regard to rural schools. This Estimate is one where there should not be condemnation of one Party or of a Minister who belongs to a certain Party. We should remember that the standard of education in our rural schools produces a better type of pupil than is produced in England or elsewhere. We hear many condemning our system and saying that our boys and girls are ignorant and illiterate. I have never said it, nor do I believe it. From an educational viewpoint they are better by far than their counterparts coming out of schools in Britain. Let us improve on that system by a truer sense of co-operation and understanding amongst all Parties.

Tadhg Ó Maonghaile

Cuirtear anashuim de ghnáth i Meastachán an Roinn Oideachais agus ní haon ionadh é sin nuair a chuimhnímíd ar stair na tíre agus ar an saol a bhí ag na daoine san 17ú agus san 18ú aois, nuair do cuireadh oideachas fé chois ar fad sa tír agus nuair nach raibh aon chaoi ag formhór na ndaoine aon tsórt oideachais d'fháil dóibh féin.

Táimíd buíoch, gan amhras, don athrú atá anois ann, ina bhfuil ar chumas gach duine aon tsórt oideachais d'fháil dó féin.

Tá fíor-mheas ag ár ndaoine ar oideachas. Deineann tuismitheoirí an lae inniu tréan-iarracht ar oideachas iomlán a thabhairt dá gclainn, mar tuigeann said gur ar oideachas is mó a bhraitheann a gclann chun maireachtaint nó slí bheatha a bhaint amach dóibn féin sann saol atá inniu ann.

Is mór an tsuim airgid é seo atá dá iarraidh san Vóta seo. Is fiú an méid is féidir a chaitheamh ar oideachas, chomh fada is tá tairbhe le baint as.

Is fíor a rá go bhfuil dul ar aghaidh i scéimeanna oideachais leis na blianta. Tá súil agam go leanfaidh sé mar sin. Fear séimh agus fear feidhmeach é an tAire, atá ullamh i gcónaí an dá thaobh de gach scéal a mheas, sar a dtugann sé barúil. Thaispeáin sé go bhfuil ceaptha aige pé athrú is riachtanach a dhéanamh sa Roinn. Tá súil agam go néireoidh leis agus go néireoidh leis an Roinn san obair atá idir lámha acu.

Fifteen and a half million pounds are being sought in this Vote for educational activities in this country. It is a fair sum, considering our circumstances; but educationists, economists and theorists of all kinds always assert that money spent on education is well spent. If our people live at home, it is all to the good, as their output is bound to be improved by improved educational standards; if they are forced abroad, or if they go abroad of their own volition, the better equipped they are educationally the better will they be able to face the hardships and hazards of life and competition abroad.

The Irish language was frequently mentioned in this debate. There was much criticism—some real and some unreal. Nevertheless, it is a good thing that Deputies can speak out their minds without fear of unjust criticism afterwards. We must remember that we have been 35 years plodding at this question, that a vast amount of money has been spent in trying to restore the language, that men and women in schools and colleges have worn themselves to the bone in an effort to restore the language and give a colloquial knowledge of it to their charges. Surely all this is not to go by the board now, with the type of criticism which seems to be growing up here?

We were challenged in former years that we had no right to nationhood because we had no language. We had the language in many parts of the country and still have it. Surely we are not going to lose such a priceless heritage, which was the cradle of our culture, of our nationality and of our spiritual progress down the years? I hope some of the criticism made here will not be taken in a narrow sense. Perhaps it is good that we have these discussions, to clear the air. In recent years, the Department has made changes. The simplified spelling has been a great incentive to the study of the language. There is no doubt that the spelling we had here in previous years was difficult—of course, the language itself is difficult—and the simplified spelling really gives a great opportunity now to impart the language colloquially.

What I really think was at fault down the years was that there was too much insistence on grammatical construction. When the children left the primary school, where every effort was made to give them a colloquial knowledge, the courses demanded in the intermediate classes were too great a strain to permit any time at all for the spoken language. On that account it is a welcome decision on the Minister's part to have an oral Irish examination in the leaving standard—and possibly eventually in the intermediate standard, after 1960. That is a wise provision.

It is not in the schools that the language is lost; it is in the after-school days where boys and girls go out into various walks of life and do not speak it to one another. That is a great pity. I remember in my youthful enthusiasm many years ago having a class of boys qualify for the Fáinne and meeting some of them years afterwards who had forgotten the language. It is a pity something is not done to encourage those people to practise the language which they made such a great effort to acquire in their early school days.

If there is a test in oral Irish to be applied in the schools, there should be a corresponding reduction in the literary standard demanded in the intermediate course. The leaving honours course in Irish to-day is of a very high standard and entails a lot of study, time and effort. It is almost impossible for any teacher to complete that course and prepare children at the same time for an examination in oral Irish. I am sure the Department will be guided by a sense of fairness in that. It is not so much compulsion at all—it is the high standard demanded which compels the teachers to make frantic efforts to fulfil the requirements of the regulations.

In regard to school buildings, we must of necessity expect that we cannot have all the school buildings over a short period. Many beautiful schools have been built in various parts of the country, but personally I think schools which are not necessary at all have been built. If efforts had been made to rehabilitate some older schools and make them more attractive, more hygienic and brighter, much money would have been saved for a time which would be more propitious for the erection of schools to replace those I mentioned. I suppose we can reasonably expect that, when the housing needs of our people have been completely provided for in a few short years, more money will be available for greater concentration on the erection of schools in areas which are clamouring now for new schools to replace those old schools.

Lack of accommodation in some cases militates against the question of staffing in the schools. That is a difficult problem and I suppose that for many years to come it will be a problem in the smaller schools, with the smaller numbers. Until we reach saturation point in the supply, I do not suppose we can expect any improvement in that direction.

On the question of mentally slow children, we all know that in the larger schools the children are graded now according to their intellectual standards or ability. That is not possible in the smaller schools and there the children, whether of a highly intelligent character or of a slow-developing mental character, have to soldier together. As a result, the slow child retards the class and the bright child does not get the same opportunity as he would if better provision were made for the intellectual grading of children.

We were very glad to hear the Minister announce the very marked increase in recent years in numbers attending secondary schools and vocational schools. That is a happy sign of the times. In a country like ours, I cannot understand, however, why we have three separate systems competing, why there has not been more coordination, why there is such disparity of status and remuneration. It is extraordinary that in a small island like this we should have these three separate systems. If we had greater co-ordination, the systems would dove-tail into one another and the result would be far better than we have at the moment. If we had such a situation here we would have no need for a Council of Education, because the operators of a combined system would be able to evolve a continuous system which would be helpful from the very day the child first went to school until he went to the secondary or vocational school.

Deputy Kitt referred to civics and Deputy Desmond referred to the lack of manners and courtesy in the children of to-day. Unfortunately, that is true. There is a reckless spirit growing up. I know teachers, excellent disciplinarians, who find it very difficult to enforce the ordinary discipline which the father would enforce in his own home. That is because the home is the right place to give that civic spirit and civic sense. Nevertheless, it is an added responsibility for the teacher, a responsibility which he has to face. The home should be the place wherein to inculcate these habits and that regard for property, for others and for the aged. The home should be the place in which to inculcate into the child some idea of its obligations in life. In regard to manners and courtesy, we find we are slipping back. Our courtesy and kindness to strangers are traditional, but the youth now growing up seem to have turned their backs entirely on the traditions handed down to them.

The pre-1950 teachers were mentioned here. As a teacher, it is my duty to refer to that also. It is significant that no Minister of State has yet said theirs is an unjust demand. The only excuse given is that the money is not there to meet the demands of those people, but so long as there is differential treatment between those retired in the Twenty-Six Counties in 1950 and those who have got their full gratuity, these people have a just grievance. Some day this matter will have to be ironed out. I submit that it is no excuse to say the money is not there. These teachers could have their award over a period of years. They would be very glad to get it on the instalment system, a system which has now come to be so characteristic of all our dealings, both in public and private life.

Mr. Booth

There has been a tremendous amount of criticism of our general system of education. I am afraid there is a danger that the reaction to all this criticism may be that we might develop a sense of inferiority complex which would only make the situation worse. I do not suggest for one moment that we should be complacent about our system of education, but, as Deputy Manley said, and I agree with him, there is a general spirit of criticism of education abroad at the moment, not only here but in Britain and America. In one of the leading American periodicals of the moment, there is a most scathing denunciation of the failure of American secondary education in particular. During the war and since the war, there have been several reports published by British Army authorities in regard to the standard of literacy or illiteracy of the conscript recruits who join the British forces. We should not feel for a moment that the difficulties we face are peculiarly Irish.

On the question of the teaching of the Irish language, I should like to stress the need for co-operation between the teachers and the parents. It seems to me that one of the great failures so far has been that lack of co-operation. In that connection, I know of one case in my own constituency where, in the national school, all teaching was through Irish. A new principal was appointed—a tremendous language enthusiast and one of the very few men I know who frequently finds himself at a loss for an English word. He has to speak it in Irish first and then translate it into English. He is a tremendous enthusiast but he immediately stopped teaching all the subjects through Irish. He taught Irish and still teaches it as a separate subject. Because of his enthusiasm, he is leading the children towards a love for Irish. He is achieving a far higher standard of Irish language teaching than was ever achieved before.

For that reason, I think some of the enthusiasts have gone too far in the past. In trying to go too quickly, they have defeated their own ends. I throughly agree with those who spoke against Irish as a teaching medium for primary education. I agree whole-heartedly that confusion between the language of the school and the language of the home during the primary education period is almost fatal. It is valuable to think back to the days which were also recalled by Deputy Manley from 1916, 1920 and even up to 1930 when the language enthusiasm was at a very high level. Certainly up to the formation of the State, those wishing to take any part in the national movement were so imbued with national sentiment that they adopted the language, not only as a necessity but joyfully as a privilege and as an additional badge of their nationality.

Many people are saying—I am afraid they are saying it in this House and it seems to be so much wishful thinking now—that the majority of the people desire the restoration of the language. I do not want to do anything except face facts. As I see it, the position is that the majority of our people do not wish to see the language restored. They are either completely apathetic or actively opposed to it. There is no use trying to avoid facing facts.

There is, I am afraid, an increasing opposition being built up against the language and we are only fooling ourselves if we say that the majority of the people want it. If the majority of our people really wanted the restoration of the Irish language, there would be no problem at all. The very fact that there is a problem means that the majority do not want it or are not enthusiastic about it.

If we compare the situation here with that in Northern Ireland at the moment, we get a very valuable comparison. We will find that the Irish language is there adopted in certain Nationalist quarters with the greatest enthusiasm which puts them right in the position in which the rest of the country was in the early 1920's. There the language is learned with enthusiasm by people who wish to identify themselves with everything Irish, but the urge has gone out of it here and we must face it. Possibly it was that some of the people who learned the language and were enthusiastic about it in the early stages were more concerned with opposition to Britain than with positive love for the Irish language and culture. I put that forward only as a suggestion because it is noticeable that, where Nationalist sentiment in Northern Ireland finds a need for expression, they turn to the language and are enthusiastic about it, whereas in the Twenty-Six Counties, where we have achieved our independence, the whole motive seems to have disappeared.

The suggestion was made by several Deputies, including Deputy Dillon, that there should be greater incentives to learn Irish. To my mind, the business of bribes, rewards or penalties is exactly what has damned the language up to now. Deputy Dillon went as far as to say that proficiency in the language should be made the passport to higher education. That would be just about the last word, because, up to now, so many people have failed examinations and have blamed Irish for it. If people are bried by being told that if they pass a certain examination in Irish, they will get certain privileged positions or certain posts, the position will always be as it is now, that, having learned that amount of the language, having passed the test and having secured the post, they drop the language like a hot potato and never go back to it. Bribes, rewards or penalties will get us nowhere. It is only if there is a positive love for the language that the language will survive.

There are difficulties at the moment but I believe they can be overcome. One difficulty has been impressed on me recently by my own child, that is, the difficulty caused by the use of Gaelic script and Roman script. My little girl was given a present of a beautiful book of folk tales. It was written in English and the Irish names were also written in English. She was reading the book very happily to herself and I asked her to read it to me, but she could not pronounce the Irish names. I said to her: "Surely your Irish is sufficiently good; you are getting good marks in Irish. Why can you not read the names?" She complained: "If only they would write them in Irish, I could read them, but when they write them in English, I do not know what they mean." She is young, only starting, but, although she is doing quite well and likes the language, already there is confusion arising. Once she drops her school books and starts reading a newspaper or any other standard writing in the Irish language, it will be in the Roman script and she will be confused by the spelling. Too many of our children are set back in that way and I have not yet seen any great evidence that that problem is being tackled.

