I wish to share time with Senator Bacik.
School Capitation Grants.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Barry Andrews, but I am sorry that the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, is not present.
This is an interesting situation and one that I take on with some delicacy because I do not like to take on any sectarian matter about the Catholic ethos or Protestant ethos. There is, however, a worrying situation here. I wish first to put it into its historical context. Amild-mannered man, the Anglican Archbishop, Dr. John Neill, has said that it is highlydiscriminatory against members of minority religions. This is infinitely regrettable.
Speaking on 2 October 2003 in the other House, the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, said: "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". That is just about half the number of Protestant schools there were when the State came into existence so there has already been a steady erosion of these schools. He added, "TheProtestant 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."
He continued to answer several of the points that the Department had put forward in defence of its swingeing cuts to these schools:
[T]he 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.
In other words, they are very different and cannot possibly be described as elitist because they often cater for poor people, those on social welfare who depend on the grant made out of the block grant and who now do not get the per capita grant.
In 1967, introducing this situation, the late Donogh O'Malley, then Minister for Education, said:
In the matter of the free post-primary education scheme special consideration was given to the position of Protestant schools. If the general scheme had been applied to these schools, practically no Protestant pupils would have benefited. In order, therefore, to ensure that Protestants would be treated equitably in the matter of benefit under the scheme, a special arrangement was made whereby a Commission representing the schools under Protestant management is to be paid a lump sum which will be distributed by the Commission in grants towards the school fees of the pupils most in need of such assistance ... one of the main reasons being that the religious in the Catholic schools — priests, brothers and sisters — plough back their salaries while the Protestant schools have not such a source of income . . . It would just not be possible for my Department to distribute the grant in the same manner as we do to the Catholic schools . . . [The Secondary Education Commission for the Protestant Schools] came to the conclusion that the manner in which they were acting was the only manner in which they could act in order to ensure an equitable distribution, taking account of the varying circumstances of the pupils and their families.
Three Fianna Fáil Ministers have outlined the reasons this provision was made and it has been unilaterally altered by this Government. This is a serious matter because it will affect Protestant schools.
The Minister of State has in his files briefing documents transmitted to Senator Bacik and to me which indicate a series of case histories both in the Dublin area and in the country which make it very clear that certain families who are on the margins would not be able to send their children to school if these measures went ahead and were sustained. In the 2009 budget the Government singled out Protestant schools for discriminatory treatment. The Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, acknowledged this in the Dáil last November, saying, "I am well aware it will cause serious difficulty and I obviously have concerns about this".
The former archdeacon, Reverend Gordon Linney, writing in The Irish Times last Monday stated:
People might assume that this is an extra concessionary payment exclusive to Protestant schools. It is not. The same funding is given to Catholic schools on a per capita basis whereas the Protestant sector receives it in block form to be channelled to those most in need.
If these proposals are sustained there will be a charge on the Exchequer because at least 10% to 15% of pupils will be dislodged. They will have to be taken into the State sector and there will be a higher cost to the State and several schools will close down completely. This is not in anyone's interests. It is not good educational practice. Reverend Linney added:
Catholic children have additional supports in their schools through various grants and a much better teacher-pupil ratio ... In one of our rural schools where many family incomes are less than what is available on social welfare, over half the pupils require significant financial assistance with their fees. It is quite disgraceful to label these people as "elitist".
In other words, because of the dispersed nature of the Protestant population throughout the country there is not normally a school of their ethos within their immediately neighbouring area so they are forced into a situation such that they have to attend boarding schools. They are not boarding for reasons of snobbery but because it is the only way in which they can get this kind of education.
I would like the Minister to think again for several reasons. First, there is an historic precedent. Nothing could be clearer than the arguments advanced by no fewer than three successive Fianna Fáil Ministers which exactly parallel the arguments now being made by the representatives of the minority religions, including the Jewish faith. Second, the whole matter is seen as discriminatory and is regarded as such by the leaders of the minority faiths.
I thank Senator Norris who, as always, puts his case with great eloquence. I echo his words and share his disquiet about speaking on behalf of this sector in the first place because I have a fundamental disagreement with the basis of our education system and the sectarian basis on which it is divided. I have criticised very strongly and will continue to do so the fact that children may be discriminated against in seeking admission to both primary and secondary schools on the basis of the religious affiliation of their parents. That is a rotten basis for our schooling system. I favour a system in which all schools would be multidenominational and welcome children of all creeds and none simply on the basis of geographic catchment areas. However, that is not the system in which we work. Given that we work with a system in which the Equal Status Act allows schools to opt-out, thereby allowing them to discriminate on religious grounds, it is important there should be a choice available to parents, not only to Protestant parents but also to parents like me. I am an atheist and would like my children to attend an Educate Together secondary school but that is not possible because there are no multidenominational Educate Together secondary schools in the State. For parents in my position, therefore, who do not wish their children to be educated within the Catholic ethos there must a choice of schools with a different ethos, whether it be Protestant or, ideally, multidenominational. Currently, Protestant schools offer less inculcation in religious doctrine than most Catholic schools.
The other point is that for Catholic parents there are choices between fee paying and non fee paying Catholic schools. In many areas there are multiple choices which are not available to parents of the Protestant or minority religions or none, given the small numbers of schools which are not Catholic at secondary level. In this context, I am happy to support Senator Norris. It is important that the ethos of the schools be maintained, as I would be fearful that the change in status proposed would affect it.
