Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 29 Jul 1970

Vol. 68 No. 16

Vocational Education (Amendment) Bill, 1970: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill is designed to enable the vocational education committees to co-operate with other educational bodies and to empower me to permit of a vocational education committee which have been dissolved being reconstituted without waiting until after the next local authority elections have been held.

Under the existing Vocational Education Acts, vocational education committees have power to pay only the cost of schools or school facilities which are owned and managed solely by themselves. My Department, with a view to having comprehensive educational facilities provided in the most economical way without waste or overlapping, have been encouraging co-operation between secondary and vocational schools so that comprehensive educational facilities can be provided in each area of the country.

In a number of centres in which co-operation between secondary schools and vocational schools is being developed, proposals have been made for the sharing of specialist facilities and ancillary accommodation, e.g. science laboratories, assembly halls, gymnasia, playing fields, et cetera, but, as I have indicated the vocational education committees are precluded from contributing towards the cost of such facilities unless the ownership and management reside solely in the committees. The type of co-operation now envisaged, however, could be fully achieved on the basis of joint ownership and joint management.

The provisions of section 1 of this Bill would enable the vocational education committees, if they wish to do so, to contribute towards the cost of the facilities in question on the basis of their being jointly owned and managed by the committee and another educational authority. This will facilitate the development of co-operation in many centres and help further to break down the barriers between the secondary and vocational systems.

A large size school unit is now generally accepted as being a necessary prerequisite to the provision of comprehensive educational facilities at any kind of reasonable cost and to making the best possible use of scarce teaching skills. Our post-primary schools tend for historical reasons to be relatively small in size. In most of our towns, there are two or three such schools operating for the most part independently of one another. There is already a fair measure of agreement, in a few such areas in which schools need to be rebuilt, that there should be an amalgamation of schools subject to an acceptable form of joint management on which the existing interests would be represented. This form of joint management of a post-primary school would be new to this country and, as the House will appreciate, there are a number of practical difficulties which will need to be resolved in consultation with the interests concerned.

Section 1 would enable vocational education committees who wish to do so to contribute to the cost of such jointly managed schools. I wish to emphasise that the section is merely an enabling one and that it would be a matter for each committee to consider the circumstances of each particular case and to decide for themselves whether they wished to participate or not. In the same way, it would of course be a matter for each secondary school authority to decide their own attitude towards any proposal for a joint contribution to a proposed jointly managed post-primary school. It will be the task of my Department to secure the maximum degree of co-operation so as to ensure that the resources at our disposal are used to the greatest possible benefit of the children of the nation.

Section 2 is both mandatory and enabling: it provides for the mandatory reconstitution of a dissolved committee and enables such reconstitution to be effected at any time up to the end of the second election year after it has been dissolved. Under existing legislation, reconstitution of a dissolved committee could take place only after the next local authority election after its dissolution.

Ba mhaith liom a rá go gceapann chuile dhuine ar an taobh so gur Bille maith an Bille seo chun cabhrú le cúrsaí oideachais sa tír seo. Tá ár mbuidheachas ag dul don Aire dá bharr. We on this side welcome this Bill and congratulate the Minister on its introduction. If I may start at the end rather than at the beginning, it is a very good innovation that vocational committees which have been dissolved can be reconstituted without having to wait for the next local government election. That is a good spirit.

To get back to the beginning, we all agree that with advances in education there is a need for having the closest possible co-operation in the use of facilities in vocational and secondary schools. Up to the moment vocational education committees could not incur any expense in connection with a school not directly under their management. Without this Bill, a vocational education committee, no matter how they might like to do so, could not avail themselves of facilities provided at a neighbouring secondary school because the vocational education committee could not contribute to the provision of facilities in the secondary school. This Bill will remedy that. We realise that at the present time it is necessary in many cases to provide costly laboratories for the teaching of science. It is also necessary to provide assembly halls, gymnasia and playgrounds. Now that there is to be a dovetailing of interests as between vocational and secondary schools these facilities can be provided and the costs shared. All of that is very welcome.

Of course, it is true that in order to provide proper teaching facilities, it is necessary to have the larger schools so that specialised teachers in the various categories could be made available. That cannot be done under existing circumstances in places where there are two or three relatively small schools situated in the same town or in some small area. The dovetailing of activities between schools will enable that problem to be overcome. In so far as this will help to bring closer co-operation between vocational and secondary schools it is good and it will also eliminate unnecessary expenditure, enabling better teaching facilities to be provided with the same amount of money. It is also welcome in so far as it will help at some future stage to eliminate what we might call the rivalry that exists in education between secondary and vocational schools whereby vocational schools may be regarded as being inferior from a snobbish point of view. If the Bill would help to eliminate that it would be doing something worthwhile. Unfortunately, there is a tendency among people in this country to regard the only education worth having as that obtained in a secondary school and, if brought further, to university level, whereas really worthwhile education can be had at a technical school and, later, at a technological school. We seem to have lost the desire to cater for people who are skilled with their hands and, in fact, sometimes such skill is looked down on by comparison with what we might call brain power.

