Ar ócáid den tsórt seo, ba chóir go mbeadh an chéad fhocal i nGaeilge. Mar is eol don chuid is mó dena Teachtaí sé cuspóir Dhream an Lucht Oibre oibritheoirí na hÉireann a mhúscailt ón ndaorsmacht agus ón aineolas agus córas Criostúil a chur ar fáil. Iarraim ar an Aire agus ar na Teachtaí an Ghaeilge d'aithbheochaint agus cultúr na hÉireann a chur san áit is dual do i saol na tire. Tá a fhios agam an méid atá dhá dhéanamh ag na h-eagraíochtaí Gaeilge ar nós Gael Linn, Cumann Lúith-Chleas Gaedheal, Connradh na Gaeilge agus na gluaiseachtaí Gaeilge eile. Dá dtuigfeadh muintir na hÉireann tábhacht na teangan do bheadh linn, ach, faraoir, níl suim ar bith ag cuid mhaith dena daoine sa Ghaeilge.
This House and the nation were looking to the Minister for Education to give us an outline, on this occasion, of his revolutionary plans to modernise our educational system. We anticipated that because, at a Press conference held 12 months ago, on 21st May, 1963, the Minister outlined the changes he proposed to make in the Irish educational system. The Irish Times carried a banner headline: “ A Revolution in Education Plans”. “Minister speaks of comprehensive schools and new colleges”. The article stated:
A revolutionary change is about to be made in the educational system in the Republic. Comprehensive schools are to be set up and a new principle is being introduced —the direct provision of post-primary school buildings by the State.
The new schools will cater for children—one third of the total in the State—who receive no post-primary education, and they are planned to overcome some of the disadvantages in the present separation of secondary and vocational education.
Plans were also announced for the setting up of a number of technological colleges.
Those announcements by the Minister gave new hope and enthusiasm to those who were looking for radical changes in our educational system, especially to parents and children who were hoping to see a breakdown in the class barriers with which our educational system still reeks. In the Minister's speech today, there was nothing to indicate that this revolutionary plan, or any part or facet of it, would be implemented, because no money has been provided for that purpose. In the Second Programme for Economic Expansion there is a stipulation that education should get priority in the new Ireland. There is revenue of £14 million from the turnover tax, and there is an extra £7 million from taxation on beer, spirits and petrol. Out of that kind of bonanza in the lap of the Minister for Finance, it was expected that the Minister for Education would take unto himself the money required to implement the desirable changes he mentioned in his speech to the nation on 21st May, 1963.
The Minister's speech is a great source of disappointment to all of us who are concerned about the education of the children of the country. Apart from token increases for heating and lighting in schools, small increases in contributions to industrial schools, and the usual increases to cope with salary increases for teachers, there is nothing whatsoever to enable the implementation of this so-called revolutionary plan. We must ask how long must we wait for the new schools of technology? How long must we wait for the breakdown of the class barriers with which our educational system is riddled? How long must we wait until the children are given free post-primary education? Clearly the foundation has not been laid for those ideals in the Minister's speech. If the Minister cannot avail of this opportunity to launch out on this scheme, and indicate that it will be realised within a reasonable period of time, we cannot hope for much in the future. This is the opportune time. Positive promises and proposals were made in a pretty ruthless manner, without the provision of the necessary revenue to carry out any plans. In my opinion, that is disgraceful, and it is a betrayal of the trust reposed in us by our people that nothing is coming from the proposals of the Minister to which I have referred.
The views of the Labour Party on education should be well known. We maintain that the criterion in our educational system should be the ability of the children to learn, assimilate and go on to higher education, not the ability of the parents to pay. Our educational system is part of the class-ridden society we still possess. The opportunities are there for the rich, but there are none for the poor. We had hoped that, pending the day when we will have free education for all, not merely primary but secondary, vocational and university, the Minister would have had the decency to increase the number of scholarships out of all proportion, in order that children could go on to secondary and university education.
We desire, moreover, not merely to see an improvement on the physical side of education, such as the building of much-needed new schools, and the repair of many dilapidated hovels in which our children and teachers are forced to work, but also an improvement in the quality of our education. Our present system relies too much on passing on to children a mass of undigested and ill-understood information, rather than giving them proper guidance and training. We are turning out machines, as it were, to deliver certain specified types of knowledge. Education of that kind is no more education in the real sense of the word, than a dictionary can be regarded as a work of literature.
