Micheál Martin
Question:9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Education and Skills the changes he plans to make with regard to school patronage at primary level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17541/13]
View answerWednesday, 17 April 2013
Questions (9, 12)
Bernard Durkan
Question:12. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the degree to which changes in school patronage are in line with expectations in both urban and rural areas; the extent to which ethos and tradition is reflected in any proposals; if he intends to address any issues emerging; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17578/13]
View answerOral answers (8 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 12 together.
The surveys of parental preferences were undertaken largely in towns and suburbs. It was also open to parents of preschool or primary school children in rural areas or rural schools to participate in the surveys. The purpose of the surveys was to establish if parents want a more diverse range of primary school patrons in their area. Following on from the recent publication of the results of the surveys of primary school patronage, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, has written to the Roman Catholic patrons in the 23 areas where parental demand for change has been confirmed in the most recent surveys. He has requested they consider options for reconfiguring schools under their patronage to allow the transfer of a school to a new patron. The Roman Catholic patrons have been asked to submit an interim response within three months and a final response with detailed proposals on divesting schools within six months. Earlier surveys had been conducted in five pilot areas and, as a result, options for change are also being considered in respect of these.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. There is a degree of hypocrisy in making it more difficult for some small schools to operate through changes to the PTR, minor works grant and capitation fees while seeking greater plurality.
Undoubtedly there is an issue of how we provide choice to parents but the Minister's approach has been unfortunate. When he entered office, he announced to great fanfare that he would change the patronage of 50% of primary schools, more than 1,500 national schools. The reality, however, is somewhat different, with the Minister talking about changing the patronage of 28 national schools, less than 1% of the total.
The Minister's approach from the outset has been unfortunate and I note the Catholic Church has been willing to work with the Minister on this and indicated its cooperation with the surveys on patronage. Would the Minister of State agree that the response to the patronage surveys in many areas was disappointing?
The surveys were conducted in 43 areas across the country. We have taken the responses to those surveys and are acting accordingly. There is a process under way with the existing patrons to consider the options. There is a timeframe for responses.
The small schools issue has not been decided yet so the link with this issue is incongruous. The accusation of hypocrisy, therefore, does not stand. This goes back to the set pieces where questions are put to the Minister and the Deputy is entitled to make whatever political charges he wants. That is part and parcel of the game of politics. I do not see the link between the two, to be honest.
Surveys were conducted in 43 areas and we should wait and see what the results were and what response the existing patrons will make.
It is entirely congruent to link small schools with the plurality issue because many small schools are multidenominational or denominations other than Catholic and provide a choice to parents from that area. It is incongruent of the Minister of State to respond to so many genuine questions by commenting on political theatre. It is a good opportunity to get to the nub of the issues and it is unfortunate that instead of dealing with these questions, the Minister of State too often comments on their political bent.
The Minister for Education and Skills said he would change the patronage of 50% of national schools. Where does that promise stand now?
The Minister made a mistake when he put a figure on the number of schools he would change. We can only provide the sort of school people want. If they are happy with the local patron system, it does not change, it comes down to parental choice. The mistake was trying to put a figure on this before any research was carried out. The data are now coming back from the surveys but the response being good or bad is not the issue. We must work from the data.
The Minister of State would enjoy the line from Shakespeare that "All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players".
This is Question Time.
None of us is averse to a bit of political banter from time to time but the purpose of this set-piece is to get to the nub of the questions. Following the recent publication of the results of the survey on primary school patronage, the Minister has written to the Catholic patrons in the 23 areas where parental demand for change has been confirmed in the most recent surveys. A total of 43 areas were surveyed for parental preferences on the patronage of primary schools. Two thirds of the 43 areas surveyed showed sufficient parental demand and, of the areas surveyed, there was sufficient parental demand for a wider choice of school patronage in 28 of those areas to support change in the patronage of schools.
Parents expressed a preference for Educate Together as the alternative patron of choice in 25 of the areas and in two areas the alternative patron of choice was the local VEC and community national school model. That is the system of plurality. If in the majority, parents have decided on the existing system of patronage in their area, that is based on a model of collaboration with those parents who have voted with their feet. As a Government, we must respond accordingly. While the Minister might have made an aspirational statement coming from his own view, he is a reforming Minister and he has taken on board the views of parents articulated in these regions and this will be reflected in Government policy in due course.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.