asked the Minister for Education if he will state, further to his reply to Questions Nos. 45, 46 and 47 of 19th May on community schools that it is now intended to hold meetings in a number of areas throughout the country in which the proposals might be applied, whether it is his intention to invite the representatives of the minority denominations to attend such meetings.
Questions—Ceisteanna. Oral Answers. - Community Schools.
8.
It is the intention to begin the holding of such meetings at an early date. They will be public meetings at which any person having an interest in post-primary education in the various areas concerned will be free to attend.
Can the Minister say who will be invited to these meetings? Presumably somebody acts as convener and notwithstanding the fact that they are public meetings who will receive notification?
The date and the venue of the meeting will be advertised in the local newspapers. I have already stated that the schools concerned will be notified, the nominee of the Bishop, the Catholic managers and the vocational education teachers' and the secondary teachers' organisations and, as I said, any other person who is interested will be very welcome.
In view of the fact that the Minister has indicated that the various representatives of the Catholic hierarchy, at local level, will be specifically notified and invited to attend the meeting, is it also his intention to notify the local Church of Ireland school authorities and to invite them also?
There are no Church of Ireland schools in the particular areas under consideration.
May I ask——
We cannot discuss this one question all day.
It is a rather important question and worthy of a Dáil debate not just——
Other questions are equally important.
All right. I will put a final supplementary and I would ask the Minister not to be as devious in his next reply. As representatives of the Catholic hierarchy at local level will be specifically invited to such meetings, will representatives of the Church of Ireland, for example, at local level also be invited?
I explained on previous occasions to the Deputy the type of management and so on that would be involved. I should be glad to see the representatives of the Protestant community present.
Question No. 9.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I am calling Question No. 9.
(Interruptions.)
I do not wish to raise the matter on the Adjournment as notice has already been given in regard to another question.
If the Deputy wishes to raise it on the Adjournment, what is the point in discussing it now?
I wish to avoid wasting the time of the House.
Then sit down.
May I ask the Minister——
The number of supplementaries is a matter for the Chair to determine and not Deputy Desmond. I have allowed five supplementary questions on this particular question.
Then I wish to raise the subject matter of Question No. 8 on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
9.
asked the Minister for Education if he considers it in the national interest to introduce, by means of departmental regulation, major changes in the educational structure of the country; and if, in view of recent developments, particularly in relation to the view to the preparation of a new Education Bill.
I do not feel that any such elaborate procedure as that outlined in the Deputy's question is called for. Ample opportunity has been given in this House to discuss the Government's policy in education which is directed towards providing equality of educational opportunity for all our children.
In view of the fact that the current proposals relating to community schools were not given to this House by way of Estimate statement, in the form of management proposed, and in view of the fact that major national changes are proposed in the whole structure of the educational system in relation to 31 centres, does the Minister not consider it extraordinary and disgraceful that no White Paper has been published, more particularly as even the Vocational Teachers' Organisation asked for a White Paper to be published in a statement this morning? The country is entitled to a new Education Bill rather than ad hoc proposals drawn up between the Minister and Cardinal Conway.
The Minister does not regard it as either extraordinary or disgraceful. It is quite obvious to the Minister that the Deputy has not followed the line of Fianna Fáil educational policy over the years. When the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dr. Hillery, was Minister for Education the comprehensive schools were established; there was no legislation needed for that. When Deputy George Colley became Minister for Education he was also concerned, not only with the comprehensive schools but with the comprehensive type of education, in order to try to provide this type of education for all the children of the country. He issued a circular letter to all the schools asking that they should co-operate and in the process to help to break down the barriers which existed between secondary schools and vocational schools. The late Donogh O'Malley brought in free education and free school transport schemes. It became obvious that the need for comprehensive educational facilities in the schools had become more necessary because of the exceptionally large number of extra pupils who were seeking post-primary education. All these moves were in furtherance of the concept of which I have already spoken on many occasions in this House. Deputy B. Lenihan continued this policy. When I became Minister for Education I too was very anxious that there should be equal education facilities for all children.
It was soon obvious that the co-operation we were looking for would not produce the equality of opportunity in the matter of providing comprehensive educational facilities particularly in the smaller towns. The vocational education committees were not legally empowered to co-operate in any formal way. For these reasons the community schools idea developed. I introduced legislation to give legal authority to the vocational education committees to participate formally in the financing and the running of the joint schools. There has been a clear indication all along of what successive Ministers for Education have been trying to do. The basic consideration is that the late Donogh O'Malley, having given access to free education to all those who wished to avail of it in the post-primary schools, we had to examine the situation in order to see whether equality of educational opportunity was in fact being given to all. In the smaller country towns it was obvious that we were not providing equality of educational opportunity. The community school idea has evolved from this as a normal development.