Education should ensure that we have independent citizens capable of thinking for themselves and exercising sound judgment. It should also ensure that our children become citizens who can play a full and constructive part in our society. Our system of education does not do that.
There are few features in the Minister's speech which I can applaud. The £100,000 increase for heating and lighting in schools was long overdue and was a dire necessity. As Deputy P. O'Donnell said, the conditions in our schools, especially in rural areas in the wintertime, bereft of lighting and heating, were nothing less than a disgrace. We know of cases where the fire had to be lit in a national school and the children were obliged to find the timber to light it. They had to do the necessary work in preparing fires and they also had to clean these schools. The Minister should exercise more authority in regard to this question of the proper lighting, heating and cleaning of schools.
The Minister's plans for the comprehensive schools which he outlined in May, 1963, have not advanced very much in the past 12 months. He has merely been able to tell us that the proposal is in the embryo stage and where he hopes to establish these schools. It is disconcerting to find that these comprehensive schools will, in the main, be confined to the west of Ireland and certain other regions known as the "undeveloped areas." We had got away from this kind of partitioning of the country in respect of Industry and Commerce and the withdrawal of the preferential grants to these areas, and it was unnecessary for the Minister to start partitioning the country in respect of these schools. We could show as great a need for a comprehensive school in parts of my constituency as the people in these other parts can. If it means the provision of free education, all our children are entitled to that facility. It is as difficult for a poor family to live in any part of Ireland as it is in the areas mentioned by the Minister in which these comprehensive schools are to be located.
I might not be right in saying that it means free education because regrettably it does involve the payment of a fee for certain children. The Minister will say that those who are unable to pay need not pay, that it will be free for them, but there again we have that class distinction entering into the picture. It is humiliating in the extreme for any poor child to have to display his parents' inability to pay a fee and it must of necessity have a bad psychological effect on that child to have to accept education in those circumstances. It would be far better if the Minister took his courage in his hands and conceded the principle of free education in these comprehensive schools rather than allow this distinction to continue. I do not know what kind of means test will be applied but obviously some kind must be applied and it is a regrettable feature of the establishment of these schools.
I have noted also the personnel who will control these comprehensive schools. There will be the appointment of a representative of the Bishop and the appointment of the chief educational officer of the vocational committee, with a representative of the Minister. I have certain misgivings about this kind of committee because it allows for no representation for the parents. I have always felt that the vocational committees are highly representative and highly competent to carry out the educational plans of the technical schools in their areas. They are representative of the clergy, as well as having on them the education officer and public representatives, and I suggest to the Minister that this new committee will not be comprehensive if the parents do not have representation. Whether that is done by way of the appointment of a local representative to speak on behalf of the parents or directly from a parents' committee constituted for that purpose, is a matter of indifference, but I feel that the parents have a right to representation in some form or other.
I do not think the Minister can tell us that there has been any worthwhile improvement in the sorry situation that less than one quarter of our children between the ages of 12 and 18 go to secondary schools and only one-third are receiving secondary and vocational education. I made a fervent appeal to the Minister last year to have regard to the crushing burdens which the provision of books placed on poorer parents and I asked him to be more generous in regard to the grants for school requisites. I had in mind particularly the provision of free books and I told the Minister and the House of the humiliation caused when children cannot hand up the required amount of money for new books. It is a great embarrassment for a child to have to admit this and I would urge the Minister not to allow children to become pawns in the hands of certain vested interests. It has now become the policy to issue new books almost every year and this is placing an unnecessary and unjustifiable burden on parents, especially poorer parents. They must provide a complete change of books almost every year for the different members of their families. Heretofore, the same book was used in a class for a long number of years and books were passed on from brother to brother and sister to sister, and the parents spared great expense.
In these times, the provision of £2 per primary school for the provision of ink, chalk and free books is totally inadequate and should be considerably increased. That is the figure I have for the provision of these items. The Minister can correct me if I am wrong. I am suggesting the Minister is being advised by the wrong people if he assumes the children in rural Ireland, or indeed in many cities and towns, can buy, out of the earnings of the breadwinner, the costly new books and appliances that are demanded from year to year and from week to week.
I am concerned that while there is an increase in the Minister's Estimate in respect of secondary schools, it is not a very substantial increase and will be very largely absorbed by increases in salaries arising from arbitration awards to the teachers. There will be very little left for the provision of the additional scholarships required and the attainment of the free education we seek in our secondary school system.