I am glad that my child is concentrating more on the spoken word than on the written word. She is happy in it and likes speaking it and trying it out. I think the longer she can be kept off written Irish, the more chance she has of becoming enthusiastic about the language.

Oral Irish produces its own problems. There is the problem now of how to get a proper oral examination in Irish. I agree that an oral examination may be a good idea, but I can see that it will be an extraordinarily difficult task to conduct a nation-wide satisfactory oral examination in Irish. I agree with the Deputies who have stated that they have no great faith in examinations. I agree also that we are too fond of examinations and set too much store by them. So far as the language is concerned, I think we would do much better by putting the emphasis purely on oral teaching, with or without an oral examination.

In general, if there is sincere anxiety for the restoration of the language, the problem will solve itself. If there is not a passionate desire, or even a reasonable desire, for its restoration, we are only bashing our heads against a stone wall. The language cannot be saved by compulsion and it certainly will not be helped by primary instruction through a language which is not the language of the home. My own view is that the best we can possibly hope for is some measure of bilingualism, especially when higher education and much of the technical education will continue to be given through the medium of English.

There has been very little imagination used in this whole question. When one sees what an organisation like Gael-Linn is doing at the moment—a voluntary organisation which is bursting with enthusiasm, has boundless imagination and which seems to be making some progress—one wonders why it is that such a voluntary organisation seems to be able to do so much more than the State Departments.

The radio would be a tremendous help, so far as the language is concerned. Live radio broadcasts could be a tremendous help. More standardised pronunciation could be achieved in that way. There could be expert teaching which would be to the benefit of all the pupils. If the school radio programmes could be reintroduced, it would be possible to have more emphasis, or even a slight emphasis, on the teaching of music, which is completely impossible in the average national school. The national teacher cannot be expected to be able to teach music, as well as all the other subjects. By the use of the radio, music could be taught, especially choral singing, which would be of tremendous help to the children and something which everyone would desire.

I am not at all happy about the present system of examinations. I agree with Deputy Kitt that the primary certificate, as a compulsory examination, is open to very serious criticism. The examination system altogether, so far as I can find out, is becoming increasingly discredited as a means of discovering ability in a child, and when there are tens of thousands of children taking the primary certificate examination, it is utterly fantastic to suggest that there could be any attempt to arrange those tens of thousands in any order of priority. There is something to be said for trying to assess whether a child has reached a reasonable standard of education or not, but there is no use in juggling with 1 per cent. over a variety of subjects.

It is quite impossible for the markings to be anything like consistent. At the most, all that an examiner could reasonably say is that the student has passed or failed. It might even be possible for him to go as far as to say that a student has passed with honours. I do not think it is reasonable that these national examinations should be competitive in the sense of indicating that the first 50 students or the first 100 students are necessarily better than the succeeding 2,500. One cannot examine to that degree of fineness.

I hope some further attention will be given to the teaching of history. In some cases that have come to my knowledge, history has been taught in such a way that bitterness and hatred have been instilled into a child who would not otherwise know of them. I do not wish to gloss over any of the more painful events in our history, but these can be taught so as to be of educational value or so as to build up hatred and bitterness which can only continue the unfortunate division of our country.

I think, furthermore, history should be brought up to date as rapidly as possible. I know that is a very difficult thing to do in a dispassionate way, but if children are to be educated only up to the early nineteen hundreds and then left in a complete vacuum, it is small wonder they should be a little confused as to how we got here. It is difficult to do what I suggest, but I think some revision of the subject of history must be undertaken.

I agree with what Deputy Kitt and Deputy Manley said on the question of civics. I believe very much of our political apathy which manifests itself from time to time is due to the complete ignorance of the average person as to how the country is governed, how central and local government works. I was asked to speak to the children at one national school on the machinery of Government and I found them very much on their toes. Their questions were most searching. They were very interested and I believe I was able to make them possibly a little more interested. I am always delighted when I see school children brought in here. That is possible, obviously, only for schools in the city, but I hope every encouragement will be given to children to come here and learn more about the whole system of Government.

We are all agreed on the question of overcrowding in classes and I think the Minister agrees classes are too big. Ministers for Education have always agreed on that point, but somehow no progress appears to be made, and I do not feel it is sufficient to admit there is overcrowding or to deplore it. I think sooner or later—the sooner, the better, because it is a very urgent question—the Minister will have to take the bit in his teeth and say: "The maximum number of children in a class shall be such and such". I would say the number should be 30 at the very most. I believe overcrowding of classes is one of the main causes of illiteracy in this country to-day. I do not feel, as some people say, that the cause of the bad standard of education in compulsory Irish. I believe the main cause of a bad educational standard is overcrowding, which results in those who are slightly backward being ignored.

I know of one boy who came to me for employment. He produced a report from his own school. It was written in Irish by his headmaster. I could not follow it and I asked the boy to read it for me. He was unable to read his own school report in Irish. That could easily be used as an argument against the Irish language. I then tested him in English and he was equally bad on that subject. After a further chat, it became perfectly clear that the boy had failed, not due to over-emphasis on Irish, but simply because he was a slightly backward child—in fact, a definitely backward child. He had not been able to have individual attention and consequently he was illiterate in both languages. His mathematics were also bad; he had never been really educated at all and the sole reason for that, I am convinced, was that he had been "educated", as he told me, in a class of over 60 in a national school in the city.

One slightly backward child in a class of 60 has not the ghost of a chance of becoming educated and I feel this is a matter which has not been tackled with the urgency it deserves. Only when classes are of reasonable size can teachers have any chance of achieving some sort of personal relationship between themselves and the children, whereby they can know whether the education is actually reaching the child and being absorbed by him.

The delay in school building is another major problem and yet nobody ever seems to be able to tackle it. It usually finishes up with the Board of Works, and they always seem to get the blame. That may or may not be right, but the fact remains that it does take an enormously long time to get a new school built. By the time the parish contribution is agreed on, the site acquired, and so on, the question of plans being prepared arises and probably amendment of the plans. I believe a lot of the delay is due, possibly, to unnecessary amendments which are suggested by school managers when a new school is being built. I would hope that some of the delay could be eliminated if schools could be of a more or less standard design. I am all for beauty and colour and light in a school, but that does not mean there cannot be standardisation. If a new school is authorised in a certain area, it should be of a standard design, with no alteration or modification permitted.

From bitter experience, I know what happens when one starts to modify plans. It often seems such a small modification. You say to your architect: "That wall could come out and that room would be 2'6" longer. That will help by giving additional light." Then you suddenly discover that that alters the roofing structure, which alters the ventilation system, which alters something else, so that months and months pass before you get it all settled. I would hope the Department of Education would agree to a standard design with the Board of Works and possibly eliminate some of the delay. I am disappointed there is no sign of pressure exerted by the Department of Education on the Board of Works to stop this delay or reduce it very considerably.

Some Deputies have referred to the standing of teachers in the community. I agree that they are not now given the respect to which I believe they are entitled. They are sometimes treated as if they were only amateurs at the job of education and as if the real experts on education were already ensconced in the Department itself.

It is disturbing to find so much criticism coming so consistently from the I.N.T.O., with so little sign of any appreciation of that criticism by the Minister and his Department. It may be that the Minister appreciates it and considers it very carefully. It is a pity that, possibly, the public relations end is not so good and that there is not evidence of careful consideration of that information and advice which is coming back to headquarters from, say, the front line of battle.

As far as secondary schools are concerned, it is gratifying to see that the number of students is increasing. Here again, I feel the community is cashing-in on the teaching Orders, on the church communities and church organisations who have taken the lead in secondary education. Through the churches, secondary education is now available to many who would not otherwise be able to enjoy it. Secondary education is no longer confined to the children of the rich. It is gratifying that others are now able to avail of it.

The resources of our existing secondary schools and colleges are still very limited. In that connection, it is a great disappointment to me that the capitation grant which was cut last year has not been restored. I feel that that was a very false economy. The amount saved to the Exchequer was not very large. From a long-term point of view, to cut back on the capitation grant to secondary schools is only cutting off your nose to spite your face. We need the highest possible standard of secondary education if this country is to grow and prosper.

There is a tendency in some of our secondary schools—I think possibly the Department might be able to counter it—to prepare boys and girls for the professions or for purely clerical jobs such as office jobs, and so on. I would hope that the maximum encouragement would be given to students willing to study agriculture or science. I believe the tendency towards the introduction of agricultural teaching, even for very short periods, would be helpful as it would counteract the present tendency of many people to go into the professions which are already overcrowded.

A greater emphasis on science is to be desired in view of the present scientific developments in the world. Progress in scientific teaching cannot take place unless the equipment is available with which to teach it. With the capitation grant cut back, secondary schools are finding it inceasingly difficult to provide the equipment and, even more so, to secure teachers who, having good science degrees, are well able to secure much more remunerative employment in scientific work either here or in Great Britain.

With the movement towards European unity, which is undoubtedly coming, I would hope for a greater emphasis on all-over proficiency in at least one other continental language. It is a tremendous handicap when travelling on the Continent to find that, possibly, even if you can read French with some ease, you are unable to answer a simple question or even ask one. As we become more and more integrated with Europe, I feel this is a matter of increasing importance and that greater stress should be placed on the teaching of a continental modern language rather than on a written language.

There has been some discussion as to whether corporal punishment should or should not be permissible. Corporal punishment for bad answering is indefensible and can be most damaging to a child. I can sympathise with the teacher in an overcrowded class who has to resort to corporal punishment in a desperate endeavour to maintain discipline. However, if corporal punishment is to be used it should very carefully be controlled and used only in cases of rank indiscipline. I would hope that corporal punishment for bad answering would be forbidden altogether.

With regard to the Estimate in general, I am disappointed that there is not a greater sense of urgency. There has been unjustifiable criticism on the question of expenditure on school building. With the present rate at which the Board of Works can work, it does not seem as if there is any point in making an increased Estimate this year if the Board of Works cannot produce the result. Therefore, the reduced Estimate for this year will not, we hope, mean any reduction in actual expenditure.

Over all, I feel there is not a sufficiently acute sense of urgency as to what is really required to be done before our system of education can give us any cause for satisfaction. I should like to finish as I began by saying that this is not purely an Irish problem. It is a general problem. There is general dissatisfaction with educational policy in other countries as well as in our own.

It may be possible to devise a system which will give us cause for real pride and which will produce the desired result, namely, the production of people whose education does not cease when they leave school and who are sufficiently educated to go on educating themselves after leaving school. That means educating people to have receptive minds—not educating people just to assimilate a certain course of instruction and to be able to reproduce the required answers to specific questions. Unless we can get rid of parrot answering, the whole system is defeated. We must strive to devise a system of education which will allow children to develop in their own way and in their own time. We must provide a chance to the child who is less brilliant to have some individual attention from the teacher while giving the child who is undoubtedly brilliant an equal chance to get some special attention also so that he or she can go on to win scholarships and go to a secondary school and later, perhaps, the university.

I would hope that, by the introduction of some of the agricultural subjects in our educational system as soon as possible, we would get away from the present trend which is that country people almost tend to look down on agriculture and feel that the highest goal is to get into a bank, the Civil Service, or some white-collar job. I feel that that is one of the causes of weakness in the whole country to-day. If we are to put agriculture back in its proper place it will have to be done right from the start and primary and secondary education is the real start of the whole thing. For that reason, I would hope that we can have a reappraisal of the whole question of education. Councils of education or consultative bodies seem to me to be too ponderous for that. They may help, to a certain extent.

I hope the Minister with a real sense of urgency, will try to see whether he can establish more confidence between himself and the teachers' organisations and more confidence between the parents of the children at present at school and the policy of his Department. One has only to look at the correspondence columns in some of the papers to see that considerable dissatisfaction is making itself known at the present time. Do not let us feel we are failing more than anybody else, but do let us try to take a lead in this matter, so that Irish education will be something that people will come here to sample and to learn from us. I believe we can do it, but we cannot do it at the present pace.

