Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 2 Oct 2003

Vol. 571 No. 3

Ceisteanna – Questions. - Funding of Fee Charging Schools.

Róisín Shortall

Question:

7 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Education and Science the proposals he has to review State financial support for private fee paying schools; the amount of such financial support in each of the past five years; the number of schools benefiting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21537/03]

The total annual amount paid in respect of fee charging secondary schools for each of the past five years amounted to €66 million in 1999, €69 million in 2000, €72 million in 2001, €77.5 million in 2002 and an estimated €83.5 million in 2003. Of this sum, almost 90% relates to salaries and allowances of teachers. The balance includes the Protestant block grant and funding towards support services such as secretarial and caretaking services. Grants were issued in 2002 and 2003 for supervision arrangements.

The payment of teacher salaries is part of a complex scheme of funding for fee charging schools which has traditionally sought to balance considerations of equity, pragmatism and State support for minority religions. Teachers in fee charging schools, irrespective of the denominational ethoi of those schools, are paid by the State. This may well reflect a long standing pragmatism to the effect that the State would be required to provide teachers for the pupils in question were they located within the free education scheme.

There are 59 fee charging second level schools in the country, of which one is Jewish, 21 Protestant, two inter-denominational and the balance Catholic. The Protestant and Jewish schools receive funding by way of a block grant which has its origins in the desire of the State to enable students of the Protestant and Jewish persuasion to attend schools that reflect their denominational ethoi. The block grant includes payments in respect of capitation and these schools also qualify for payment of such grants as the transition year support grant and secretarial and caretaking grants. Fee charging schools not embraced by the block grant do not qualify for payment of capitation or related supports.

State funding of fee charging schools is complex. In many respects the present system has evolved over time as opposed to its having been rationally planned. That said, we all know that suggestions of change can all too often be seen as threatening and run the risk of being presented in a black and white or winners and losers way. The reality is different. Fee charging schools are not all of a kind. The spectrum of fees charged varies considerably and, in some cases, scholarships are provided. Enrolments in schools in receipt of a Protestant block grant can increasingly include a significant number of pupils from other denominations. Just as the issues are complex, securing change will be equally complex. I have no proposals for a grandstanding or headline setting measure such as the total removal of all State support. Equally, we should not accept the existing arrangements as either ideal or unchangeable. As a first step, I have asked my officials to explore some of the issues involved with representatives of schools in the fee charging sector.

The Minister has given us an interesting outline of the issue but he has not answered my question as to what proposals he has to review the existing funding arrangements. Is it that he just wanted to sound as if he were concerned about disadvantage and spending a significant sum of money on fee charging schools? What will the Minister do to address the problems that exist?

I have often been accused of saying what I will do before giving anybody the opportunity to express their views. Therefore, I will not be drawn into the argument of the Deputy.

I have raised the matter with the JMB as a representative of the management of the schools. I have asked my officials to examine some of the issues involved and to report back to me. When they do so, I will consider the matter further.

Is there a timescale pertaining to when the proposals will be put forward?

I have no timescale. It will depend on how long the talks continue with the officials.

Is the Minister examining some or all of the issues involved? Will he tell us what they are? He was asked on a radio programme if fee charging schools should join the free education scheme. He said it would put the building programme up the creek. Is he still of that opinion?

I would not use unparliamentary language like that in the House. Not only would the schools joining the free education scheme cause major problems for the capital programme but it would also cause problems for my current programme because none of the schools in question, with the exception of those associated with the Protestant block grant, receives a capitation grant. If they were to be subject to the free education scheme, we would have to pay capitation grants, which would cost approximately €60 million. Bearing this in mind, I would still prefer to have them all included in the free education scheme. The day of private schools may be over and they should all be treated equally.

On the issues Deputy Enright raised, there are issues of constitutionality and school size. For instance, a case was put to me by a Church of Ireland clergyman that, even within the Church of Ireland system, there are quite distinct differences between some of the fee charging schools and others. He listed one or two schools in Dublin – I will not name them – that could well afford not to be receiving State support. However, the vast majority of Church of Ireland schools are in rural areas and cater for a scattered Protestant population. Their not receiving State support would cause them great difficulties. These are the kinds of complex issues that are involved.

As the Deputy knows, the issue of constitutionality also arises. We have a commitment to look after minorities and one way by which churches feel their ethoi are preserved is if they have their own schools. There are very complex issues to be considered but I still believe it would be useful if all such schools made provision for pupils from backgrounds other than wealthy backgrounds to attend those schools. That is not because I deem these schools to be any better than the free schools. It is not good to have people from just one socio-economic background clustered together in a school. There should be pupils from diverse backgrounds in attendance.

I agree with the Minister that this is a complex area and that fee charging schools can create an elite. Does he not agree that the need for a Protestant block grant underlines the perception that the education system is still dominated in large part by a Catholic ethos which, if the opinion polls are to be believed, is not shared by a growing proportion of the population? Does he not agree that we need schools in which all denominations are respected equally? Will he proactively assist groups such as the Educate Together schools, which need assistance from his Department?

Educate Together schools and those of a non-denominational nature, like all others, are treated equally in the system. We have a constitutional obligation to ensure that this be the case. The question of the Protestant schools and the block grant arose when the free secondary education system was introduced. It was deemed to be a way of discharging our constitutional obligations but, as far as I am concerned, all schools are treated equally within the system and I hope that this continues to be the case.

Top
Share