Our aim is to raise the general standard of education to the highest possible level. Some years ago the primary certificate was regarded as a fundamental level of education but if intermediate certificate standard or, even, leaving certificate standard will in future be regarded as the fundamental level, we will have reached a high standard. However, we must have the highest respect and esteem for skilled persons such as carpenters, joiners and so on unlike in the past when the greatest respect was retained for those who had reached professional status. In so far as this Bill helps in that direction, it is very welcome.

I do not like to sound any discordant note in regard to the Bill but the only reservation I might have would arise from the fact that I am not very clear as to whether it will lead to a greater demand for money towards education from the local authorities. There might be a tendency at central government level to transfer as much of the cost as possible of this joint education scheme to local authorities. We all realise that, in the long run, the money will be paid by the taxpayer and the ratepayer but in certain areas, particularly in the poorer counties where rates are a burden, people might be pressed unduly hard if there was any tendency to transfer an unfair share of the burden of the joint effort to the local authorities. Such attempt might be resisted and might result in the provisions of this Bill not being adopted in some areas with the same enthusiasm as might otherwise be the case.

The reason for my raising that point was that recently the schools library scheme was introduced. I attended a county council meeting last week and every member there was pleased that this scheme should be introduced so as to provide suitable reading matter for pupils in primary schools. However, there was a certain reluctance to adopt the scheme because of the cost it would impose at local level.

There are always some people on a local committee who do not see as clearly as others the need for first class education for our children. They make the case that the cost of any new scheme will be prohibitive and a great burden on the ratepayers and for that reason the scheme, however desirable it migh be, is not adopted. I hope there is no danger that the cost of implementing this scheme will become such a burden on the local authorities that there will be no desire to go ahead with it. My fears may be entirely unjustified. I hope they are, because I would like this Bill to be received enthusiastically throughout the country. I hope people will see the good sense in providing pupils and teachers with the maximum facilities at the lowest possible cost to the community. It will certainly do a great deal to take education out of the various water tight compartments it has been put in.

Education should be broad and flexible and aimed at giving the greatest possible return for the money spent. This Bill is geared to do exactly that. It is aimed at permitting each student to reach the highest level of his ability whether it be manual, technical or academic. Our education system is designed to bring every student to the highest level of his ability. It is well recognised that in the past the person with great ability went to secondary school and the person not capable of secondary education went to a technical school. From the word "go" the lad who went to the technical school was frowned on by those who regarded themselves as a superior class simply because they were better at Latin and able to do good translation in their exams. They did not realise that the lad at the technical school was able to do a good piece of electrical work, engineering or plumbing. It was always said if a fellow had brains he went to secondary school, if he had hands he went to the technical school and if he had neither hands nor brains he was kept on the land. This Bill goes a long way to remove this attitude of mind.

A committee of management may have to be set up when a vocational and a secondary school come together. I hope the greatest care will be taken about who is appointed to these management committees. Teachers from secondary schools and vocational schools should be brought together on a common level. If this Bill goes a step further, as it will in my opinion, it is likely that a vocational teacher will do either a day or half a day in the secondary school and a secondary teacher will do the same in a vocational school. I very much want to see this interchange of teachers between schools.

With regard to comprehensive schools it is generally admitted if they are to be a success there must be a sufficiently large number of pupils to enable a suitable staff to be appointed. If a comprehensive school has only 200 or 300 pupils it is most unlikely that the necessary teachers will be provided in each department of the school. The coming together of vocational and secondary school units will provide larger numbers.

There were historical reasons for small schools in the past but these have been eliminated almost entirely by the introduction of the school transport system. We now have very big numbers brought together in a centre by means of the transport scheme introduced by the late Deputy O'Malley. It is only right, having brought them into these centres at the expense of the taxpayers, that the maximum educational facilities should be provided for them there.

The nature of the Bill is such that it does not require any great speech about it. The purpose of the Bill is clearly stated and it is a tribute to the draftsmen that they were able to put this matter in such a simple form. As a member of a vocational education committee I have no doubt the Bill will be received with acclamation by the committees. The committees have always felt they were tied to the limits. I do not foresee the developments as set out in this Bill coming to fruition very quickly. There are bound to be problems with some schools who may be reluctant to participate in the scheme. Provided they are given the authority by the Minister to look around and see what can be done to implement the Bill I am quite sure it will be tackled with vigour by the various committees and with the goodwill of the secondary schools so that the very desirable changes envisaged in the Bill can be brought to fruition. The Bill gives a certain amount of power and the main purpose of it is to give administrative authority, this will be welcomed by the various committees. The Minister should be congratulated on adding a new dimension to secondary and vocational education.

We can all welcome what is in this Bill which sets the scene for a comprehensive district plan approach to the organisation of our post-primary education.

When the comprehensive schools were introduced six or eight years ago I spoke very strongly against the idea here and time has borne out the objections I raised, that what we required was not simply the superseding of the system we had got but the drawing of it together and the organising and co-ordinating of it in what I think I called a comprehensive district plan. Many others shared that view and I am glad to see that in the period of a few years the practical merits of such a proposal have been recognised and that we have departed from an unfortunate spirit that was present at that time of almost sneering at the secondary schools and certainly being less than generous in acknowledging the tremendous debt that all Irish men and women owe to the people who founded and carried secondary education in this country with very little State help compared to what is given to other systems.