Captain Giles

This is an Estimate for a Department which I believe deserves every sympathy, and the Minister may be quite satisfied that I am not standing up to criticise either him or his Department. The Department of Education gets more criticism than most other Departments and I do not intend to adopt that line. This has been a mixed kind of debate, but I can say that, taken all in all, our educational standards are just as good as those in any other country. In fact, if we had more money available, we would be in a better position than most countries. Taking it all in all, we are just as good as anybody else, and many countries would envy the educational facilities that we have here.

The teachers in this country have a hard and difficult task. They are much criticised and I am sorry for that because they are really the hub of the whole educational system. About 70 per cent. of our people are unable to go any further than the primary education stage. They have not the money to go on to higher educational standards, and therefore we must concentrate on our primary education services and see that they are up to the highest standard possible.

In that connection, there are many snags in country areas which Deputies discover. I am quite satisfied that many of the teachers in country schools work under great handicaps. I have very little to say about the bigger centres because the teachers in the schools there have every facility that it is possible to obtain. Because of the handicaps, good teachers leave country areas and go into the cities like Dublin, Cork and Waterford, and into the bigger towns. The same thing is happening in connection with school children.

To give the country schools and the country teachers a chance, no child should be allowed to move out of his own country area school until he is 14 years of age, but I find that that is not being practised. The result is that people are acquiring superiority and inferiority complexes about the country schools. Some people do not want their little darlings left in country schools and think, if they can get them up to a big centre, they are more of the élite and are doing better. We should put our foot down and see that every child goes to his own local country school, and mix with the ordinary school children in his own area.

There is nothing wrong in a child mixing with country schoolchildren, but we have that kind of snobbery in certain people—not many—with the result that they are trying to remove their children from country areas into the bigger towns. The Minister and the Department should consider this trend, as it is a development that is not to be welcomed. If it continues, we will have no settlement of teachers in country areas. Good teachers will come to country areas for a few years, look around them, and then move back to the larger centres.

The foundations of our people's education are laid in the national schools in country areas, but there is one problem which has proven difficult to solve down through the years and which has caused great anxiety amongst teachers. It is a problem we should do something about. There should be decent school buildings in country areas. As far as the money is available, we are building new schools as fast as we possibly can, but more money should be made available. Many old schools should be knocked down and new schools built, with all the amenities which the schools in the bigger towns and cities have. In that way, we will have a happy, contented teaching profession, happy to live in country areas.

Another big problem is the provision of private dwellinghouses for teachers in country areas. In many parts of the country, it is very hard for a young teacher to get a house near his school. He often has to live in a second or third-rate type of house, down a lane or boreen. That is not right. We must treat the teacher as somebody superior, as somebody well educated, as somebody whom we want to live amongst the people. School managers should see to matters in this regard so that decent houses will be provided for teachers in country areas, especially for family men, because it is the family men we want. They will settle down and spend their lives in the areas where they are teaching.

There is a lot of discontent amongest young teachers who have just completed their training because their initial salary is very small. It is very little better than that of road workers and I think there should be a better starting salary. The initial salary should be bigger, even if the increments were to be smaller later on. I would suggest that we should start them off with a decent salary, so that they could mix in a decent community life and could be the leaders in the community. They should not be in the position of watching from day to day to see when their salary is coming. They should be independent, and the Minister should see that they start at a decent salary level, so that they may settle down to a decent life in country areas and stay in those areas.

I believe that, with the influx of people to the towns and cities, the school leaving age should be raised to 15 years. In the building of new schools, we should put an end to the building of two-teacher schools. They should all be built for three teachers. I have seen a definite snag in that connection arising in my own country. Two-teacher schools were built, but, with the division of land and the migration of people into the area, we found the schools were too small and we often had to patch on another schoolroom. Even though a new two-teacher school is considered sufficient, there is no reason why it should not have a third room, because, with the development of vocational education, we can use any spare room there may be in a national school for the purposes of vocational education. Any third room so provided would not be a loss and I would ask the Minister to see that no more two-teacher schools are built.

I was critical here, 15 or 20 years ago, of the Department of Education for building large vocational schools in certain centres. They could not get the children to attend them and I saw schools which cost a vast amount of money with only six or seven pupils attending them. Now, all that has been changed. The common people realise what vocational education can mean to them and to their children and we have masses of children seeking vocational education. Indeed, we cannot accommodate them all. I should like to see vocational education spreading out over the whole country, but I should not like to see big vocational schools being built in various centres. I should like to see every five national schools being treated as a group that would provide a vocational centre. One of the schools should have an extra room or two, where a vocational centre could be established. We could combine the five national schools as a centre, with one as a pivot from which vocational education could be spread throughout the area.

There is no reason why we should not give vocational education to all our people. At present, we are giving it to the privileged few, to those who are near large centres and to those who can travel to those centres, but the vast majority of our people are very far away from them. It will cost money, but it will be money well spent, and it will give a profit in many ways in days to come. The day of the ordinary rough and tumble man is gone and the day of the trade and profession is here. I look to vocational education to provide for our general advancement.

When a child leaves school at 14 he is by no means developed as a man fit to go into the world. He is only ready to assimilate knowledge then and if you let him go out at 14 it leaves him ignorant. A follow-up is needed. I think 15 years should be the leaving age for the primary schools and after that the pupils should be able to go to vocational centres. If you concentrated on developing the spoken word between the ages of 14 and 15 it would mean a great advance for the Irish language. Young people at that age are beginning to acquire knowledge and they have an incentive to go ahead with anything connected with education. At that age too, they have a good national spirit; it is only afterwards that they lose that spirit when they go out and mix with other people.

The Irish language could be developed very much in the vocational schools. Vocational education is advancing by leaps and bounds. In that regard I must congratulate the Department and the Minister, and our excellent teachers throughout the country areas, for the manner in which it is advancing. We are also advancing rapidly in the agricultural sphere. In my own area, where I am a member of the county committee of agriculture, we are going as fast as we can. We are building pig byres and poultry houses attached to the vocational schools and we are embarking on various types of horticulture. Those are the things which are required. We want to put the agricultural stamp on vocational education so that people will continue to live in the rural areas.

We are also developing, in my country, something which I think is novel—an Irish-speaking college for a month every year. We are embarking on it this year and we are handing it over to private people who are public spirited and nationally minded and of the type to further the Irish language. They are not even national teachers, but people drawn from different parts of the county, who have their hearts set on seeing the development of everything Irish.

We are going to have an Irish-speaking month in this college in Navan. From the highest teacher to the maid in the kitchen nobody will speak anything but Irish during that month; no other language will be heard there. That is a novel departure and although ours is a county of the Pale we are very forward with the Irish language, just as we were in the old days. Meath is in the forefront and the people there are as national minded and as progressive in this regard as the people in the West of Ireland. I hope that other counties will take a lead from us. Developments of that character will give the people a better spirit, a spirit which will help to resurrect the language. We have a Trojan job to combat the materialism of to-day. I am satisfied that we are doing everything possible to revive the proper spirit to ensure that our nationality is kept intact and that our nation is kept progressive.

There are always pessimists and "doleful Jimmies" in this House and elsewhere who ask: "What good is the language?" One did not hear the English ask: "What good is the language?" One did not hear the Germans or the Poles ask that question; they all held on to their language. For 600 years we fought for the language and are we, who have freedom to express ourselves and to work in our own interests, to fall down on the task? I do not believe we should fall down on it. I believe those cranks and place-hunters must be given a back seat in this country; then those who believe in a nation once again will come to the forefront.

I do not believe in forcing anything down anybody's throat. The Irish people never liked compulsion; when there was compulsion the Irish got their backs up and fought against it. There has been a lot of nonsesical talk and the language revival started off on a false step. Those cranks and place-hunters got to the forefront and they sickened the people. I knew many men who were shouting from morning until night about the Irish language but the moment they got what they wanted they were never spoke on a platform again and never spoke the language again. That sort of conduct sickens the Irish people. Some people at present learn the Irish language solely to get into good jobs because if they do not know the language they do not get the jobs. That is a side of the language problem which should be examined.

We must try to get the spoken language going. At the present moment there is need for a review to ascertain whether we are going forward, whether we are a standstill or whether we are going back. I believe the vast majority of the people who went to school after my period acquired a good knowledge of the language and that knowledge could easily be revived. My own children may not speak much of the language but when they listen to the Irish news on Radio Eireann they understand every word of it and are are able to say exactly what the English news is going to be. I give full credit to the national school teachers who have done their share, and more than their share, in reviving the language. Schools have done Trojan work, particularly the Christian Brothers who are in the forefront and are doing more than their share, but the people outside must take over once the children leave school.

Our little Irish colony provides the required follow-up in building up a spirit of enthusiasm. We are getting more pupils than we can cater for and that is a good sign. I would ask the Department to take a special note of it and to see that the system is fostered in other counties. If that is done the people will get their superiority complex back again and they will not be going around with bowed heads. In other days the people who were Irish educated were sneered at, but the day of the sneer has gone.

While other things must be kept going, the revival of the Irish language is so essential that we cannot let it slip backwards. I would ask the Department and the Minister to see that the project which we have started—if it is a success, as I believe it will be— will be furthered throughout the country and that we will have several of those colleges started so that the people can go there in the summer and practise speaking the language. I believe that the language will be restored and that it is being saved at the present day. I am not afraid to say that the language is dead; it was never more alive than it is to-day. The present generation is just as good as previous generation and requires only a lead.

There is great apathy and indifference at present. All the people want now are material pleasures, sport and, if they can get it, money in the easiest possible way, but these things are not everything in life. There is more in life than material progress. There is the spirit of man. Man was endowed with the spirit of endeavour for the betterment of himself and his country. I believe we can get that spirit back. again.

The views of the national teachers are important and I would ask the Minister to consult them as a body in connection with the revival of the language. Ninety per cent. of the teachers are keen on seeing the language revived and they do their share towards that end. For that reason, they are entitled to be consulted. Many of them complain that it is hard to start off a child on Irish and contend that a child should be started on the language of its home. There is something in that and it should be looked into. Until a child comes to the use of reason, it should speak the language of its home, even in the classroom. It is difficult for a child to come in from an English-speaking home and start off speaking Irish.

I want to deal with some local matters concerning the building of vocational schools. But for the crux of finance, we would have a vocational school in Navan by now. The position there regarding vocational education is chronic. Pupils and teachers are scattered in buildings in six different parts of the town and some of the places are not very healthy, either—overcrowded, old ruins. I would ask the Minister to give this matter foremost consideration because Navan is the centre of a very populous area where there are a number of industrial firms. The people there want vocational education, but they cannot get it until this new school is built. I would ask the Minister to make every effort to see that the money is provided for that school.

The Department have passed the school for Oldcastle and everything is ready, if the Board of Works do their share, but we all know they have a happy knack of putting everything on the long finger. I want the Board of Works to give us the plans and get going. If they hold it up, we will not get the school for years. We are entitled to the school now because we have been waiting four or five years for it. I would ask the Minister to give the boys in the Board of Works a punch in the ribs to get going with the Oldcastle school.

Of all the Minister of State, the Minister for Education has the hardest task. He and his Department are the most criticised. That is unjust. In this country, we have a problem of reviving a language almost killed. We are proud of the language and we must teach it, even if it means a lowering of our standard of education. But our standard of education is not being lowered. There are very few illiterate people in this country to-day; they have a good, solid basis of education. I know two pupils who left a school in my area and went to England where they were put in classes similar to those they were in here. They were put up for examinations and both came to the top, beating every English pupil. They were ordinary simple pupils of a country school here. We are not an illiterate nation. We are just as good as any nation in the world, and better. If we can revive our spirit, we will be a nation of which the world can be proud.

The task ahead of us is to restore the language in a common-sense way. Do not try to push it down the people's throats. Instead, foster a love of the language in the hearts of the people. I want to see our language, native games, folklore and national traditions all linked together. We should not concentrate on the revival of the language alone. We should foster them all together and get our spirit back. The shoneens and place hunters are whining and crying that the revival of the language prevents their children from getting proper educational facilities. They are getting facilities as good as anybody else. It is only the people with a grudge who are in the forefront to-day, writing letters to the papers and so on.

