Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Oct 1986

Vol. 114 No. 10

Adjournment Matter. - Multi-Denominatinal Education in Sligo.

Mr. M. Higgins

I am grateful for the opportunity afforded me to raise a matter of considerable importance to those who are seeking to establish a facility for multi-denominational education in Sligo. The issues are rather straightforward but to me very worrying. There is a group in Sligo known as the Sligo School Project. That group have come together for the purpose of providing facilities for their children for multi-denominational education. I have in front of me a large amount of correspondence which the group has had with different Ministers, including the present Minister, and with officials of the Department of Education. I cannot fail — here I must substantiate what I am saying, which I intend to do — to get the impression that unnecessary obstacles have been placed in the way of their endeavours. The project people are very pleased that in late 1985 approval was given in principle for such a school. The impression had been given that as long as the Sligo School Project met with the normal conditions they could look forward to their project being successful and the school being provided.

The difficulties they encountered are as follows. Initially, approval had been given, in principle, in the autumn of 1985. They then set about finding a building for the school. They found the Dental Mirror factory at Cleveragh and they asked the Department on 22 October 1985 for a reply as to whether it was suitable and if funds would be available for the modification of the building. In the meantime, in order not to present a single option, they approached Sligo Vocational Education Committee. That committee in a very forward looking and generous way, agreed to provide a site for a temporary building for the provision of the school. They now had two options on offer. A contingent issue might be in relation to the first option that some money would be available for the adaptation of the building, and it become clear that there would be very little money available and even at that stage the group were experiencing difficulty in securing answers to very specific questions. For example, is option A in relation to the buildings acceptable? Is option B acceptable?

In their letter of 22 October 1985 the group requested a reply in writing before the end of October so that they would know what to do. At that stage they were aiming to open in September 1986. They wrote on 9 December 1985 requesting an answer to their letter. On 16 December 1985 the office of the Minister for Education wrote to Ms. Nuala Moloney, secretary of the Sligo School Project, Hazelwood Avenue, Sligo, saying:

The Minister for Education, Gemma Hussey, TD, has asked me to acknowledge receipt of your letter on 9th December, 1985 regarding Sligo School Project's proposal to purchase/lease the Dental Mirror Factory at Cleveragh. Inquiries have been made in this matter and a further letter will be sent to you as soon as possible.

We must try to resolve this matter because having received letters from the political people involved, the Minister of the day — who is here this evening and for whom I have a high personal regard — his predecessor and several other representatives of that constituency, the project is not advancing any further. This group have come together, are agreed what they want, have found tentative buildings but cannot get answers to their questions. Then they come to their next difficulty, they cannot get meetings with the appropriate officials in the Department of Education. On 23 December 1985 — two days before Christmas — they wrote a letter to the Minister for Education stating:

Dear Minister,

Having met the requirements of your Department the Sligo School Project has received provisional recognition for its school in a letter dated 16th December, 1985. The Project is pleased with this development.

However, other aspects of that letter created a deep sense of shock and anger within the Project:

The acquisition of temporary premises is a matter for the school promoters. The rules for National Schools do not provide for grant-aid towards the purchase or the carrying out of works to make such premises suitable. Accordingly, grants would not be available at this stage for the acquisition or conversion of the former Dental Mirror Factory.

The project always appreciated that in the short term there was excess space in the Dental Mirror Factory but was confident that this could be a decided advantage in the developing situation. However, the Project concedes that it presented problems for the Department of Education. But that does not excuse the discriminatory stance adopted by the Department in disallowing any grant aid.

No such question could be raised with the alternative proposal, i.e. the V.E.C. site.

I must emphasise that the Sligo VEC offered a site to the project.

However, at a meeting between the Project's representatives and Mr. D. O'Lochlainn, Department of Education, on the 17th December, 1985, it was suggested that similar conditions concerning grant-aid would apply. Derisory sums were mentioned in relation to the contribution of the rent of pre-fabs. This is totally unacceptable to the Project. It demands at minimum terms similar to the Bray School Project with which Sligo has many parallels.

We again appeal to you, Minister, to guarantee our constitutional right to have multi-denominational education available to our children by ensuring fair treatment for the Sligo School Project.