That has changed and it is a change for the better. I hope this spirit of co-operation will permeate our future educational organisation because nothing leads more to the down-grading of what the technical schools stand for, that is, the development especially of manual skills leading to the production of first-class technicians, than trying to force those same institutions into providing courses in the more academic subjects for which they have not got the necessary facilities. This implants the idea in the school that the important part of the training is the academic part and that the skills are only a second best, whereas if the institutions in the local district can concentrate on what they are best at, then each has a pride in what is being done and the students share in that pride and can see in it their natural fulfilment.

We have been snobbish in this country in looking down, to some extent, on technical training as opposed to the more academic type of training, but we should recognise that today there is great need for technical training, for the skilled electrician, the skilled mechanic and the skilled carpenter. They are the people who really make a major contribution to our industrial life especially if they have got, in addition to this development of their natural bent in technical skills, sufficient academic training and the ability to express themselves in writing. These are the people who rise to very high and responsible positions in industry. I have been worried and still am worried that with our system which places too much emphasis on the intermediate and leaving certificates we will become cert. mad. This is inclined to down-grade the very type of training it is supposed to be promoting, training in the technical skills. Anyone connected with Irish industry or in any responsible position connected with it will say that if there is a scarcity in Irish industry today it is a scarcity of technicians. The careers that are open to properly qualified technicians are quite comparable with and in many cases better than those open to those who go on and take certificates and even many of those with university degrees.

I feel then that this comprehensive district approach is a very useful one. Down the country it succeeds in bringing the people together and in setting the scene for the development of adult education. In the 1970s when we expect the community will have more leisure there must be a very positive effort to fill that leisure and one of the best ways of doing that is through a proper and organised system of adult education. This can be profitable by conferring in adult life a training in the skills that people are actually employing at that time or it can be useful solely from the point of view of the development of the personality and of making the recipient more adjusted to his surrounding and a better citizen, giving him a broader view of life, a view that may succeed in making him a better citizen locally and also a happier citizen.

In the development of adult education I would appeal to the Minister not to be penny-pinching on this most important facet of our work. I share with many others the disquiet of some of the CEOs on the cuts that have been made in the numbers they require to carry through their schemes in the coming year. I speak with first-hand knowledge of the value of some of those schemes because in UCC for years we have been operating a very successful adult education scheme in conjunction with the vocational schools and the vocational authorities. I see that one CEO claims that the cut backs would endanger schemes of that nature. I feel the time has come not to cut back but to expand very considerably.

In the development of this co-operative approach I would appeal for much less Departmental guidance. It may be very well intentioned but the Department seem to think that driving is guiding. That just is not a policy which will bring our educational groups together. I would appeal in this case for the maximum utilisation of our post-primary resources. The groups concerned, the vocational organisations and the secondary schools, both lay and clerical, should be encouraged to set up a small council of their own to promote these activities. This might be well worth while. It would be much easier for promotion to be done in that way rather than to feel that it can be imposed by some departmental unit simply by wielding the power of the purse-strings at local level. In all those schemes, there is a contribution from the State and that contribution gives the State the right of veto. I know there must be a type of veto but it is something which should not be used too often to the extent of making the district groupings feel that something was being imposed on them rather than that they were being led to develop. That is our main problem in education today. We need the central authority to lead rather than to drive, to encourage and suggest but not to drive.

We are very fortunate at present, and have been always, in the quality of people who are associated with vocational education schemes. In every case the CEOs have emerged as natural leaders and the local technical school headmasters are doing a very fine job. It is a job comparable to what the secondary schools are doing, where both the religious schools and the lay secondary schools have done immense work. If we can give them every assisance to pool their resources we will be setting the course properly for the 1970's. We will be getting away from any suggestion that any group are to be superseded or slowly starved out from the scheme. All have a contribution to make. In that spirit I welcome this Bill. I hope there will be a strong development of the comprehensive district approach to the development of post-primary education. I appeal to the Department to credit the local units with knowing their place. Even if they are not doing things as well as one would think they should, the fact that they are showing initiative and doing things is something to be prized. Very often there is a gulf of misunderstanding between the central authority view in the big city and what is seen to be feasible at local level. I appeal for a much freer and more decentralised approach to all these developments.

Like the preceding speakers I very much welcome this Bill. It is very easy in talking about the need for co-operation in our educational system to sound as if we were interested in the most economic way of doing things and the best way of doing things without waste or overlapping. In my view, whatever the difficulties and temptations when faced with budget stringencies, any of us with interest in education and any of the authorities such as the Minister, the Department and the various teaching organisations must try to keep firmly in mind that the prime duty of educationalists and the prime rôle of our education system is to meet the educational requirements of our young people. In quite a number of cases the best educational interests of our children can be met in an economical, efficient and effective way. If on occasions there seems to be additional cost involved in meeting the needs of the children, it is the duty of the educational authorities to face up to this situation and to realise that the educational development of our young people is worth any money we can afford to invest in it. That is the basic context in which we should discuss any developments in our educational system. If I could express some scepticism about the developments which this Bill may promote, I hope it will be felt that I am not forecasting in any way what I think will happen. It is desirable that I should sound some warning about what I see as possible snags ahead.