Some sincere men believe we have the wrong way of teaching Irish. I would respect their views, but I would not respect the views of many others because they are the views of disgruntled men. We had those people 30 years ago and we carried out our duty in spite of them. We silenced them then and if we do our duty to-day, we will silence them again.

Mr. Loughman

During the past year I happened to be in the Seanad Chamber one day when there was a debate on this question of the Gaelic revival. I listened to two speakers. One of them, I understand, is a socialist. The other, if we were to give him a label outside Party, we would call a conservative. It really amazed me that both of them had the same idea, that, while the Gaelic language is a wonderful thing, a beautiful language, very expressive and so on, we ought to realise that it was now time to relegate it to the realm of dead languages.

During this year also in this House I gathered the impression from Deputy Dr. Browne and Deputy McQuillan that they also felt that this language revival movement should not be pursued. Since these two Deputies have recently found a more or less socialistic outlook, I came to the conclusion that the socialist speaker in the Seanad and these two people have a purely materialistic outlook and measure everything in terms of bread and butter. I could understand their outlook, but I definitely could not understand the outlook of the Senator I referred to as a conservative, because I knew that person to be a man who set a very high value on things that were old and beautiful and that in fact he had spent enormous sums of money to become the possessor of articles of that description, and yet, with all his love for the Gaelic language, he was prepared to see it a dead language.

All the charges made in this House and outside it against the revival movement, I find very foolish. We are told that it hinders children going to school and we are also told that the children regard Irish as a penance on them. My personal experience is that neither of these things is true. The children do not regard it as a penance and I do not think it hinders them in their learning at all. In fact, I believe they gain by reason of the fact they are studying Irish as well as English. When I was at school many years ago, Irish was not taught in the school I attended. But if it was not, French was taught and Latin was taught. The fact that these subjects, among others, were taught did not keep us backward, so far as acquiring knowledge was concerned and did not interfere with our learning. True, we were not able to learn French in such a way as to permit us to speak French when we went to France. We certainly acquired an excellent knowledge of English and I hold that the knowledge of English which the youngsters of to-day have is at least equal to the English spoken by their counterparts in Britain, which is the home of the English language. Abroad, I have met many people who are fluent in two languages. In practically every country on the Continent, a second language must be learned, and learned as a spoken language. I do not think that the people suffer because of that.

Deputy Dr. Browne referred to the modern trend towards internationalism and he said that any barrier towards internationalism should be removed. He suggested that the maintaining of a nationalistic outlook was contrary to the modern trend towards internationalism. During the time I was in Strasbourg, I was connected with a bilingual movement. It was called the "Anglo-French Bilingual Movement". The strange thing was, I found, that nationalism was stronger then in all of the 15 countries constituting the Council of Europe than it has been at any time since.

The proposal that French and English should be the two languages which the Council of Europe would sponsor caused the breakdown; the Germans wanted German to be one of the languages; the Danes wanted Danish; and the Italians wanted their own language. The outlook was purely nationalistic rather than international in that council chamber on that issue.

Deputy Dr. Browne is completely at sea if he thinks nationalism is going out and that internationalism will oust it. From my observation, it is quite clear that every country in Europe thinks very highly of its own language. At the same time, most countries are anxious that a second language should be acquired and I am certain that they do not believe that the acquisition of a second language will hurt their knowledge of their own language.

Many people seem to think that when we advocate the use of Irish by our own people, we are against the teaching of English. That is one of the most foolish statements that is being made on this issue, but unfortunately it is one which is generally believed. I regard our knowledge of English as one of our greatest possessions. I have no illusions where the worth of a knowledge of English is concerned. It it the language of a great number of people all over the world. I believe we should continue teaching English and, not alone that, but we should give our children as perfect a knowledge of English as we possibly can. That is not to say that I am not equally convinced that we should persist in our determination to make Irish the spoken language of our people. Many times I have felt humiliated abroad, and I have been going abroad for the last 30 years, when, because I spoke in English, people asked me was I English and I had to explain the position to them. That may be a small thing, but the fact is that Irish is one of our greatest possessions.

Deputy T. Lynch asked a few days ago what was our Irish heritage? He did not answer the question. One portion of our heritage is our language, the language which was spoken here 2,000 years ago, and which is still alive in part of this country, at any rate. I remember the old people speaking Irish in the town in which I was born over 50 years ago. When the old people did not wish the young people to know what they were talking about, they spoke in Gaelic. In my town quite recently, a man, who is fond of following the sporting news after his day's work, was studying form and two of his youngsters were kicking up a bit of a row. He could not read and he told them to "Shut up" or "Be quiet," and one kid turned to the other and said something in Gaelic and the two children burst out laughing. Vexed, the father said: "They are gone too far with this Irish." The tables have turned completely. The young people of to-day talk Irish when they do not want their parents to know what they are saying.

Irish was never stronger than it is to-day. I know youngsters of 14, 15 and 16 who can talk in Gaelic amongst themselves. Deputy Giles mentioned a college in Meath for the propagation of Gaelic in which nothing but Gaelic will be spoken. In my town, a number of people—doctors, veterinary surgeons, teachers, employees in the county council offices and so forth— meet every fortnight for a social in which nothing but Gaelic is spoken. All the signs are that, if we persist on our present lines, notwithstanding the pessimistic talk we hear from time to time, Irish will be revived. That thought cheers me considerably because I would hate to think that it was in this generation Irish was allowed to die.

I would support Deputy Dillon and Deputy Corish in what they said about corporal punishment. Deputy Booth said he favoured corporal punishment, but not for bad answering. Corporal punishment was the order of the day when I was a youngster. It was meted out without favour to all in the class. No slur was cast on any particular child. If a child was slapped, he was slapped because he deserved it. I believe that corporal punishment is kinder than the mental punishment which can be inflicted in a tongue-thrashing or through the medium of sarcasm. I see nothing wrong with a youngster getting a little slap from a teacher. I have the greatest faith in teachers generally.

There are, I suppose, 15,000 or 20,000 teachers in the country. There may be an odd black sheep amongst them. In every group you will find people of that description, but because one or two of them are on the side of being brutal is no reason why the remainder of them should be under such a ban that they cannot slap a child if he is doing something which is completely wrong. I see nothing whatsover wrong in suitable correction and I would encourage the Minister to take little heed of the protestations of Deputy Dr. Browne who, in my opinion, lives very often in a world outside this world altogether.

I have also listened to criticisms of the progress made in the matter of building schools. As far as I can judge, wonderful progress has been made in that regard since this State was founded. All over the country we see new schools replacing the dungeons in which children were taught many years ago. So far as secondary education is concerned, I see improvement even there. I know two towns quite close to me in which new secondary boarding-schools have been erected; in other towns new secondary schools have also been erected. The two new boarding-schools definitely must mean that a greater number of people are attending secondary schools.

I am not one of those, however, who believe we should have secondary schools for every child in the country. I think it was Deputy Desmond who recommended that the school leaving age should be increased to 15 years. I would be very happy about that but unfortunately we have not teachers for the children we have with the age limit at 14 nor have we classrooms for them. If we were to increase the age limit to 15 our difficulties would be greatly increased. Perhaps as time passes—Rome was not built in a day— we shall reach a period when we shall be able to increase the school leaving age and have accommodation and teachers to meet that situation.

While I was a member of the Seanad I heard a plea made by the university professors. They made the case that the universities were starved for money, that they had not sufficient classrooms, that they had poor equipment and that the salaries they received to pay their professors would not enable them to obtain the best professors possible. I believe that was true and the Minister of the day, having heard the professors and those of use who supported them, did make them an additional grant. I still feel that the universities should get from the State greater monetary support, and I would recommend to the Minister that, if he finds it at all possible, he should certainly see to it that our universities will be able to employ the best possible professors obtainable in the world and that the equipment available to them and the classrooms will be up to the required standard.

I should like to conclude by stating that we should not be pessimistic so far as Gaelic is concerned and that, when a policy is decided upon as to the method of teaching Irish, we should all support that policy rather than be critical of it. All our trouble comes from the fact that we decide that Irish should be taught in a particular way; those who say it should be taught in another way object and this constant objecting makes it difficult to do anything. If we are all united in regard to one system—because there is always more than one system of doing anything well—we shall eventually reach the objective at which I am glad to note everybody in the House who spoke aims, an Ireland in which Irish, our own language, will be our vernacular.

Mr. Coogan

We have before us an Estimate for £15,000,000 for education for the Twenty-Six Counties. That figure compares very well with the figure for the Six Counties, £17,000,000. Our standard of education also compares very well with either the North or England, and one would be prompted to say that all this talk about Irish costing so much is just ballyhoo.

We hear Ministers talk about economy and I think the best place to start it is in the schools. We have parents of large families burdened with the cost of school books, books which change practically every year. The book that Johnny is using in his class will not suit Tommy next year. If you look at the school children's copy book you will see at times just one line of writing on a page. There is a lot of waste, but these are merely pointers to the economies which could be effected.

There is need for more physical culture in our schools and for the promotion of athletics. It is in the interest of our children to give them a more healthy outlook, to teach them, as a means of helping them in their future life, what it is to give and take. School children should also be given a quarter of an hour's lecture periodically on road sense by a member of the Garda. Such a lecture now and again would make an impression on children and might be the means of saving a child's life.

I should like also to see something done in our schools to instil a proper civic spirit into our children, a spirit which is lacking nowadays. A great deal of vandalism is rife. I know it is the responsibility of the parents in the first instance but a number of fathers of families must, for economic reasons, migrate and the mother may not have a sufficiently strong hand to put the children on the right path. Much has been said about sparing the rod. From these anonymous societies who raise their heads and say: "Save the children" one would think they were being attacked. If we had a little more of the rod there would be fewer teddy boys behind prison bars. One has only to look around in the public streets to-day to see the amount of vandalism that can be traced to the fact that some children have been too softly treated.

This is an important Vote. It concerns the moulding of the character of our future citizens. It is in our schools that children should be taught their duties. We hear a lot of talk nowadays about people's rights. If people were taught, first of all, their duties to their fellow-citizens, we would all have our rights. It is in the schools these things can be formulated and more attention should be given to instilling them into the children.

In regard to the schooling of itinerant children, we hear a lot about putting the itinerants off the road. Apart from housing them, there is only one way to deal with them and that is to fit them out for life, give them a sense of dignity and a sense of responsibility. We have them going around the country, no longer illiterate but a responsibility we are not prepared to face up to. Everyone is down on them.

On the question of the bright pupil, it is known that the bright pupil is pushed on at the expense of the less brilliant. The teacher wants to show results, but it is unfortunate that it should be at the expense of the child who is not so bright. We have seen in after life that the child who appeared to be dull has proved to be away ahead when given a chance. I should like the Department to see that the parents are given an indication as often as possible of the progress or otherwise of the children. It is not always given. Thereby, the parents might be able to co-operate with the schools.

Before I close, I would like to ask the Minister's view on the question of the pre-1950 teachers. There are not so many of them left that it would cost a terrible lot to do justice to them.

I notice in the figures a saving under certain heads on casual labour in our colleges. There is not a lot involved, but I think it is false economy. It will not save a lot to the Department, but it will cut down on the unfortunate worker. Perhaps the Minister would consider that point.

I should like to refer to the equipment in our university colleges. It is a point into which the Minister, himself a graduate, should go, to see that the equipment is not so obsolete. We have evidence throughout the country nowadays of the need for good equipment and, with the full pressure of free trade, we should enable our universities to meet such a situation. I would congratulate the Department on the figure put before us. When one compares it with the figure for the six northern counties, it is certainly something that we can be proud of and we are not ashamed of the little we have spent on the Irish language. Sin é an méid.

Mr. Russell

Before I offer what I hope will be constructive remarks on the Minister's Estimate, I should like to congratulate the Minister and the Department on the report he presented to the House. His report, and those of previous Ministers, indicate that over the past 35 years, in spite of our shortcomings, particularly in regard to capital, we have made tremendous progress in the provision of education facilities in every grade—primary, vocational and university. It is easy to be critical and not to consider the many difficulties which must have presented themselves to successive Ministers for Education.