There is a courteous series of letters between the promoters of this project and the people they met along the way. They give an example of meetings they had and they wrote to the present Minister on 14 February 1986 stating:

On behalf of the Sligo School Project I wish to congratulate you on your new appointment and look forward to your support in the future.

Some people say this in letters to the Minister and do not mean it but I know that on this occasion it was meant.

Minister for Education (Mr. Cooney)

I get that in all letters I receive.

Mr. M. Higgins

I will quote from Programme for Action in Education, 1984-87, published by the Government.

Where the Government is convinced that the establishment of a multi-denominational school represents the clear wishes of parents in an area and where the school can be provided on a viable basis, support will be given to such developments on the same terms as those which would be available for the establishment of schools under denominational patronage.

The Sligo School Project took cognisance of this statement in pursuing their objective. In March 1986 they were still asking for a meeting to resolve the difficulties that had arisen in relation to premises. In a letter dated 24 March 1986 to Junior Minister Enda Kenny they said:

... The assistance and co-operation of the Department of Education were assured, ... Unfortunately, the commitment and efficiency of the Project is not reflected in the Department's handling of the matter.

It is important to stress that the Sligo School Project is an innovative development in the educational life of the North-West region and we call on you to use your influential office to ensure that the Project's initiative is not stifled by bureaucratic machinery.

They then requested a meeting with the Department of Education for Thursday, 3 April or Friday, 4 April, They wrote again to the Minister for Social Welfare, Mrs. Hussey TD, on 26 March reminding her how far they had gone during the period of her ministry. They said they were still requesting a meeting to straighten out the question of buildings. If I appear tedious reading this, I am sure I am only reflecting the tedium of a group of people who are trying to resolve something very simple and basic.

Unfortunately, it got more complicated after that. The Minister wrote to a colleague of his, Mr. McCartin, TD, on 23 April 1986, stating:

I wish to refer to representations on behalf of Ms. Nuala C. Moloney ... concerning the Sligo School Project....

There is sufficient suitable accommodation in St. Anne's Boy's National School, Carnmore Road, Sligo, where six classrooms are available. The question of putting the spare capacity at the disposal of the Sligo School Project for the purpose of a multi-denominational school has been taken up with the authorities of that school from whom a reply is awaited.

We are now in a rather interesting position. The Minister and I have debated Education very often and I accept his lecture. He wished me to understand that what we have in this country is denominational education. The Minister is now saying that people——

Mr. Cooney

I have never said that. The Senator is misquoting me.

Mr. M. Higgins

If I am I will withdraw my quotation, but I think we will let the record judge, and we will meet again to——

Mr. Cooney

The Senator should check the report and be careful.

Mr. M. Higgins

I will be very careful; in fact I will now quote:

There is sufficient and suitable accommodation in St. Ann's Boys' National School, Carnmore Road, Sligo, where six classrooms are available. The question of putting this spare capacity at the disposal of the Sligo School Project for the purpose of a multi-denominational school has been taken up with the authorities of that school from whom a reply is awaited.

Perhaps I am naive, but it is extraordinary that multi-denominational school accommodation cannot be processed when it is in a factory, or on a site provided by the VEC, but that it can be considered when it is under the same roof as denominational education. That is my opinion for what it is worth.

Matters were to get a little more strange. There was a further request for a meeting in May 1986 but by now another dimension had been introduced, and this above anything else is really the reason that moved me to take the time of the Seanad on this matter. In order to meet the initial enrolment numbers that were required for the project, it could only include children who had not yet enrolled in a primary school. I have four children attending primary education, one in one denominational school and three in another, but what if I want multi-denominational education? The group were told they cannot change the children within the denominational system; they can only talk about children not yet at school. I want a very specific answer because I think we should all be careful. What is the constitutional status of that particular regulation? I want answers to these questions. Is that a new policy in 1986? Is it clearly within the interpretation of the provision of education in the Constitution? Are the conditions being looked for in this regard the same as have been looked for in every other school that has been started — multi-denominational, non-denominational and denominational? On what basis can separate conditions be put in? Is this representation entirely wrong? Have there been meetings that I have not described or have not heard about? When are future meetings planned?