If co-operation between vocational schools and other schools is in a genuine spirit of joint ownership and management, and that it is real co-operation which will break down the barriers between these schools, everything will be fine. Co-operation sometimes means in our community, I feel, that we interpret it as a form of free power struggle or one-up-manship between the various bodies which normally act in a spirit of co-operation and co-ordination. Speaking as a parent with a future interest in education and looking at the prime interest of the children from a parent's viewpoint it is true to say that most parents in the community are not interested in whether one branch of the teaching profession regards itself as superior to the other or not. Basically, where education is concerned they are not interested in any anxiety by church authorities or particular teaching orders to maintain their position or in the local pride of particular school managers. Above all the parents are concerned with getting the most effective co-operation from all parties involved in teaching. When we have further co-operation and co-ordination under this Bill I hope that all parties involved will put aside matters of local pride and tradition, and any feelings of superiority, and get down to the task of providing the most effective service for the community. It is important that co-operation between the vocational system and the secondary system should exist. They have a tremendous part to play in the post-primary educational system and I hope that these parties, when coming together in a spirit of progressive development, will manage to step outside existing social and sectarian patterns.

I should like to explain what I mean here. For example, there has been a case where you have close to each other a vocational school and a girls' secondary school. Co-operation between those schools—I am not sure if this has been decided yet—may mean that some people may say: "We will transfer all the girls from the vocational school to the secondary school and let the vocational school develop as a boys' school." I do not regard that as a progressive development of a spirit of co-operation because I think one of the great factors about the vocational system has been in many instances a splendid example of the effective working of co-education. If co-operation between vocational schools and single-sex schools means any diminution of the existing pattern of co-education, it cannot truly be called co-operation.

When it comes to co-operation one often gets the feeling that there is a sort of trading growing up between schools. If a secondary school and a vocational school are co-operating, the vocational school will be fighting for the science laboratory and the secondary school for the language laboratory, and then when it comes to fighting for a new gymnasium there will be another ding-dong battle between them. This is not co-operation or co-ordination. We must see a preparedness on the part of education authorities to sit down and to look at the merits of each case particularly in fields like science and language. It is regrettable that the financial resources we have should not be able to provide adequate teaching staffs immediately because there are not sufficient quality teachers available in fields like languages, including Irish, and in fields like the natural sciences, particularly developing fields like biology.

It is very important that the prime consideration in every area should be to provide the best possible facilities for the maximum number of children in both languages and the sciences, and the pattern should be one of co-ordinating the best quality teachers in those areas, plus whatever investment is required in the new physical facilities like laboratories and so on. If it is necessary to tie in some way the physical facilities to particularly expert teachers, that is what should be done even if it means that in that instance both the new language laboratory and the new science laboratory will be basically in the one position. That is the sort of spirit in which people must look at every aspect of education. They must forget about petty jealousy and differences. We must have real co-operation and co-ordination.

I have been giving an example of social factors. I would hope that, in a situation in which vocational and secondary schools are co-operating, when parents are looking at the situation they will not automatically say: "Those schools are now co-operating. I will make sure all my children go to the secondary department." This again would be the completely wrong attitudo for parents to take. Their attitude should be to get the best possible educational facilities suitable for their children. That is the basis on which parents should make their choice, not on any snob value.

There can be tragic cases where co-operation obtains. Parents may well send their children to education not at all suited to them, solely for snob reasons. Children may be much better suited if the system continues as before co-operation. Parents must resist snob factors. They must think only of getting for their children the best teachers and the best educational provisions.

These are social factors. People may think it strange if I refer to the sectarian factor. I am conscious of the need to provide equal opportunities for free education to the Protestant community in this country. There is a situation at the moment in rural areas where vocational schools might well be considered by members of the community outside the Protestant churches to be a perfect opportunity for post-primary education in a non-denominational way, and such people may well wonder why members of the Protestant communities in rural Ireland have not accepted this. There have been a number of reasons for it.

I think it is true to say that some Protestant church authorities and local Protestant communities have not felt that the system in each vocational school genuinely has been non-denominational in atmosphere. I think that in some cases this has been a justified fear. In the same way, members of Protestant communities have not appreciated the full range of education now available in rural vocational schools: they have felt that the local vocational school may not have been in a position to provide the type of education they have wished for their children. In many cases, too, they have been justified in this.

Education has been changing all the time, particularly now when we are providing for further development of co-operation and co-ordination between schools, and Protestants who have felt inconvenienced or at a disadvantage in rural Ireland should keep under constant review the development of vocational education in their areas. Now, many vocational schools in rural areas offer the full range of courses to be found in secondary schools, and Protestant parents who are concerned about providing a particular type of education for their children must constantly review the facilities available to them locally.

Also, local vocational education authorities should keep under constant scrutiny this business of making sure that their school, as far as possible, particularly in areas where Protestants may wish to attend, is conducted in a genuinely non-denominational way. If both these developments take place we may find that the problem of free education for Protestant pupils in rural areas will be eased somewhat. I trust that, when vocational education authorities are considering matters of co-operation between schools in particular areas, they will think of all the secondary schools in those areas, whatever denomination may be the controlling body on the management board, because again the development of co-operation in education, as I have said, must have its main interest in the future of the pupils and must not be affected in any way by social or sectarian considerations.