Having said that, I should like to offer a few comments on the work of the Department in general and on the whole question of education, which is a very large one and indeed one with which I am not competent to deal at all. Any consideration of education in this country must have regard to certain vital factors. To my mind, the first one is the past history of the country, the years during which the country was under foreign domination and the almost successful efforts to anglicise the country. That meant the banning of Irish almost completely as the medium of the people. In addition to the concerted effort to stamp out the language there was a concerted effort to stamp out everything that was part of the integral Irish tradition. It is important to remember that.

When we speak in terms of the revival of the Irish language, what we should really talk about is restoring the Irish traditions which were so very nearly lost up to the foundation of the present State. When we consider methods in the primary and secondary schools and in the universities to extend Irish and make it the spoken tongue, we really are considering only one factor in the whole question of the living Irish tradition. In my view, pure concentration on the teaching of Irish will not of itself have the desired result. I read with interest correspondence, articles and booklets that appeared in recent years on this whole question.

One cannot escape the fact that statements, that little or no Irish is spoken once the pupil leaves primary or secondary school, are only too true. They may not be completely true and I do not want to contribute too strongly on that theme, because I know it is quoted as an expression of failure to revive Irish as a spoken tongue. However, it is a fact and no useful purpose can be served by burying our heads in the sand and not facing up to the realities of the situation. It is a fact that thousands of schoolchildren leave primary or secondary education every year and seldom if ever use the native tongue again.

Again I must emphasise that I am not an expert in education. My knowledge of education is extremely slight indeed and my suggestions are made in the humble knowledge that they are only the suggestions of one who has little knowledge of education. However, if we accept and keep in mind the factor I mention, the need to restore the integral Irish tradition, uppermost in our minds must be the aim to make Irish—whether it is to be written or oral, and personally I think there is a strong case in favour of oral Irish only, at least in the primary schools—something which is associated with the most pleasant part of the curriculum of the entire school day. Then the children will look forward to that particular hour or two, during which there will be games or discussions or film shows, which the child normally associates with something that is pleasant, easily assimilated and easily expressed.

I am not so much concerned about the method. I am not competent to talk about methods or suggest methods. If we keep in mind the objective of associating the assimilation of Irish and the speaking of Irish with something associated with the pleasant part of the school day we shall have made a tremendous step forward.

The late Dr. Douglas Hyde, first President of this State, described the Irish language as being necessary in order to de-anglicise the country. I think that is a very true statement of what is needed. In addition to the language, everything else must be taken into consideration—Irish history, dancing and music. All these subjects must be associated together in the child's mind and in the student's mind later on.

I do not think sufficient credit is given to Irish teachers for the part they are expected to play in the restoration of the language as the spoken tongue. The normal people to teach the children the mother tongue are the parents. We have entrusted the teachers with the task of teaching the child a language which is possibly different from its mother's tongue and which, in nine cases out of ten in this country, is English. We are asking the teachers to undertake a task which, if we were normally bilingual or speaking the one tongue, should be undertaken by the parents. That is putting a most unusual and very grave responsibility on the teachers. It needs a teacher of tremendous knowledge and appreciation of his vocation to carry out that task, day in, day out and year in, year out.

I feel that we should let the teachers know we appreciate the task they are trying to perform. They should be adequately rewarded for what they are expected to do. They are not merely being asked to teach the children but they are being asked to reintegrate those children into the Irish tradition in language and music and to appreciate the country's history, something which, for one reason or another, the parents are not in a position to impart to the children. No matter how successful we are in school, in associating the teaching of Irish with the pleasant section of the school day, if we cannot go outside the school and regain the upsurge of enthusiasm which was there up to 1921 and the Civil War and the split which wrecked it, I do not see how we can ever hope to revive Irish as a spoken language.

That means a tremendous effort on the part of all of us, parents, public men and others in whatever walk of life they may be. It needs our help and enthusiasm. The duty falls on us to create that climate of enthusiasm which will allow the language to blossom and become a truly spoken language. If we adults cannot do that, I do not see how Irish can hope to survive as a spoken tongue with the impact of what is termed the modern Anglo-American civilisation. With the changes which are taking place so rapidly in the world and with the tremendous scientific and technological progress, I do not see how Irish can hope to survive unless adults are cognisant of the part they have to play and play that part.

I should like to see more colleges like Ring College, Ballingeary and others set up particularly in the non-Gaeltacht areas. I think that within these colleges you have that spirit to which I referred a few moments ago where the child, quite naturally and without any pressure, speaks the language. Even if the children leave the school and come out for a day or two with the parents, the children, as I have reason to know, continue to speak the language among themselves. That certainly shows that, given the right atmosphere, enthusiasm and the necessary encouragement from adults to create that environment, Irish can be revived as a living language but only in such circumstances.

Great cultural and sporting organisations like the G.A.A. could do much more to make Irish the spoken language in my humble opinion. I also think that the Catholic Church could do a lot more. Certain church leaders such as the Most Reverend Dr. Lucey, Bishop of Cork, have given a very encouraging lead in that regard. I think that in other dioceses and parishes throughout the country a lead could be given to the people by the clergy.

The figures in respect of the number of children enrolled in the national schools—I am not quite certain whether national schools mean primary schools also—are an indication of the increasing number of young people who seek primary education every year. It is very encouraging. I think I am correct in saying that drawing is not a subject in the primary schools. If that is so, I think it is a great pity because, harking back to what I said at the outset of my few remarks, you cannot restore the Irish tradition by teaching language alone. You must teach the child an appreciation of the art and culture of its own country. One way of doing that is to allow the child to draw and have an appreciation of pictures and other art forms and culture. I should like to see included, in some form or another on the curriculum of the primary school, drawing or some other subject associated with art and culture.

I am glad the Minister has decided from next year onwards to include an oral test for the leaving certificate examination. I think that is a very definite step in the right direction. I have seen suggestions made by experts, real or alleged, that all written Irish should be done away with and that we should confine ourselves to oral Irish. Again, I am not competent to judge whether or not that suggestion is a sensible one. Anything which increases the speaking of Irish should be welcomed and the Minister is to be congratulated upon that development. I presume that in time the same oral test will be added to the examination for the intermediate certificate.

We should all like to see an expansion in the facilities for secondary teaching. The fact that only something like one-fifth of the number of the pupils who attend national schools go on to secondary schools is indicative of the gap which has to be made up. I appreciate, as the Minister stated when introducing his Estimate, that the matter of finance is very important. Ours is a small nation and we are not wealthy. The best thing we can do is to make the most of our resources. One sensible way of increasing the numbers attending secondary schools would be to give more grants, directly or through the local county and city councils.

On the question of vocational schools, I do think that the fact that vocational schools are to a large extent controlled independently of the Department of Education has led to overlapping in the provision of buildings. If there had been closer integration between the vocational schools and the primary or secondary schools, the erection of many of the buildings dotted all over the country, to a large extent unused or only partly used, could have been avoided. If the small technical school, particularly in a rural area, could have been attached to the primary or secondary school, a considerable amount of capital outlay on buildings could have been saved and a flow of pupils from the primary school to the vocational school would have been created.

In his report the Minister rightly referred to the emphasis nowadays on the teaching of science and technical education generally. If we intend to keep abreast of the rapid modern developments in technology and science, we must educate our people in these subjects. I should like to see them equipped to stay at home and give the benefit of their skills to their own country but, again, we must face realities and for as long as anyone here can foresee, a substantial proportion of our people will emigrate annually. We all want to see the present excessive rate of emigration reduced but we would be fooling ourselves if we did not appreciate that every year many thousands of young Irish men and women will want to go abroad for one reason or another not connected with financial reasons.

We owe a duty to these young people to send them out equipped with the necessary skills and education to earn the best possible place they can for themselves in communities outside this country. That necessities, in addition to a knowledge of the language of their own country, that they should have a competent knowledge of the English language. It would be fatal that the acquisition of a knowledge of the Irish language should in any way conflict with the acquisition of a really competent knowledge of the English language, which is essential, particularly where young people have to emigrate or wish to emigrate.

I do not wish to say very much on the question of university education. That is a subject that is discussed very often. We listen to appeals from various university authorities for increased grants for the expansion of university buildings to cater for the growing number of students. I should like to refer to the City of Limerick which has no university facilities. There has been a persistent and growing demand in Limerick over the years for some form of university education. That is not a wild or unreasonable demand. It is a demand for the fulfilment of a real and growing want in Limerick and contiguous counties.

We appreciate that, at present, having regard to the parlous state of existing university colleges, the provision of a full-blown university college for Limerick is out of the question, but it is thought that at least the first courses in certain faculties could be provided there. That would be one way of overcoming the difficulty in regard to finance. The first year's courses in arts, commerce and science could quite easily be provided in Limerick and there would be a very substantial response from pupils coming out each year from the secondary schools in and near Limerick. There certainly would be no difficulty in providing the necessary competent staff either from Limerick or from the existing university colleges.

Another desirable development would be the provision of more university scholarships, particularly for students whose parents live in areas at a distance from the university centres. Those who are fortunate enough to live in Dublin, Cork or Galway perhaps do not appreciate the heavy charge entailed in giving a child a university education placed on a parent living in Limerick or some other county far from a university college. That cost as often as not prohibits the parents of a brilliant boy or girl from giving them university education and the value of their brains and ability is thereby lost to the country.

The Minister in his report refers to the fact that certain people do not appreciate the sacrifices made in the past to ensure that parents, the Church and the State would play their appropriate part in the system—meaning, I take it, the system of education. The parents could play a greater part if some system of local councils of education were set up. The vocational education system has been remarkably successful. I know that it suffers from certain defects. It has not always got the best personnel, due to the fact that the personnel are elected by the local county or city councils and politics, as seems to be inevitable in most things in this country, plays its part. There is a great deal to be said for examining the question of the setting up of local councils of education that would correlate and integrate the various branches of education outside university education, local councils on which parents and other citizens would be represented. That would avoid a good deal of overlapping. It would decentralise education to a large extent and it would bring home to parents and citizens generally that education is their responsibility, not the responsibility of the State.

There has been some reference to the question of corporal punishment in schools. I do not hold any strong view on that. The proper person to punish a child is one or other of his parents. Having said that, I do not believe that any child who needs to be punished should escape punishment in school. It would be wrong to take the drastic step of abolishing what is a mild punishment in the schools merely because one or two sadistic teachers had injured a child. There is a law there to look after such people. Their number is so small that it should not influence any Government to decide to take such a drastic step. Such incidents have been very few and far between in this State since we took control of our affairs 35 or 36 years ago.

Probably what I have said is repetition of what the Minister has listened to with great patience in the last couple of weeks. I should like to conclude, as I began, by congratulating the Minister and his officials on their report. It is not easy to please everybody, particularly in this country. Each week, each year will bring progress and we will make up for the shocking heritage of neglect we took over when this State was founded some 36 years ago.

Any suggestions I have made have been made with the best intentions, I can assure the Minister. In his view, they may be quite impracticable, but I feel there is something to be said on one point I mentioned, that is, bringing the parents and citizens of local communities closer into the whole system of primary, secondary and vocational education.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I have been anxious for quite a long time to see adult university education decentralised, if possible. Only in the university centres of Dublin, Cork and Galway, the big centres of population, can a large number of our people have any opportunity of acquiring adult university education that has proved so successful since it was introduced some years ago in Cork. There is a growing need for this experiment and I believe, if made general, it would create a better national outlook among our people and make them more appreciative of the things that are essential for the well-being of the country. If anything can be done to raise our people, to give them love of country, love for each other, love for the Irish language and Irish culture, I feel that adult university education can contribute more to doing that than anything else.

We have had, during this debate, various criticisms about the Irish language. Some have condemned compulsory Irish; some have defended it. I think if there was a great revival in adult education, it would inspire our people with a greater love of learning, greater patriotic spirit and make them take a special interest in their country's well-being, its language and its customs, its production, agricultural and industrial. It would make them interested in manufacturing industries, in mineral exploration and in what we can do in every way to improve our parish, district and county.

I feel that some move of that kind is badly needed to inspire the people with a spirit of charity and co-operation. There are many cranks who do nothing but blame somebody else who is in authority for doing nothing. The only way we can surmount that is to educate our people through the system of adult university education or vocational education.