Let us summarize: are the questions of buildings still outstanding? Can they be resolved? Is the question of numbers still as it was, or has there been a new condition in relation to the numbers? Has there been a special policy? Does this mean that if you want a multi-denominational option, and you organise with parents in any part of the Republic to provide it, you should keep your children away from school to begin with, and not send them until you have the required numbers in order to build up the numbers required. It appears that the moment you send them to a denominational school you forfeit your right to change your mind about the kind of education you want for your child.

What is the legal status of that? It is far beyond an issue of education policy or administration at that stage. It is not a matter of people having meetings or not getting meetings. It is not a matter of people being unsatisfied with letters. It is a matter of the frustration of educational rights as they exist in the Constitution in relation to the provision of education. It was for those reasons that I raised this matter. I thank the Minister for the courtesy of coming into the House and dealing with this matter at this time.

Minister for Education (Mr. Cooney)

It is important when we approach this matter that I make a number of things very clear at the outset. First, I have to reject the implication that has run through Senator M. Higgins' entire contribution that the approach of the Department is somehow biased or bigoted.

Mr. M. Higgins

I did not say that.

Mr. Cooney

I know the Senator did not say it in so many words but——

Mr. M. Higgins

The Minister advised me to be careful.

Mr. Cooney

——that was the entire theme of his statement. I want to say quite clearly that I reject any suggestions——

Mr. M. Higgins

The Minister should be very careful. I do not use and I never have used that language.

Mr. Cooney

I am very glad to hear it. The whole tone of his contribution indicated to me that I and my Department were being accused of bias against a non-denominational school. I want to deny that quite categorically, and say that that is not so. I stand by the statement in the Programme for Action which the Senator read. We are quite prepared to grant aid a multi-denominational, non-denominational or denominational school. Whatever parents want that is Government policy, and that is the policy that determines the establishment of schools in our society, but the establishment of schools has to be done in accordance with rules and regulations. I am sure everybody will agree on that.

Some people may find rules and regulations irksome, but rules and regulations are designed to protect public funds and to ensure order in our affairs. Undoubtedly the application of those rules and regulations will not at all times satisfy the people to whom they have been applied and that is unfortunately what we have here, no more and no less. I have a totally open mind on what type of school is provided in Sligo, Ballina, Athlone or any other part of the country provided it comes within what I consider to be the perfectly reasonable rules and regulations governing the establishment of these schools.

When approval was given to the school on 16 December 1985 it was made very clear that the Department would grant provisional recognition, again in accordance with the rules and regulations, and the question of permanent recognition would be considered after the school had been in operation for some time. That is perfectly understandable. It would defy reason if we were to grant-aid to the full and maximum extent what is essentially an experimental project or, indeed, any school that was a new concept in an area, no matter how desirable. I do not deny its desirability from the point of view of the parents concerned. It is a new concept in that area and the rule regarding the granting of provisional recognition has to take into account that sometimes experimental projects do not continue after the initial enthusiasm wanes. Consequently I and my officials would have a lot of egg on our faces and would be the butt of indignant taxpayers if we were to fully grant aid ab initio something that we were not satisfied was going to endure. Therefore the recognition was provisional to give it a chance to get established and get underway. The school was getting official recognition; it was getting status. We indicated quite clearly that that was our official position, and that is still our official position.

It then got to the practicalities of where the project was to locate. The first premises was an empty mirror factory and we were asked to grant-aid the rent. The rent we were being asked to pay for this substantial premises was of itself significant and out of proportion. That is a personal opinion, as the one who has to account to the taxpayer. It was too much.

Secondly, I do not think I have to argue heavily before the House that there were at least — and this is putting it at its very mildest — serious question marks over the suitability of a disused mirror factory as a place for commencing a school. That was the first proposition this group put to us. That is one of the unnecessary obstacles Senator Higgins has quoted as being placed in the way of this project by the Department when we turned down this school. The Senator said in his opening remarks that the issues were straightforward but that the whole thing was very worrying and I noted the words "unnecessary obstacles were being put", and then he proceeded to give the evidence. The first piece of evidence was the refusal to approve this empty mirror factory. I do not think we were unreasonable there.