The late Donogh O'Malley would turn in his grave if he could hear what the Minister has just said. At no stage since 1963 did the late Donogh O'Malley, Deputy Colley, Deputy Dr. Hillery, or Deputy Brian Lenihan when they were Ministers for Education in making statements in relation to the community schools and to comprehensive schools legally vest the ownership and effective control of these schools in a particular ecclesiastical authority.
In so far as the comprehensive schools are concerned, they are vested in the Trustees nominated by the Bishop for that area.
One particular school.
10.
asked the Minister for Education if he will elaborate on his statement of 19th May, 1971, concerning the proposed community schools that the question of agreement with the Catholic Hierarchy does not arise.
11.
asked the Minister for Education whether he intends to invite Rev. Dr. Buchanan, the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin, to discuss with him the implications of his recent statement on community schools.
12.
asked the Minister for Education if he will elaborate, in terms of dates and composition of delegations, on his statement that the Protestant community could not regard vocational schools as non-denominational in character.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 11 and 12 together. At the outset I would like to deprecate again in the strongest possible terms the efforts on the part of the Deputy to introduce sectarianism into this matter of community schools.
I informed the House on the 19th of this month of the discussions which I and my Department had with various interests in relation to these schools. At no stage did the seeking of or the giving of agreement arise. The proposals which emanated are my proposals and I stand over them fully.
As regards the statement made by His Grace, Dr. Buchanan, I can only repeat what I have said already—that Dr. Buchanan was no doubt referring to the legal position but that the factual position is that on numerous occasions deputation after deputation on behalf of the Protestant community stated that because the vast majority of pupils and teachers in vocational schools are Catholics they could not regard these schools as non-denominational in character. That I and my predecessors respected the view that the Protestant community wished their children to attend schools under Protestant management is evidenced by the special provisions made in the matter of school transport for those children and by the provision of separate schools where such would not be otherwise warranted. I do not feel that it would be correct for me to furnish details of deputations received by me or my Department.
I might add for the Deputy's information in relation to the areas proposed for community schools that of the 13,800 pupils at present attending post-primary schools in these areas only 106 are Protestant pupils attending vocational schools. He will, therefore, I trust appreciate the non-issue which he has raised.
The Minister's figures illustrate the sectarian character of his proposals. I bitterly reject and completely repudiate any suggestion that we have introduced such connotations and overtones into the proposals.
The Deputy has. His party have not done so.
May I put it to the Minister——
The Deputy may ask a question. We cannot have these speeches.
Would the Minister agree that Cardinal Conway made it explicitly and unequivocally clear to him personally that he required that the proposed 31 community schools should be owned in trusteeship and effectively be under control by the majority board system of the Catholic ecclesiastical authority? Would the Minister agree that this was the proposition? Would he agree that this indication was given to him and the Minister accordingly accepted it and then redrafted and brought in his proposals? Is that not the truth of the matter?
That is absolute nonsense. I have stated here and have stated publicly on television and on the radio that I had discussions with the Hierarchy, with the vocational and with other groups. My Department had discussions with the teaching organisations. I listened to all they had to say, and when I had listened to them all it was quite obvious to me, as it is to anybody who looks at or reads of the controversy which is proceeding at the present time in relation to the position, that there was considerable opposition to my proposals, but that many of those who were opposing my proposals were opposing them for different reasons. It was obvious that if all sat around a table for years and tried to work out a completely acceptable solution they would never reach it. Having listened to what all the various groups had to say, I made my own decision. The proposals put forward now are my own proposals. I reject entirely the inference in Deputy Desmond's supplementary question.
The Minister has not answered my question. I asked the Minister if he would agree it was clearly conveyed to him by Cardinal Conway that the community schools would have to be—all 31 of them— under the legal ownership and the majority management control of the Catholic ecclesiastical authority. The Minister has not answered that question. I challenge him to say whether the statement was put to him?
I said, and I repeat, that what is implied in the Deputy's question is nonsense. If the original document which I issued in the form of a working paper is examined particularly in relation to the board of management—and in so far as I can see most controversy appears to arise in that regard—and if it is related to the proposals which I made in my final document, it will be seen that there is very little difference except that there is in fact a considerable improvement. In the original proposals I put forward only hope was expressed that the parents might become part of the management board; in fact, parents will now be on the management boards.
This is turning into an argument and I will allow no further questions.
May I ask the Minister a final supplementary question?
I am calling Question No. 13.
Then I wish to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Questions Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12 on today's Order Paper, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy. I have called Question No. 13.