I feel that the best appeal would be made to the people, if it were possible to send some of our university professors—provided we have sufficient of them—to centres in each county. If possible, these specially chosen men should give lectures to each two or three parishes or form some centre where they could operate. I know that such men cannot be taken off the shelf, but I feel it is necessary to have such people throughout the country who will be able to uplift our people, to encourage them to love their country and to do the things that are essential for its future progress. These men could instil self-respect into each one of us by promoting the national language and culture. In that way, a good deal would be done to counteract the criticism that we meet with abroad.

I feel that any cultural class or Irish class, provided it is an adult Irish class, can be a great advance in a district, provided the right kind of teacher is there, a man who is a psychologist as well as a teacher, and not the type of teacher of whom I have had experience in the past and not the type of teacher of whom I have had experience in the past and whom I have to criticise. I do so because people who had not the good fortune to be born in the Gaeltacht were allowed to remain in the background, while the person who, by accident of birth, had the advantage of living in the Gaeltacht, monopolised the class and disheartened all the others.

It is only people specially chosen for that teaching job who can do much good work in that regard. I am not in favour of compulsion of any kind; I am more anxious to lead the people than to compel them to do certain things; but I feel that a great revival is necessary. If we can get the people to think in a cultural way of what they can do to improve the country, I believe they will achieve a great uplifting of the country generally and we can take our place among the free nations of the world more ably in the future.

I should like to appeal to parents to let their children avail of vocational education, even if these children must emigrate eventually. Some children at present leave school when they get their primary certificate, or at 14 at the latest, and if the child does not go to a vocational school, it will be knocking around at home, until it tries to get a job at 18. By then, he will have forgotten everything he has learned. The most important period in the life of a youth or girl is between 14 and 18 years of age. Only a percentage of our children get the advantage of secondary education.

For that reason, I am most anxious to have vocational classes held, if possible, in every parish in Ireland. I hope the parents in every parish whose children will not be sent to a secondary school will send their children to a vocational school. If no vocational school is built in their parish surely a vocational class could easily be held in the national school, in the parish hall, or some such place? The important point is to ensure that that class will be availed of fully.

People with whom I have been associated from time to time and who went to foreign countries have told me, on their return home for a holiday, perhaps, that one of the biggest disabilities they suffered from when they first went abroad was their lack of education. The Minister should stress the urgent necessity of getting our people in every parish in Ireland to attend vocational classes, if it is possible to have them.

We should do our best to provide as many vocational classes as possible throughout the country, even if it means that we have to spend more money. Some critics may say: "What is the use in having vocational schools? Only so many attend." A national appeal should be made to the parents and children to avail of the vocational schools if the children have not the opportunity of attending a secondary school. In that way, the children would at least have some chance in the world. If some of those children are forced to emigrate they will then be a little better equipped for facing life in a foreign country than if they finished their education at the national school at 14 years of age and emigrated at 17 while three very important years of their lives were not made use of from the point of view of additional education.

I have at all times been anxious to press for vocational schools for County Dublin. I avail of this opportunity to thank the Minister and previous Ministers for Education for their cooperation with me and other representatives in County Dublin in respect of the building of vocational schools and also in respect of the extension of vocational classes to each area.

I am not satisfied that the Board of Works are doing their job quickly enough in the building of schools. I realise that they have a problem. When a site is selected there are legal formalities as to title, and so forth. However, when the Department of Education indicate that they are willing to give a grant for a school, some steps should be taken to put the work in hand as quickly as possible. I have at least three examples in County Dublin in which the present Minister has indicated his willingness to give grants in respect of the building of schools there but I have not yet seen advertisements for these schools. I shall deal more fully with this matter on the Estimate for the Office of Public Works.

Something should be done to expedite the building of schools once the Minister indicates his willingness to give a grant. Nothing should be left undone in that respect. There are a number of very bad schools in County Dublin. We have one of the worst schools in the whole of Ireland. For the past 14 years, I have been trying to get a new school built there. One of the first things the present Minister did when he took office was to sanction a grant towards the building of the school. The building of the school was advertised on two occasions. On one occasion, the contractor fell down on the job and was not able to carry on. Then it was advertised again. So far, I have not heard that the building has been given out on contract. I realise that the Minister is not responsible for this matter. I am commenting on the slowness in carrying out a job that needs to be done very urgently.

Managers are responsible for sanitation in their schools, as they are responsible for many other things. In this modern age, water and sanitation facilities should be available in every school. Even if there are no water or sewerage facilities in the district, the matter of sanitation can be dealt with by septic tanks, for example. It is about time we tackled that problem and made some of our schools more modern. Unhealthy schools and unhealthy surroundings are detrimental to the health of children. No effort should be spared to ensure that very bad and unhealthy schools will be knocked down and new schools erected as soon as possible.

Mr. McMenamin

Would the Deputy come down on some side of the ditch and say who is to blame for the non-building of schools? The Deputy is wobbling about.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am on the fence in this way. I am blaming the Office of Public Works for the fact that, even when a grant is given over a year or two for the building of a school, they do not do their job.

Mr. McMenamin

Who? Let us get down to grips with the question.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I shall allow the Deputy to make his own speech. I can assure him I will give him a special hearing.

Mr. McMenamin

Use the soft soap now.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am well able to do my job. I shall not go any further in relation to that matter. I am sure the Minister is intelligent enough to know what I am hitting at.

In County Dublin, there is a differential rent system in operation for teachers. If they are living a few miles from the city, they get the same rent allowance as teachers get in the city. Take, for example, Skerries, Rush or any of these seaside areas. The rents of teachers' houses are possibly higher in those places than in Dublin City. Dublin City and County should be grouped as a unit so far as teachers' rents are concerned. The rent allowance for teachers should be the same in the county as it is in the city. In the suburbs of Dublin, and especially along the coast, the rents are very high and teachers have a problem. A man in Kinsealy, for example, gets the same rent allowance as a man in Dublin whereas a man in Malahide is given the same rent allowance as that for the county. I have mentioned this matter to other Ministers, as I have mentioned it on a number of occasions on this Estimate.

A Gaeltacht paper is in circulation in the Gaeltacht areas. The promoters are very disappointed because they are not getting the grant which other papers in the Irish language are getting. I hope the Minister will look into the matter and see what can be done to assist in this very worthy project of subsidising the Gaeltacht paper. It is a tough job to keep such a paper going especially as there is a narrow circulation for it when they are not getting the help which other papers in the Irish language are getting.

I wish to touch on a problem which has been discussed on numerous occasions. In justice to all our citizens, we should be a little more impartial in enabling children who have a love of the language, of learning and of culture, and who are anxious to be trained as teachers to go ahead by not giving such a high percentage of passes to Gaeltacht students when they are entering for the teaching profession. As a result of my experience over the years, I know that a man who acquires a knowledge of the language the hard way, who goes down to the Gaeltacht areas and tries to improve himself, often has a great deal more sympathy with the child who is trying to acquire the language in the same way because he has had the same difficulty himself.

Whilst we must thank the people of the Gaeltacht who have succeeded in holding on to our language and keeping that national heritage for us during the dark days, I do feel that, as times change, we have got to change with them. Where a child from a non-Gaeltacht area applies for admission to a preparatory college to become a teacher, that child should at least get an equal chance to that given to a child from the Gaeltacht. I do not think the preferential treatment of candidates from particular areas for the teaching profession is fair.

We have good students all over the country and I feel that this disparity in treatment should be examined and, in fairness to all our people, each child should be treated on his or her merits. I know that the object behind the system was good at the beginning, but we have pursued that system for a long time, and now I think each case should be treated on its merits, irrespective of what part of the country from which the child comes. I am not saying that any obstacle should be put in the way of Galetacht students. They should get every encouragement, but at the same time, they should be put on an equal footing with students from any other part of the country.

We have only a small number of teachers who retired pre-1950 and each year that passes sees a diminution in the number. Their representatives have often been received by Deputies and by the Minister and I feel, if the resources of the nation could afford it, that we should give them some extra gratuity, because they are on a very low pension rate. I am well aware, of course, that when legislation is passed in this House, it cannot be retrospective legislation. If it were, we would never get anywhere. I do ask the Minister, however, if financial circumstances have improved sufficiently to look into their case sympathetically and see if anything could be done for the few old teachers who are left. Every year sees a thinning of their ranks. I do not wish to say any more on this topic except to ask the Minister again to consider it and do his best.

I close by complimenting the Minister on the job he is doing and I wish to take this opportunity of thanking him for the co-operation I have received from him since he became Minister for Education.

Donnchadh Mac Seoin

San oráid a thug an tAire uaidh ar an Mheastachán seo tá a lán rud a chuireann dochas ar dhaoine a bhfuil suim acu i gcúrsaí oideachis sa tír seo. Ní hionann sin agus a rá nach bhfuil rudaí inte nach féidir iad a fheabhsú. Tá rud amháin gur chóir go mbeadh soléir do gach éinne, go mabaineann ceist an oideachais le gach éinne-ní hé amháin na daoine a mhúineann ins na scoileanna, sna bun scoileanna, sna meán-scoileanna agus sna hollscoileanna, na daltaí agus na tuismitheoirí, ach baineann sé le gach éinne.

Ag éisteacht le cuid de na tuairimí a nochtadh anseo—agus cluintear taobh amuigh den Tigh seo iad—do shílfeá go raibh rud éigin bun ós cionn leis an gcóras oideachais sa tír seo. Do shílfeá na fuil na múinteóirí nó na leanaí oilte ach oiread. Tá daoine a deireann anso—agus deirtear taobh amuigh den Tigh seo leis—go bhfuil leanaí na tíre seo, nó cuid díobh, neamh-oilte nó leath-oilte. Im thuairimise, is mór an masla é sin agus ní masla é don lucht oideachais amháin ach masla do na leanaí freisin. Ní dóigh liom gur ceart nó cóir go rachadh ráteas mar sin amach ón Tigh seo gan iarracht cur ina choinne.

Le tamall anuas, tá daoine ag déanamh gearán mar gheall ar an gcorás oideachais agus fílim go ndéaneann siad dearmad ar phríomhchuspóir an oideachais sin—gurb é an rud a bhíonn idir lámha againn ná intleacht na leanbh a spreagadh agus an dalta a chur ar a leas chun a anam a shábháil agus chun a chur ar a chumas saol tairbheach a chaiteamh sa domhan seo. Ní hé cnuasacht eolais ar fad an rud is fearr. Tá a lán rudaí eile ann ach sílim gurb é sin an rud is tábhachtaí atá ann, an leanbh a chur ar a leas.

Tá daoine ann leis a dúirt anseo, agus arís cloistear go minic taobh amuigh den Tigh seo é, go bhfuil dochar déanta don chóras oideachais anso tré Ghaeilge. I mo thuairim féin, agus i dtuairim a lán daoine a bhíos ag caint leo, níl aon dochair den tasghas seo déanta don chóras oideachais agus níl sa tír seo, mar deirtear, "compulsory Irish". Sin rud atá ag cur—ní deirim gach duine, ach a lán daoine—amú so cheist seo. Sna scoileanna sa Ghaeltacht, gan dabht, sa bhfíor-Ghaeltacht, tosnuítear ar theagasc na leanbh trí Ghaeilge nuair a thagann leanbh isteach sa scoil.

San nGalltacht, nuair a thagann an leanbh isteach sa scoil, tosnuítear ar oideachais ansan as Gaeilge ach sna ranganna níos airde leanter leis an teanga a bhíonn aige nuair a thagann sé isteach agus ní bhíonn aon iachall air a thuile a dhéanamh.

Ba mhaith an rud é dá gcabhraítí níos mó sa tír seo le gluaiseacht na Gaeilge agus gan an milleán a chur ar an scoileanna. Dá ndéantaí aon rud, is cuma chomh bheag agus a bheadh sé, má bhíonn na daoine toilteanach é a dhéanamh, bhéadh súil agam agus dóchas agam ná caillifí ar an Ghaeilge agus go mbeadh an abairt sin i n-úsáid arís: "Is Gael mise agus ní thuigim gur náir dom é".

Listening to the Minister's speech and to the speeches of Deputies and reading some of the things I have read on education outside this house, one would imaginer that something had gone completely wrong with the education system. I have listened to Deputies speaking of children as being illiterate or semi-literate. If such Deputies gave time to thinking on the question, they would come round to the view that not alone are the children not illiterate or semi-literate, but that there has been a distinct advance in education.