The next suggestion from the project was that they could get a site from Sligo VEC. There was nothing wrong with the site; the site would be perfectly acceptable but what they wanted to put on this site were to all intents and purposes, what would be quasi-permanent buildings. We would then be in breach of our own rules and regulations. If we were to grant-aid what were quasi-permanent buildings we would be grant-aiding on a permanent basis, from day one bearing in mind that our recognition was provisional. If there were prefabricated buildings on the site and they were available at a reasonable rent, we would grant-aid the rent. There is no doubt about that. That is part of the provision. Fifty per cent of the rent would have been paid if there had been buildings on it but we were not prepared to grant-aid to the tune of up to £100,000 at that stage the provision of quasi-permanent buildings on this site. I have no objection to the site. It was an ideal site, but it was an empty site.

In an effort to help the project we drew their attention to the fact that there were empty classrooms provided at taxpayers' expense in other schools in the town. The management of those schools and the project people did not reach a meeting of minds, and, in retrospect, that did not surprise me. We have to look at reality and, to my disappointment, the management were not prepared to make available to the project accommodation which was custom built, that is, the empty classrooms. There was nothing I could do about that because the State does not own the school. This is a private school and the school project when set up, will also be a private school; it will not be owned by the State although it will be State supported and State assisted. This is the system we have. I have no power to twist the arm of any school board of management and say they must give these people their space spare. I cannot do it. I can only point the people in that direction. I point the management in that direction but if they do not come together I cannot do anything about it.

I want to assure Senator Higgins there is no bias on my part or on the part of the Department against this project. We have the management of public funds. We have the job of applying the rules and regulations which order the establishment of schools, and we have to do this objectively and fairly, taking account of all the obligations we have, not just to this group but to the entire taxpaying community.

It seems odd that in a community the size of Sligo — Sligo is a large urban area by Irish standards — it has not been possible to identify a temporary premises that could be rented. We are prepared to grant aid that rent, and it is on record that we are prepared to pay 50 per cent of the rent. If the school runs a reasonable length of time and can show it is going to be a viable proposition, then the normal grant aiding for permanent or quasi-permanent buildings will be available in the way it is available for any group denominational, non-denominational or multi-denominational, who want to start a school. I want to assure Senator Higgins that there is no question of any hidden bias, that because it is a new move and does not accord with the majority view or the traditional projects that come to us, we are in some way hostile to it. That is not so. The Senator mentioned the children——

Mr. M. Higgins

The enrolment figure?

Mr. Cooney

That is not a particular rule that was dragged out or contrived to present as an obstacle to these people. That rule would apply, and has applied, in the case of a second — let us talk in denominational terms — Catholic school being provided where there was already another Catholic school in an adjoining area. We would not allow enrolment to drift between the two because there must be an economic use of resources.

Mr. M. Higgins

But does the Minister see the special problems of non-denominational and multi-denominational schools?

Mr. Cooney

I can see them. I would be careful to ensure that the application of that rule would not fall unduly harshly or hard on this group but the rule was not devised to prejudice the group. In their application they may see it as doing so, and if I can arrange that its interpretation with regard to them avoid that consequence, of course I will do so. That is a secondary issue. I would not like the group to think there was any bias against them. That rule is there and I will ensure that it is applied in a fair way and in a way that will not prejudice them.

I conclude, first by hoping that Senator Higgins is free of any suspicion of unworthy motives on my part or on the part of my Department or any bias against this project and to assure him that in accordance with the Programme for Action, Government policy on this matter is that we are prepared to grant aid it in the normal way within the rules. But the difficulty is it is up to the project, as a group of independent citizens, to supply their own school. We do not supply the school for them or for any other group in society. The groups provide their own school, and we grant aid it. When this group come forward with a suitable premises, we will grant aid the rent provided, of course, it is a reasonable rent and that the premises are reasonable.

Mr. M. Higgins

And such meetings as are necessary with the Department?

Mr. Cooney

As are necessary. Very often I have found since I came into the Department of Education people feel their problems can only be resolved by a personal meeting with me when very often their problems can be solved in correspondence. If there are meetings reasonably required we obviously will meet this group of citizens, as the Department will meet any group of citizens if something arises. I want to assure Senator Higgins that, when a suitable premises is brought forward, the project will find the Department more than willing to help them.

The Seanad adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 4 November 1986.