I have said the secondary school system is a class-ridden system, that all the State expenditure on secondary education is tending to endow the rich, buttress privilege and disfranchise the poor man's child. The secondary system of education, with its varying degrees of fees, the cultivation of accents and the different brands of uniform, is evidently the most class-conscious section of our educational system. We as a Party have no hesitation in saying that we would undo that system and claim for our children free post-primary education, free secondary education and free university education. Pending the attainment of that ideal, we would extend out of all proportion the required number of scholarships so that every child who had the ability could pass on from the primary school to the secondary school or vocational school of his choice, and thence to the university.
Again in regard to vocational education, it is significant to note that of all the secondary scholarships which have been availed of—and there must have been many thousands in the past few years—I do not know of a single instance where a parent opted to send the child who had won a secondary scholarship to a vocational school instead of a secondary school. Clearly, and it is regrettable, there seems to be in the mind of the parent some stigma attached to the vocational school. Rarely, if ever, have we found that a pupil availed of a secondary scholarship to go to a vocational school. It has always been to the secondary school. I am suggesting that parents must feel there is a higher social status attached to the secondary school as against the vocational school, and that is to be greatly deplored.
The Minister is doing something to build up the status of the vocational school in introducing the Intermediate and Leaving Certificate examinations. It is something we recommend very much. I note from the Minister's speech that plans are going ahead for these examinations in the vocational schools. They will have the effect of upgrading these technical schools, giving them a better status and ensuring that boys and girls who have a bent for vocationalism will avail of these schools in future.
Money expended on education, and particularly vocational education, in these times is money well spent and it will reap a rich reward not merely for the pupil or the parent but for the nation in the immediate years ahead. We are facing difficult times. There are serious problems confronting this nation, problems which may very well put the survival of this country as an independent State in jeopardy. We will be relying, in the main, on a highly-educated, highly-trained and highly-adaptable labour force in order to contend with the economic battles we shall have to fight in the future. It is in the sphere of vocational education that the greatest good can be done. That is why we support the Minister in respect of the improvements he is making in vocational education. Many old skills are passing away. Industry is being forced through competition to adapt itself and introduce the most modern techniques and devices available. The vocational school of the future will have to realign itself and change its curriculum to ensure the children of the future have the training required to cope with these new devices which industry has been forced to adopt.
Again speaking on vocational education, I want to impress upon the Minister the importance of a transport system. While there are very many primary schools and possibly somewhat fewer secondary schools dispersed throughout the country, there are still fewer technical schools. If the children of the rural areas are to avail of vocational education, we must be prepared to transport them long distances to the vocational school. I would ask the Minister to treat with urgency all proposals he may receive from the vocational committees in respect of travelling facilities of this kind and to be as generous as he can in the provision of the subvention in order to ease the burden on the parents in respect of the transport provided.
I have also felt that when children are being transported to primary, secondary or vocational schools which might be in the same town or region, it is extremely wasteful to provide different sets of transport. Clearly, the one transport system ought to provide for all the children of the various schools when they are in the same region. I understand that this waste and extravagance is bound, of necessity, to occur where you have an educational system which is in four watertight compartments, a primary department, a secondary department, a vocational department and a university department. There would not seem to be any cohesion among these various branches of our educational system. We have appealed time after time for the abandonment of this wasteful and stupid policy of having our educational system confined in those four compartments. They should be placed in one department under one heading, so that we shall have the co-operation and the cohesion which is desirable for the implementation of of an educational policy proper.
I do not wish to allow the occasion to pass, Sir, without raising again the question of the mentally handicapped child. I know there are various grades of mental handicap and I know, too, the Minister's Department, despite sincere effort on his part to grapple with this serious national problem, has up to now made very little impact on the problem of the care and education of the mentally retarded children of this country. Despite constant appeals in this House, the Minister's Department has failed to do anything about this and voluntary organisations have been forced to take up the work. These voluntary organisations get subscriptions, together with an amount of goodwill and support, in many counties, particularly my own—County Tipperary—and they have now been forced to raise colossal amounts of money, seek suitable buildings and secure the necessary staff for the establishment of schools for the physically and mentally handicapped. They propose to establish a central school in the county but they propose moreover to establish day centres in certain of the big towns where these mentally retarded children can be taken along, trained and educated for five days of the week, and return to their parents afterwards.