As the Minister is probably aware, his best allies in this country are the parents. They have the same interest as the Minister in providing the best possible education for all. Parents' associations are being developed satisfactorily in relation to our secondary schools. This is a good idea because it gives parents a say in the management of the schools. I would hope that in any joint co-operation between vocational and secondary schools this idea of parents' associations would develop on the lines of co-operation between the two bodies. Parents can be a very useful factor in determining whether co-operation is genuine. They are very quick to detect when any organisation, be it teachers or management, or any other group, are acting in a self-centred way rather than in the interests of all the children concerned.

On this point I would say that, in making sure the idea of co-operation and co-ordination receives adequate notice in the community, I would request vocational education committees —I am not sure where the power lies —to admit the Press to their meetings. This may horrify some people but I had personal experience of this while working in South Shields in the north of England. All the committees of South Shields Corporation were open to the Press. I covered many of these. The Press were excluded traditionally when items arose such as the appointing of an individual member to the staff and so on but this did not present any problems. Pressmen attended the meetings as representatives of the community and were supplied with an agenda in the same way as were the members of the corporation. They knew when they would be asked to leave the meeting and very often the agenda was arranged in such a way that matters of public interest were discussed first. These were reported with the proviso that the minutes were subject to approval by the corporation. News of new developments in relation to curricula and so on was made available to the community.

If we had the same type of Press coverage in Ireland it would help to create a community interest in all new developments in vocational education. The community would be glad to hear of any such developments and would give their support to any efforts towards genuine co-operation between the educational establishments in any particular area.

Senator Honan tells me that the Press are admitted to vocational educational committee meetings here. To my knowledge, this is not the practice throughout the country, but, if the Senator is correct, all I can say is that I hope we will see much more coverage of those meetings, particularly in the Dublin and Dún Laoghaire areas.

Finally, I would ask a question of the Minister. He makes the point that it will be the task of his Department to secure the maximum degree of co-operation so that the resources at our disposal are used to the greatest possible benefit of the children of the nation.

That is fine but I would ask him with regard to section 1, where the co-operation between schools will be subject to the consent of a Minister, if this literally means every item of co-operation between schools or will the Minister give a general consent to co-operation between schools in an area and the schools can then work out such terms as may be agreed between themselves and continued from there; or will the Minister and his Department be informed of this particular arrangement regarding every instance of co-operation once the general consent to this type of development in an area has been agreed? I welcome the Bill. I am sorry for having delayed the House with these observations but I thought they were worth making.

I should like to join with other Senators in welcoming this uncomplicated measure. It is a straightforward enabling Bill and displays considerable enlightenment and knowledge of what is taking place in the world around us. Since I came to the Seanad in 1961 I have referred, year after year, to the untidiness of what we describe as our system of education. I have always said that it could never be described as a system because in reality we had three branches and not the slightest co-operation or co-ordination between them. Yet, we went along merrily in the belief that we had a system of education but we have only now realised that the articulation which should have existed between the three branches in order to create a system of education has been long overdue.

This measure will have obvious educational advantages and I concur with Senator Keery when he suggests the main principle is the best possible educational benefit to our children. Common sense would indicate that, in the co-operation suggested between the vocational and secondary schools, there would be considerable saving for the taxpayer. In the past there has been overlapping. There has been waste of accommodation, waste of apparatus and waste of teaching skill. Not so very long ago I saw three schools open in one small town. There was a primary, a vocational and a new secondary school without any reference one to the other. They arose as three independent units. I consider such practice to be a considerable waste of public money as well as being a waste of educational effort and educational forces. There was no guiding principle behind the establishment of these three schools.

However, I am glad that we have reached the stage where we cannot think in isolation of the primary school, of the vocational school or of the secondary school. I welcomed the establishment of the development branch in the Department of Education some years ago. Considerable progress has been made within the Department as a result of the establishment of that branch. I agree also with Senator Keery when he suggests that there should be more co-operation between the various teaching agencies. Unfortunately, during the past few years and, in particular, the past couple of years, there has been the most unseemly quarrel going on between various branches of the teaching profession. I maintain there should be only one profession of teachers. There should be only one common qualification for the art because there is only one art and that is the principle of the imparting of knowledge. It is only a question of adopting the method to the age level. For instance, different techniques have to be used for younger children then for those in a higher age group. They must be stimulated by the use of various techniques. This is done until the children are able to find out for themselves.

The art of teaching is the same whether one is teaching infants or undergraduates. The fundamental principles of imparting knowledge and acquiring knowledge are the same. It is a waste of effort, money and accommodation to have various establishments engaged in training teachers to teach at different levels without having a co-ordinating course. If this were done it might eliminate some of the bickering which goes on between the various teaching groups. I agree with Senator Keery that there is an atmosphere of superiority in certain groups. It is tragic in negotiations involving conditions of service and conditions of work to find teachers not willing to sit down at the same table as other teachers. This air of snobbery is deplorable and the sooner people are taught more sense the better for everyone.