In his introductory speech, the Minister referred to the system of education and how it came about. School attendance is compulsory for all children between the ages of six and 14 years. Certainly, a far higher percentage of children attend school now than attended school in the days of the school attendance officer who went around the country in his trap.

Having regard to the number of pupils attending secondary boarding-schools and day schools and the vast increase in the number of university students, who is there who will say that education has declined? Irish people who have gone abroad have made their mark in competition with people anywhere. That is still happening. Irish missionaries who go abroad spread the light, not only of the Faith but of learning. The same spirit prevails as prevailed in the past. A system of education that can produced that results is no mean system and there cannot be very much wrong with it basically. Undoubedly, there are points in the system of education where improvement could be brought about by co-operation and discussion between the various elements involved. That would be a very desirable thing. There should be consultation between the various people responsible for education.

At present, there is an amount of discussion and criticism as to the place of the Irish language in our educational system. There are those who maintain that the language is a disadvantage and drawback in the system. I have not heard anyone saying that any other subject in the school programme is a drawback. Subjects are included in the school curriculum for the purpose of training the mind, developing the child's retentive powers and enlarging his vision. I have not heard anybody who has been criticising Irish for the damage it has done criticising the teaching of modern languages or ancient languages, history, geography, algebra, geometry, trigonometry or any other subject.

If it were only for the sake of what a second language can do in helping to enlarge the mind of the child, the teaching of Irish would be useful, just as useful as Latin, French, German, Spanish or any other continental language, but there is far more to the question of Irish, as far as we are concerned. It is the fountain, the well, from which we can draw. If we want to preserve the traditions of the past, we must retain the language that our forebears kept down the years. We should try to recapture the spirit which developed in every country and parish goodwill to those things that were Irish and national. We should try to restore the feiseanna which were a feature of the 18's or 19's, where children sang songs and parents came to take pleasure and pride. That is a matter in which this House might give a lead. The spirit of defeatism should be cut out as well as talk about the language doing damage to the educational system.

There are difficulties and there are faults in connection with the teaching of Irish as a subject or as a medium of instruction but they are not insurmountable. Our greatest need at present is for labhairt na Gaeilge, the speaking of the language, by the children, freely and without too much emphasis on grammar. There should not be too much insistence on grammatical construction. The main thing is to encourage the children to speak Irish and snás and grammar can be attended to afterwards. How many people are there who speak English or any other language and do not speak it grammatically? Is it suggested that when people make grammatical errors in speaking English, they should be made to correct their mistakes?

In regard to the programme in national schools, as I said last year, I do not think it is possible in the programme as it is at present and with the concentration on the revitalising of the language, to include fresh subjects. I know it is a desirable thing. There are Deputies here, and people outside this House, who from time to time have counselled the inclusion of other subjects in the school programme, but there is a thing which should be remembered, that is, that in a good many cases at present, speaking particularly about the constitunecy from which I come, children have in many centres an opportunity of getting secondary education at an early age and it is more the commonplace than the exception that children leave the primary school at approximately the age of 13.

I have heard Deputies speaking to-night about the number of children who go on for secondary education. It is only those children who reach the top classes in the primary school who will go on for secondary school and I am sure the Department officials could tell us what fraction, or percentage of the number on our rolls in the national schools go on for secondary education. If we take the ratio of pupils who go to both secondary and vocational education, it is indeed a very respectable fraction.

In regard to the school building programme, the increasing numbers which are coming on to the rolls of the national schools are a hopeful sign. It is one of the hopeful signs when you find the younger people in the country increasing and that increase is most readily measured in the national schools.

There is an increasing need for schools. The Department, and the Office of Public Works which carries out the schemes for them, have done a good job in those schools that have been put up. As mentioned by Deputy Manley, they are very beautiful and are monuments to our fidelity to that tradition of interest in education. What is needed is to find a means of speeding up the building of these schools, or the provision, as Deputy Manley also mentioned, of an extra room, where necessary, or even the adaptation of a building.

Very often in relation to the building of schools at the present time the slowness is reached when they arrive at the drawing stage. With Deputy Booth, I cannot see why there should not be a type of school suitable, say, to a country area, a type of school suitable for two teachers, three teachers or four teachers, as the case may be. Then the only thing necessary, in all cases when it has been decided to build a new school in a certain area, is to pick out there and then the plan for that school, because it is a two-teacher one or a three-teacher one.

There is one thing I should mention in regard to new schools. We should not make the mistake which we have often made in the past. What is most necessary is that our rooms should be of sufficient size, that they should be bright and airy and that during winter time, they should be capable of being efficiently heated. In regard to the size of the rooms, it would be wise for us to leave an extra room and not to stick to the present idea of having so many square feet for the number of children who will attend the school.

It is very necessary that this House and the Oireachtas should persuade the people that agriculture is our main-stay and that the movement must be back to the land. If that were done, then we could look forward to an increase in the rural population. Then we would not have to be altering a building or erecting an extra room in a few years' time. That applies also to girls' schools. There should be that extra room left in a new school when it is being built and it could be used for cookery, or laundry, or such subjects and if ever there was a need for an extra room, it would be there.

I heard another Deputy speak a short time ago on the question of water supplies for schools. Wherever a water supply is naturally available, undoubtedly it would be availed of, but there are many places in the country where difficulties exist in that respect. I do not think it is a wise thing that we should put off building a school in an area like that, waiting for a water supply. There should be nothing more difficult in preparing an estimate for a school of that type than there is for a preparing an estimate for any other type of building where so much is provided in the estimate for a flush type sanitary system if water becomes available, and then, if not, going ahead with the ordinary dry-type lavatory which can at present be very efficient.

Keeping still to the primary end of education. I heard somebody saying— I think it was Deputy Booth—that he would be against any bribes or threats with regard to the language. I disagree with him. As I mentioned last year, there is nothing which gives and will give a greater fillip to children in the schools than the comics. There is at least one Irish monthly available now, but I should like to see not alone one weekly comic but two, and there should be one available for juniors and one available for seniors. That should be a continuing series which would keep the children interested and they would be practising the language which is the free and easy language of the schools.

Suitable books are, of course, an asset and an addition and in that respect again we should stick first to the spoken word. In the junior classes, I think we should not go in at all for the reading of Irish too soon and certainly we should not go in, up to the third or fourth standard, for the writing of the language. If we could, firstly, get them to speak it and, secondly, to read it the other would follow naturally.

If I might digress for a moment, it is heartening to find that, in 1960, we will take a step towards the integration of that policy in regard to the spoken language. We find the oral test coming into the leaving certificate. Of course, in that there are bound to be a number of difficulties for the Department; and I suppose in regard to the pupils, there will be the difficulty of something new; but I am sure that those who will be charged with the carrying out of these béal-triails will approach the question of this examination in a sympathetic manner. Naturally, the "comhra" that will take place on an occasion like that will be based on such things as pupils of that age would be interested in.

I should hope it would not be just a question of examiners arriving at schools to test the knowledge of pupils as knowledge, but rather, I would hope, the aim would be to test their fluency in speaking the language and expressing themselves on such occasions. I should hope that in the early stages, at any rate, no pupils would fail their certificates because, through nervousness or otherwise, they failed in the oral test.

I think it was Deputy Manley who mentioned on this that there would have to be compensation with regard to the amount of work laid out for secondary schools. The number of books which secondary pupils have to read, particularly for the honours leaving certificate, the books of grammar, corra cainte and so on that have to be dealt with, are a large burden. If there were to be over-concentration on that, then there would not be the time available for the spoken language in the school.

I mentioned the primary certificate examination last year. The one really objectionable feature of such a written examination for children of young age is the fact of its being compulsory. Very often, it is wise and good to advance into sixth class a child who may not be of the required standard in a particular subject. But it certainly is a trial for that child at the end of its time to find that it failed to get its primary certificate. The teacher —since he is the one best fitted to know—ought to be allowed the liberty of presenting for examination those children he considers fit for it.

The numbers in our secondary schools are surely convincing proof of the value which our people place on education; but we should be able to find more time in the secondary schools for what was mentioned here by Deputy Desmond: deagh bheasa, good manners and the ordinary courtesies which are the hallmark of education. I am afraid at present, in our system of testing the education of children by mere examination, we are missing the point very much and we are tending more and more to the cram system. Nothing could be more destructive of real education than the fact that teachers, or pupils equally so, find that they have to devote such an enormous amount of time to the amassing of knowledge, becoming almost walking encyclopaedias of knowledge, and then find the battle royal opens at the end of the year with the people who have set the papers testing the knowledge acquired by these children during the year from textbooks. There ought to be more time for these, things in the schools. In that regard, I know that at the beginning of each year secondary schools send their time-tables and so on to the Department. Then they lay out half days or other time for physical culture and so on. I sincerely hope that the amount of time laid out for these is spent on them. It would be a wise thing to ensure that there would be sufficient time in our secondary school programme for such things as that.

I want to refer to the teaching of history in our secondary schools. It is not as much of a problem in the primary schools because the books available cover the period; but looking at the secondary school programme, one finds a period of history laid down for intensive study, particularly in the Leaving Certificate. It is quite a search to find a book which will contain that period of history. It will either fall short of it or exceed it. In these periods of history, particularly where it concerns European history as integrated with Irish history, the authorship of these books is, in the main, English. There is nothing available for the Leaving Course comparable with the history available for the Intermediate Course. A history of such a type should be made available for the secondary schools or the Department should change the period of history to suit what is contained in the text books now available. With different books in use, it would be possible for an examiner to frame a question on the detailed information in one book which might not be available to the pupils in the schools.

With Deputy Booth, I should like to appeal to the Minister in regard to the capitation grant for secondary schools. That grant has been stationary for quite a time. In a good many of these secondary schools, particularly the residential ones where facilities were made available for the increased entry of pupils desirous of a secondary education, the people who provided the buildings for these pupils find themselves with a huge weight of debt around their necks. It would be a great relief to them to know they could look forward to an increased capitation grant to help reduce it. I am in complete agreement with the Minister's statement that people do not sufficiently appreciate the value of vocational education. Vocational education has been a slow growth because in the past there was a feeling that education of that type was lower than other types of education. There does not seem to be sufficient interest in practical education here. Too many people are turning their minds to what are described as white-collar jobs and, when they achieve the education to equip them for that type of work, they find there are not enough jobs to go round. It would be wise for people to remember that any kind of work is praiseworthy so long as it is honest work. We should not base too much of our education on books.

I was disappointed in the Minister's statement that the number of university scholarships, or the renewal of scholarships, has decreased. Whether or not the students who go to Ollscoil na Gaillimhe find conditions too onerous, I do not know. It would be something to deplore, if such were the case.

A happy development over the years has been the number of firms which have assisted education by way of endowment or grant. In regard to the primary schools, a number of firms are providing charts which are things of beauty in themselves and which convey knowledge to the children as well as cultivating their aesthetic appreciation. That is a development very much to be desired, very much to be commended and very much to be encouraged.

Most people will welcome the idea of an interview for future students desirous of entering the training colleges. It is desirable that the authorities, both in the training colleges and in the Department, should be satisfied that the material is such as will make successful teachers. For the students, it is a good thing that they should learn in time whether or not they are suitable rather than find themselves after a year in college without a bent for that vocation.

There has been a great deal of talk here and outside about corporal punishment. Indeed, these words "corporal punishment" conjure up visions of extraordinary things happening in our schools. Deputy Dr. Browne spoke of grown-ups inflicting punishment on small people, and he made the fantastic statement that the present wave of juvenile delinquency springs from corporal punishment in the schools. How he could come to that conclusion is a mystery. He finds the roots of the maladjustment of those children who come before the courts in the period they spent in the national schools.

As has been said, considering the numbers involved over the whole educational field, there have been very few instances of any thing which would give cause for uneasiness in relation to corporal punishment. Deputy Dr. Browne destroyed the foundation of his own argument when he said he would deny to parents the same right that he denied to teachers. In most countries to-day, it is accepted that there are people who will not obey ordinary, simple discipline or make themselves amenable to the laws of society. Therein lies the root cause of trouble at the present time. Teachers are not desirous of inflicting punishment, but, if education is to be effective, there must be some system of discline which will enable the majority to obtain the education they desire, even should one bold boy decide that he wanted to prevent that aim.