I have said this is a national problem, but it is an indictment of the Department of Education that voluntary organisations can do these things, and are doing them well. I hope, when these voluntary organisations call on the Minister for financial support or moral support, guidance or advice, it will be readily forthcoming. I know the Minister has been assisting those voluntary organisations with advice and guidance but I am primarily concerned that, when it comes to the acid test of providing the necessary money, the Minister will, as he is indicating to me physically, dig deep into his pockets and give generously to these organisations to whom we owe a deep debt of gratitude.
No words of mine could adequately express the suffering and great anxiety of mind which prevails in a home where one, and perhaps more than one of these children has to be maintained. Clearly, the teachers in our schools are unable to cope with this type of child. He, or she, is usually relegated to the back of the class. Interest may be taken in him, or her, for a short period, but, eventually, that child is completely ignored and is left alone and lonely. In time, it is decided that it is purposeless and foolish to continue the spurious attempt of educating that child. The child is confined to the home and in many instances becomes a problem. We have cases of children of tender age—as young as ten years—of this kind in my county who have been confined in a mental hospital. There is no provision in this country for a proper institution for the care of that child, or for the training or education of the child, and the child has been placed in a mental hospital, which is clearly unsuitable for a child of such tender age.
I want to plead with the Minister for proper educational facilities for mentally retarded children, whether their condition is mild, medium or chronic. I should wish, while nothing is contained in his speech in this respect, that the Minister might reply and tell the House and the nation, what the parents can hope for and what these children can hope for from the Minister in the coming year from any proposals he may have to alleviate this serious problem.
I noticed that the Minister proposes, and has suggested to the representatives of the secondary schools, that the school year should be extended to at least 200 days. I wish to say now as I have always felt, that children have too many holidays. It is purposeless leaving children off from school for six or eight weeks every year. It is wasteful in the extreme. It is certainly no help to the child and very little help to the parents. I am glad the Minister has had the wisdom now to provide that the school year will be extended to 200 days. Extra instruction of these children will result, and the wastage arising in the past by children being away from school for virtually two or three months of the year will cease.
The same might apply to primary and vocational education. Here again the period of holidays seems excessive and is not in the best interests of the children. I know the argument has been made from time to time that parents were able to utilise the services of their children, especially the older children, on the farm or in the business during the holiday period. That may be so, but I am of the opinion that it is not in the best interests of the children that they should be allowed to play around and that their education should be disrupted for such an extensive period every year. It is only right and proper that the Minister should see to it as far as he can that a reasonable work year is maintained. Most of us get only a fortnight's holidays every year. When one considers that, one would regard three or four months' holidays as excessive.
With the exception of some provision for heating and cleaning, provision for secondary education, a slight increase for industrial schools and an increase in the State subvention for scholarships, there is nothing in the Minister's speech which gives us any hope of the implementation of the revolutionary plan outlined 12 months ago. I ask the Minister to indicate more clearly and in greater detail when we may hope to see the establishment of these regional colleges.
I know the centres the Minister has designated for such colleges; I know, too, he has said he is having particular regard to the establishment of such a college in Carlow, that he is in consultation with the vocational education committee there in an effort to gauge the requirements of that college. It would seem—I hope I am wrong— that the Minister looks upon the establishment of the Carlow college as a pilot plan, as an example of what the other colleges should be, and that until such time as the establishment in Carlow is a reality, work will not begin in other centres.
That is the inference I draw from the Minister's remarks. It would be tragic if the people of the country at large had to wait for a number of years for the establishment of colleges in their areas. Apart from the great wastage of talent, many young boys and girls who could be trained as technicians, scientists and technologists, will have been lost to the nation. This, I would impress on the Minister, is a matter of extreme urgency. If we are to progress in the industrial sector, if we are to take our place in the European economy, if agricultural output is to be increased, we urgently need these schools of technology for the training of personnel.
When the Minister outlined his proposals in May, 1963, and when these revolutionary plans were outlined, I thought we would proceed with all haste. It is not merely disconcerting but alarming that the Minister has not positive proposals for the commencement of work on these establishments. He has not even indicated when these schools will be in operation. Thousands of our young boys and girls have been looking with hope and enthusiasm to the day when they can go on from the technical schools and the secondary schools to technological colleges and the university.
When are these hopes to be realised? Clearly it is not to be this year, next year. Will it be in ten years time? How many thousands of boys and girls with great talent, aptitude and ability, will by then have been lost to the nation? I can only urge on the Minister the necessity for proceeding with all haste in the centres mentioned in his statement today. While I realise every town in Ireland of any size cannot have a college of technology, I regret the Minister did not think fit to propose a school of technology in the Premier County.