I maintain education is a basic service which must receive the greatest attention from the Government. It lays the foundation for the efficient working of all our services. We cannot afford to go along the same traditional lines as we did in the past where the emphasis was on the academic side of education. We are about to enter into a fiercely competitive European community, and this measure is forward looking and in keeping with the trend which already exists in Europe. The structure of society has changed considerably on the Continent. It is only right that Senators should realise the type of community we are facing. I shall quote from the UNESCO World Survey of Secondary Education which states:

It is reported that in the last century 80 per cent of all Frenchmen were employed in agriculture, 10 per cent in industry and 10 per cent in the tertiary sector, while now 30 per cent are in agriculture, 35 per cent in industry and 35 per cent in tertiary occupations.

There has been a complete change in the structure. The report goes on to state:

... in the future an economically well-developed country will be likely to find more than half its working population in the tertiary services (commerce, administration, liberal professions, transport, health, and social services, newspapers, arts, leisure, etc.).

There is a complete moving away from the land. It is estimated that more than 50 per cent of the population of France will be engaged in the tertiary sector in a few years time. Another comment I would like Senators to bear in mind when thinking about entry into the Common Market states:

More and more workers who in the past needed only an elementary education are being employed in posts which require a longer period of general education, and this is an irreversible trend. Similarly, technological progress is reducing the need for skilled labourers and greatly increasing the demand for highly qualified engineers and technicians. The conclusion which emerged from this analysis was that, in view of the changes in industry that are likely to take place, France will have less need for narrowly specialised workers but an increasing need of people with a high general development who can adapt themselves to changing circumstances.

One further quotation from the same survey about the USSR is very interesting because most people imagine that the general development of education there is not as enlightened as it is in western countries. This quotation will, therefore, come as a surprise:

Future technical and economic development will impose heavy demands on all workers in socialist society, and an all round education is of vital importance for them. The labour of the present-day worker is not merely a matter of the use of muscle power: it is becoming increasingly filled with intellectual content.

As a representative of a teaching group I welcome the measures before the House. It will tend to create better opportunities for people to develop skills. I appreciate the point made by the Minister when he said that the use of facilities in secondary and technical vocational schools will be brought about by discussion with the relevant authorities. This is most important because there is grave suspicion among school managements that an effort is being made to take over control of the school. Managers are slow to carry out changes which look like taking away their control of the schools. As we all know schools have been used as an instrument to inject political opinions and indoctrinate people in accordance with political opinions. A deplorable situation arose in Germany in 1933 under the Nazi régime when teachers in schools and universities who did not conform were thrown out. The same happened in Italy and teachers who did not conform with Fascism were sacked. The Minister has taken a very good line by saying that co-operation will be sought through discussion. He may be frustrated in his approach to certain bodies of management if there is any suggestion that the State are endeavouring to take over control of the schools. This is a delicate point.

I welcome wholeheartedly this measure. It can do nothing but good not only for the children but for the community as a whole.

In common with other Senators I welcome this Bill and the ideas behind it. We all appreciate that the Minister will have difficulties at the outset but given goodwill on all sides there will be a good foundation to start on. I have listened with interest to Senators, who are all agreed about what should be done. I wonder, however, if the people who are going to implement this scheme are as clear in their ideas and in what they would like to see done as we are.

Sectional interests are bound to play a part here. The word "snob" has been used on a number of occasions this morning, and the snobbery has been connected with secondary schools. I wonder if the parents—I include myself in this—are completely free from the snobbery that is attached to sending our children solely to secondary post-primary schools. I wonder how many national or even vocational teachers send their children to a post-primary vocational school. Most of us have not done this. I am not a teacher. I must confess my children are not attending a post-primary vocational school.

We must hark back in the history of our country to examine the reasons for this. Up to a short time ago, and indeed it is still so in secondary schools, the emphasis was completely on education for the university. Our whole educational and examination system is geared to university education. It is only now we are coming round to the idea that there is some other place to send our children besides the university. With the foundation of the regional technical colleges and the diplomas that will be given there I feel a change will come about—at least I hope so. We have for too long practically worshipped the academics of our country and have regarded our craftsmen as being not quite first-class citizens; and that, in this country, where in days of old craftsmen were the people of importance, is a sad thing to see. But we inherited our later educational system from somewhere else and we are only now coming into our own.

I should like to join with Senator Quinlan in saying that we are too certificate-minded. Children are under extreme pressure from the time they go into a post-primary school. We are now reaching the stage where a number of our leaving certificate students are having nervous breakdowns over the results of the leaving certificate, or during the course, because of the pressures that are being exerted on them or which they are exerting on themselves. There should be some system of credits for their work during the year in various fields. Something must be done about our examination system. I wonder if we could perhaps see that the intermediate certificate is not such a thing of great merit and it might be recommended that in many cases it could be by-passed.

I should like to see too, through post-primary education—and this might now be available with the amalgamation of schools—more interest in the crafts section of our education, and in handwork. Even if the children take examinations they might at the end of the time have a handwork examination, be it metal work, engineering, or wood turning. This could be a part of the leaving certificate curriculum. This would encourage people to think along lines other than mere academic subjects.