I should declare my own interest as somebody who went to a fee paying Protestant school but as a Catholic girl on a full scholarship to Alexandra College. Senator Norris said——
That was my mother's old school.
I am proud to say it was also Senator Norris's mother's school. As Senator Norris said, in many Protestant schools there is a wider diversity of class backgrounds than in their Catholic fee paying counterparts. For that reason too, there is a case to be made for treating them differently from Catholic schools.
On behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, I am pleased to be given the opportunity to clarify for the House the position on the funding arrangements for fee-charging Protestant schools. I reassure Senator Norris that I, with my colleagues in government, recognise the importance of ensuring students from a Protestant background can attend a school which reflects their denominational status. The Senator will be aware that the Minister for Education and Science has met representatives of both the Church of Ireland and the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland to discuss the funding position of Protestant schools and the background to the decision in the October budget to remove certain grants from such schools. The Minister emphasises that no changes have been made to the block grant which is expected to be €6.5 million in this school year. It covers capitation, tuition and boarding costs——
Rot.
——and is distributed through the Secondary Education Committee, SEC, established by the churches concerned. This fund ensures necessitous Protestant children can attend a school of their choice. I advise the Senator that officials from the Department of Education and Science have met representatives from the SEC to discuss future funding arrangements for Protestant schools. In this context, the Minister has expressed his willingness to consider any proposals that might be made to the Department that would enable the available funding to be focused and adjusted to meet more effectively the twin objectives of access for individuals and sustaining the schools they wish to attend, particularly those in rural areas.
The October budget implemented changes in how all fee charging schools are treated in respect of the number of publicly funded teaching posts allocated to them. With effect from 1 January this year, teachers in fee charging schools are allocated at a pupil teacher ratio of 20:1, a point higher than allocations in non fee charging post-primary schools. In view of the challenging economic circumstances we are facing, the Minister is not in a position to reverse this decision. The decision is justified on the basis that schools which have access to fees as an income source are in a better position to maintain services at a time when the public finances are under such severe pressure. Fee charging schools can continue to employ additional teachers that they fund from their fee income. The Minister will continue to work with representatives of the Protestant education sector to ensure State funding made available to the Protestant community is targeted in the fairest way possible to meet the needs of their children and their schools.
Planned expenditure levels for the Department of Education and Science will be considered as part of the Estimates and budgetary process for 2010. This will include consideration of the report of the special group on public service numbers and expenditure programmes, SGPSNEP. The decisions on all the issues arising will be a matter for the Government. It would not be appropriate for me to comment further at this stage, pending the outcome of that deliberative process.
Now we know why the Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, was ashamed to show his face——
Does the Senator have a supplementary question?
That is one of the most disgraceful responses I have ever heard. It is blatantly sectarian and a tissue of lies. I am beginning to wonder if there is not an agenda at certain levels within the Department among those who have the same view as Senator Bacik and I that sectarian education is not a good idea, who would like, by stealth and imposing their policy on a weak Minister, to extinguish the Protestant schools. I would like the Minister of State to pass this information — some of the figures — to the Minister. The total number of pupils in 21 Protestant voluntary schools is 9,500; the estimated total number of Protestant pupils attending is 6,600; the total number on a grant from the SEC is 2,850——
Does the Senator have a question?
——and the total on a full SEC grant is 1,000. How can the Minister square these figures? More than half of the Protestant pupils attending are getting grants because they are poor. This is getting worse. The action of the Government has got rid of secretarial and maintenance grants. Any objective independent analysis will show that this is discriminatory and that as a result of the Government’s actions, the Protestant schools are worse off. That is fine, if the State decides it will move in the direction of non-denominational, non-sectarian education throughout the State. I will support it. It is the duty of the parents, not the schools, to produce the ethos. I remind the Minister of State of Article 42.3.1° of the Constitution which states: “The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State or to any particular type of school designated by the State”. This is what the Department of Education and Science is doing to my community and I object to it. I will support and hope the record of the Adjournment debate in this House will be used to support any constitutional action undertaken to overcome this vicious and discriminatory policy of the Department.
I have met Eleanor Petrie and many representatives of the fee paying Protestant schools and this is the first time I have heard wild allegations about conspiracies and sectarianism in the Department of Education and Science.
I did not say that.
On the contrary, they have engaged in a very constructive way with the Department and Members of this House in informing and explaining to Members the distinction with regard to Protestant schools in the areas in which they are involved and particularly the demands met in rural areas. The campaign will be part of the deliberative process in the budgetary process. They have also accepted the fact that everybody has to take a hit in the current climate and are being constructive in the proposals they are putting to the Minister. Far from being weak, he will endeavour to the best of his abilities to ensure the constitutional imperatives to which the Senator referred are discharged fully for the protection of those students who wish to follow a specific spiritual ethos and those parents who wish to access that spiritual ethos in their children's education.
I have a final supplementary question for the Minister of State.
Senator, there is no such provision.
If it is not sectarian, why was the Orange Order dragged in as a red herring in his speech? What does the Orange Order have to do with anything?
Senator, there is no provision for a further question.
Perhaps it is a Masonic order.
I call Senator Keaveney to raise the second Adjournment matter.