I should be lacking in my duty if I did not refer to the question of the retiring gratuity to pensioned teachers. This has been an annual here since 1950 and each year, in the eight years that have passed, the number who are waiting for that measure of justice grows less. Only a few years more need pass and nobody here need raise a voice because those who seek this gratuity will have passed on. Consider the extraordinary anomaly that exists in the case of two teachers born in the same year and within, three months of each other, trained in the same college, doing the same work in the same kind of school; one retires on 31st December, 1950, and another retires on 31st March, 1951. One gets a gratuity; the other does not. The injustice there should be apparent to anybody. Our desires and the best intentions of the Minister are useless, if they are not backed up with the necessary finances. If the money is not available, we should be honest and say that it is a question of money and that we cannot do it. We should certainly not put forward the excuse that this would establish a precedent for other State pensioners.

In relation to the Art Gallery and the Museum, I should like to add my voice to that of Deputy T. Lynch. We should find more space for our valuable exhibits. The works of art we have, especially in Dublin, represent a treasure house from which an amount not alone of pleasure but wealth of thought can be drawn. I have often felt on occasions that it might be possible to lend some of these treasures to the smaller museums down the country. On previous occasions, we were very pleased in Limerick when the Ardagh Chalice was brought there and a great many people were able to see it.

I have no misgivings about education in Ireland nor about the place of the Irish language. Our plain duty in that respect is to maintain the language and to advance it. It was heartening to hear from Deputy Giles to-night of a further Gaelic centre in Meath. We had one last year at Arus Ida—Foynes —where the children gathered from the areas all about to spend the two months of July and August, and indeed this year it is very heartening to find that there is not sufficient space available for the students looking for accommodation there in the months of July and August. That is something which the State, by way of any grants it can make, ought to encourage, the voluntary co-operation of people gathered together like that to advance the cause not alone of the language but of our culture and heritage which is so richly there.

There was this year also the movement of the daon-scoil which opened at Easter this year. That is something which we hope will grow with the passage of the years so that more people, both in our area in West Limerick and in areas elsewhere, will become interested in this movement—people voluntarily coming together to speak the language, to listen to Irish songs, and to join with the seanachai in the recounting of the glories of the past.

The educational system in this country has justified itself. Those who are concerned with it, whether it be the Minister, who is responsible for policy, the Department officials, who have guided its destinies, the inspectors and the teachers, are all doing something worth-while. The Jeremiahs of this country who bewail and bemoan the lack of advancement should pause and take notice of the actual situation. I would invite them to take note of the position in our secondary schools. Anyone who wants to judge the standard of our Irish children in relation to education ought to compare our secondary school examinations with the public examinations of any other country. We have had children coming here from abroad and they have undergone the same tests as our own children; we have had our children going abroad, and by whatever measure you decide to judge them, it is apparent that the Irish system is as good as ever it was and bears comparison with that of any other country in the world.

I am perfectly certain that Irish did not do any damage; in fact it has enriched the education of the children. I am also certain that in the long run both the children and the nation will gain from the keeping of the Irish language in its rightful place in Irish schools.

Mr. Moloney

This debate has proved to be rather protracted, but that is not surprising, seeing that the Estimate being discussed is of such great importance. It provides for a vast sum of money, in the neighbourhood of £15,000,000, and the number of student it caters for, whether juvenile or adult, averages about 660,000. We are all very happy that, above any other year, so many Deputies have expressed their views on this very important question of education. Unfortunately in recent times there has been a good deal of loose talk about a number of Government services and particularly education.

Education is a matter which concerns everybody at some time or other and for that reason criticism must be expected. There is, however, nowadays a tendency on the part of people generally, when they want to criticise, to do so without going to any trouble to ascertain the facts beforehand. Education is a rather technical problem and in many respects it is beyond the ordinary man in the street to pass comprehensive judgment on it. Nevertheless, through the medium of newspapers, the radio and other means of obtaining information it is much easier to offer opinion in recent years than it was many years ago when these facilities were not available to the people.

In recent months, there has been an organised attempt, in a small way fortunately, to attack our educational system. It is very hard to understand the mentality of people who set out to attack that system, because we have developed it to such an extent in the 30 odd years of native Government that it now meets the general aspirations of the people. It is to be expected that there should be a certain volume of disagreement, which is to be found in other aspects of Government policy as well, as to the methods adopted. Those in themselves are not such, in my opinion, as to warrant the type of attack which has been launched, particularly in recent months and even by Deputies, against our general system of education. Even those who spoke quite recently have been wild, reckless and unsustained in their charges with regard to illiteracy.

Those of us who went to school 35 or more years ago are in a good position to judge those statements and have very little difficulty in proving their recklessness. There is no evidence to sustain them. I myself have reason to know that the children who are attending the schools now, particulary the national schools, are better educated than we were then. I have checked up with my own children and am amazed to find that the child in sixth standard now has such an extensive knowledge, something which those of us even in the senior standards were not able to get in our time. In this debate, in which so many, Deputies from all sides gave their views, it is very important, and long overdue, that expression should be given clearly to the almost unanimous view of the people, that teaching through the medium of Irish has not retarded the general education of the child.

We are told by the best educational authorities that a child can acquire a new language, particularly its own native tongue, quite easily between the ages of four and ten. The vocal organs of speech are more easily attuned to the new sounds at that age. It has been proved from the results of various examinations set at school leaving age or at later stages of extended education, that the children have in no way suffered in their general education as a result of the teaching of Irish or as a result of the general curriculum being such that they are taught through the medium of Irish.

Another Deputy this evening made the point that in most European countries at the moment—at least, in all advanced countries and, indeed, in American countries, too-Governments have encouraged both adults and children to acquire a knowledge of two languages—their native language and another, intended to be of use to them commercially. If that is so, what is wrong with our policy of encouraging as much perfection as possible in our own native tongue and after that the knowledge of English which would appear to be necessary for us and for those who have to emigrate.

It is alleged that those leaving the national schools are almost illiterate. Many people accept that view, because they do not stop to think and they take no steps to examine the situation. There are, however, many people who have very good reason to know that statements of that kind are not true. Employers who have had occasion to interview boys and girls for certain types of employment, requiring a reasonable standard of education, know that such children can give a good account of themselves. Compared with children of similar age who had to submit themselves for a test of this kind many years ago, the children of the present day are, in my opinion, streets ahead.

The revival of Irish has been under much fire in recent months. It was a very wise step on the part of the Taoiseach, during a recent debate in the Seanad, to indicate that a commission would be set up to examine the question. What was wiser still was that the Government decided to extend somewhat the proposed terms of reference of the original motion and decided to include consideration of the methods used in the follow-up after school. Most people agree that the general system of teaching Irish through the schools is successful; but where we seem to differ very largely is with regard to the most effective and practicable methods that can be employed to retain the language and to help to increase the speaking and the general use of the language after school. I sincerely hope the commission will be able to put on record, for the first time, the best method of bringing about that situation.

In view of the large amount of money spent in teaching Irish through the schools and in view of the general desire of our people that it should be the spoken language as far as possible, it is a pity that this failure occurs after the children leave school. In my opinion, out side any recommendation which the commission may make, there are many ways which could be devised to make good the deficiency of which we are all so conscious.

A certain amount of Government backing and a certain amount of a lead from the Government are highly desirable. The best way in which the Government can give that lead is, first of all, to ask the State servants, particularly those in regular and intimate contact with the people, to use Irish, particularly with the younger people. Most young people would be only too anxious to respond to an approach made in that way. Nowadays, there is a test in Irish when recruiting most types of State servants—in the Army, at least in the officer grade or cadet corps, in the Garda and in the Civil Service—and in the recruitment of teachers for primary, secondary and vocational schools and in many other spheres of Government activity.

I am very happy to see that teachers, particularly primary teachers who are in close contact with the rural people, have always set a good example by conversing in Irish as much as possible, particularly with the younger people and with their past pupils who, they have reason to know, are proficient enough to discuss certain subjects with them. We could go further than that; we could initiate some sort of campaign. I suggest it is sufficiently important to intitate a national campaign, so as to try to ensure that State servants in their dealings with the public will converse as far as possible through the medium of Irish.

At this stage, I would respectfully suggest to the Minister that an approach might be made to the Church authorities of all religious denominations, asking that prayers at Masses and at Services be in Irish. No greater lead could be given to the people in general. If we could get the co-operation of the Churches in this connection, as I am sure we could, I think we would make a very good start. Voluntary organisations such as the G.A.A. and the Gaelic League are only too anxious to help in any drive initiated at Government level. Indeed, were it not for these voluntary organisations in the past, we could not have achieved the position in which we find ourselves to-day.

There is something we could do very readily because the means are at our disposal. I refer to the radio. On the Estimate for Wireless Broadcasting, I made the point that a special half-hour, or, if possible, an hour in the day, should be allocated for a suitable type of instruction particularly for beginners or people with a moderate knowledge of the language. A course of that kind arranged for the night time, when people are not at work, would be invaluable.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would be a matter for another Minister. It is not the responsibility of the Minister for Education.

Mr. Moloney

I make the point so that the Minister for Education may make representations in the matter to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. I am sorry if I am out of order. With regard to the various subjects which are at present taught in our primary schools, through the medium of Irish, I think that, those of us, particularly parents, who have an intimate knowledge of the developments at the moment, are quite happy about the results. We have reason to know that arithmetic and algebra can be taught very easily through the medium of Irish. The results have proved that these subjects can be taught to the children much more easily in Irish than in English. History and geography are taught almost entirely in Irish.

I am told that this medium of instrucation has been quite successful. The only comment I got from a number of people with whom I discussed the matter was that the text-books available for these subjects are not generally suitable and could be recast. A number of parents made the points to me that the present policy with regard to the teaching of Irish in so far as grammar is concerned was slightly awkward and that there could be some adjustment in that regard. In the teaching of Irish, grammer is apparently made a very vital test as regards examinations. From inquiries and discussions I have had with variour people and with children in the primary and even the secondary schools, it would appear that we attach too much importance altogether to grammer. A more realistic approach to this question would be to encourage oral Irish and leave the written work take care of itself. I have it on good authority, from people who have spent many years at it, that if we can get the child to become proficient in oral Irish, he will in due course manage to reach a similar standard in written work.

Inspection of the schools nowadays is generally satisfactory and the relations which exist between the teachers and the inspectorial staff are satisfactory. That is something about which we are all very pleased because it is of very great importance that co-operation should exist in this connection, because the inspector is the link between the Department and the teacher who has to handle local problems.

One authority suggested to me that the type of inspection carried out in the national schools was somewhat impracticable; that when the inspector visited the schools, particularly the primary schools, he proceeded to examine the class and in most cases failed to get the true results from the children. Children, particularly in the rural areas, are rather frightened of such people as inspectors. They get excited. The result is that they are unable to give the answers they would normally give, if they were examined by a person to whom they are accustomed.

It is suggested that the more realistic way to ascertain the true value of the children's instruction and education would be to have the inspector supervise the examination of the class by the teacher who would normally teach the children the subject in question. I think there is a lot to be said for that. If it is not already the rule of the Department, I would suggest the Minister might consider the point and see if it could be adopted and applied generally.

Another point made was that many methods could be utilised to propagate the language. The circulation of Gaelic papers in all parts of the country outside the Gaeltacht is one of the most effective means we have of spreading the influence and knowledge of the language. Most of our provincial newspapers give very good co-operation in that direction. We are particularly fortunate to have three or four newspapers in this country entirely in Irish. It was a step in the right direction when the Government of the day initiated special grants to subsidise these Gaelic papers.

Even though they have a very wide circulation, these Gaelic papers find it hard to get the type of advertising, particularly when that advertising is published in Gaelic, which the ordinary commercial newspapers get. For that reason, the Gaelic newspapers can only be expected to carry on with a State subvention or assistance. It is very satisfactory that the policy of the Department down through the years has been to give that assistance. However, I understand that Amárach, which has come into circulation during the past two or three years, has not yet got the grant. I would appeal to the Minister to have that point examined and endeavour to allocate the grant to that paper as quickly as possible.

Generally speaking, the previous speakers covered all the other points I wanted to mention, and if I were to proceed further, I would only repeat their views and that would be entirely out of place. We are all more interested in hearing the Minister's concluding statement.

Progress reported: Committee to sit again.