I am concerned, too, with adult education. We have looked for many years to the vocational education committees to provide classes throughout the winter for adults. This they have done—and great credit is due to them —sometimes by employing teachers who were not, or will not now anyway, be regarded by a section of the teaching organisation as fully qualified to teach crafts. I am speaking of traditional crafts rather than home crafts. I have always maintained that the domestic science instructresses or home economics teachers should be concerned only with the teaching of home economics and that the teaching of crafts, handcrafts and home crafts, should be the duty of a crafts teacher. We have no facilities in this country for the teaching of traditional crafts and, except for what is done in the College of Arts and the limited amount done in the various vocational and domestic training colleges, this field has been left completely to the ICA and their subsidiary, Country Markets, to do what they could to improve the teaching of crafts in the country. I am referring now to the crafts the women do.

Country Markets have over the years taught crafts at various centres and the ICA have done the same thing and have taught crafts at An Grianán, their adult education college. They have brought out a proficiency test for this and the women must pass a fairly stiff examination before they get a proficiency certificate. They have now gone a step further, realising that teachers are needed to teach home crafts, and they have set their own teachers' test. They have based this on an English examination. There are now a number of teachers so qualified.

It would be a great thing if the Minister and his Department would take a look at this test and see whether it measures up to what they would expect craft teachers to have, and do something about recognising it. Otherwise, this year through the country many thousands of women will be deprived of craft classes, because those about whom I speak are employed by vocational education committees. After this session I wonder if they will be employed. Home crafts may be brushed aside as being insignificant. But they give many women pin money at home and in one case they have been the foundation of a very successful hand craft co-operative where there are now 300 members with a turnover of practically £20,000 a year. This, to an area where there was no money coming in before, is a great boost. This has its foundations in people being taught hand crafts locally. I appeal to the Minister to examine the position regarding these teachers and if he can do something constructive about it we will be very glad.

I wish the Minister the best of luck with the implementation of this Bill but I suggest to him that without co-operation from the parents it will be very difficult to get this message across. The parents minds must be changed about the type of education available to their children. If there is anything the ICA can do to help him, I know they will be only too pleased to do it.

I should like to join with the other Senators in extending a welcome to the Minister's introduction of what has been described as a straightforward measure.

I should like to refer to section 2. I am very glad the Minister has taken the necessary powers to reconstitute certain dissolved committees. I am sure the Minister had in mind the City of Limerick Vocational Education Committee when he brought this provision into the Bill. As is generally known, the vocational education committee in Limerick city were dissolved, following an inquiry held by the Minister's predecessor three years ago. Many people in Limerick are still at a loss to understand what it was all about. The inquiry was long and cost much money. The final analysis appeared to achieve very little. I should like to ask the Minister if he would be good enough, when replying to this debate, to indicate when it is proposed to re-constitute that Limerick committee. Will the membership of the committee be on the same lines as it was in the old committee? Will they have the same powers, particularly in relation to staff appointments? Will the method of financing be the same as it was prior to the committee's disbandment?

I should like to enlarge on the question of finance. I agree with the proposals in this Bill to give the vocational committees powers to make financial assistance available to other educational committees or bodies. I wonder how this is to be financed? It will obviously mean a substantial increase from the local authorities, who contribute to the vocational education committees. Has the Minister in mind the limit he proposes to place on the financing by the local authorities, and what proportion of the additional expenditure will be borne by central funds? This is very important. At this juncture it might be helpful to the Senators who are members of vocational education committees to know what the Minister is thinking about the future financing of this very desirable development.

The Minister has been said by other Senators to be taking a very important step in the right direction towards achieving the maximum degree of co-operation so as to ensure that all the resources available to his Department are used to the greatest possible benefit of the children of the nation. Everyone would subscribe to that philosophy unreservedly. It is a principle which could very well be extended into other facets of our national life, including sporting and athletic organisations. I hope I will live to see the day when one sporting field in a town or city will be utilised to play all games, irrespective of what association or organisation controls them.

Several Senators have referred to what they described as a certain degree of "snobocracy" towards secondary education as compared with the vocational or technical education. This is quite true, but we should have regard to the wonderful work which the religious orders, in particular, have done over the years to provide secondary education where no secondary education would have been available without their activities. While we realise now that the division between academic education and technical education should be closed and that we should have one post-primary education, that development, however desirable and inevitable, could not possibly have come about if the earlier efforts of the religious, and in some cases the lay groups, had not provided the basis on which to build the secondary schools.

I do not think this House would wish it to be said that they were merely critical of the whole idea of secondary education because some of the children of the nation did not have an opportunity to avail of it. Secondary education or academic education has existed over the years, but the real difficulty has been that it was not enjoyed equally by all the children of the nation. As many Senators have said, it is true that in the past, and currently, many well-meaning but foolish parents sent their children to secondary schools when in many cases the children's future might be better served by giving them an opportunity of technical or vocational education. We all know cases of individual children with four or five honours in their leaving certificates who are stuck in dead end jobs for the rest of their lives, whereas if they had had a technical education they would now have the ability and opportunity to earn a better future for themselves.

Our objective should be to combine the best of both systems so that every child in the State can be educated in the full sense and develop his natural talents for his own personal benefit in later life and for the benefit of the nation. Education does not consist of producing only technocrats, any more than it means producing academic scholars divorced from the realities of everyday life. We need both academic scholars and people skilled technically. We should not play off one against the other. Our ambition should be to have every child begin life with the essential basis of a broad education and then to develop his natural skills, whether academic or technical.

It is important for every child to have an opportunity of getting into a secondary, comprehensive or technical school. It is even more important to ensure that the quality of education is as good as it can be. I hope, in our desire to ensure that every child has an equal opportunity of post-primary education, that the quality of that education does not suffer. Sufficient education teachers of the highest possible standard are available to give the right kind of education to all our children.

I hope the day will come when the ordinary, humble, unskilled or semiskilled labourer will have an appreciation, due to the right type of education, of good literature, the arts, culture and music.

In this era, when leisure hours are becoming extended every year, it is obvious that it is in the best interests of the children that they should be taught to appreciate the arts and culture, and that their ideas of recreation and amusement should not be confined to exercising on playing fields, however desirable that may be, or to taking a self-drive car for the day, or going to the pictures, or some other such form of amusement. Certainly it cannot possibly fulfil their inherent desires to use their leisure time to the full.

I should like to see a bias in every post primary school towards an appreciation of the arts and of culture so that the humblest working man there-after will have a real appreciation of those things. I might say in passing— and Senators in every part of the country will have the same experience— that it is remarkable to see the number of people, from humble backgrounds, humble homes, humble avocations, who have taken a prominent part in organising cultural activities in their own towns, in their own areas. That is the type of thing which should be begun at primary school level and developed at post primary level.

It is obvious to all of us that the development of comprehensive education, the joining together of academic and technical fields of education, will lead to co-education. I am sure this is a development the Minister has in mind. It is an inevitable development and I think it is a good thing. I hope that in the future when the Minister is developing his ideas on education in general he will keep this inevitable development, as I regard it, in mind.

I was glad to hear the Minister's reference to consultation and co-operation with the various education authorities. This is vitally necessary. No progress can be true or satisfactory progress unless the Minister and his officials, and the education authorities generally, consult with the lay and religious bodies who have long and valuable experience in all fields of secondary education.

I should like to join Senator Keery in his references to the Protestant community. When we talk of comprehensive schools we should keep the 5 per cent religious minority always in mind. It is not only a good thing in justice but I think it would also give a very valuable headline to our co-religious and the members of every church on the other side of the Border.

The young people being educated nowadays will be the citizens of the future who will take their place in the new Europe. We all accept that in a short period of years this country will be a member of the EEC. That being so, the Minister is very wise in the steps he is taking now to ensure that the type and the quality of education our young people are getting and will be getting in the future will fit them not only to be worthy citizens of this little country but also worthy citizens in the wider European context.

Senator Quinlan made reference to the question of restricting the scale of adult education or part-time education. I am sure the Minister has seen references to it in this morning's newspapers. I am sure also that every Senator feels it would negative the worthwhile developments in vocational education if there were any restriction in regard either to finance or the provision of adequate staff. I hope the Minister, when he is replying, will reassure us on that point. Again, I wish to congratulate the Minister for having brought in this simple, straightforward measure. If we have been more loquacious than he anticipated, I am sure he will appreciate that it has been in the best constructive spirit. I hope some of our views will be helpful to him.

Fáiltím roimh an mBille agus déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Aire as ucht an mBille agaus freisin as ucht na hóráide a thug sé dúinn inniu. Óráid an-mhaith a bhí ann ó thús go deireadh.

I very sincerely welcome the Bill. I welcome the thinking behind it. This is an age when, as the Minister stated in his speech, barriers are being broken. I will quote the last sentence on the first page of the speech:

This will facilitate the development of co-operation in many centres and help further to break down the barriers between the secondary and vocational systems.

So far, so good. In the fullness of time, we hope it will also break down the barriers that exist or seem to exist between the secondary, vocational and primary systems.

Education is a continuing process and it would be very foolish for a person to believe or to attempt to believe that education can be put into water-tight compartments. Unfortunately, this has been the tendency for far too long. We have had what people like to think of as a primary system, a secondary system, a vocational system and a university system. It is unfortunately true that the great majority of our people still look on education as being in one of these compartments. Nothing could be further from the truth because from the day we are born until the day we die we are learning. Unfortunately, too often we forget what we have learned.

Education, then, cannot be divided up even into age groups. At the various ages in a person's life, changes occur in the development of the mind. Certain sections of the mind will develop at certain stages of a person's life and later other sections of the mind will develop. Psychologists and we educationists in general are aware of this. We are also aware that those developments do not come in any particular individual at any fixed time, because, as individuals vary, individual minds vary.

Therefore, it is disastrous for anyone to believe that we will give a child primary education up to a certain age and then, when he reaches the age of 11 plus, 12 plus or 13 plus, that he will be transferred elsewhere. For that reason, I commend Senator Brosnahan for saying that the ideal as far as teachers are concerned is one association of all teachers.

However, so long as there are various teachers' organisations, that basic fact will not be recognised. Primary teachers may be inclined to think that they should keep their own knowledge among themselves, secondary teachers may have the same idea in their respect and, possibly, vocational teachers might hold the same idea about themselves. The truth is, however, that we are all working towards one aim and that is the development of the human personality to its highest degree and the development of a sound mind in a sound body.

While I am on the matter of a sound mind and a sound body, I should like to refer to the development of technical skills. The day is gone when a person can be said to be educated if he can merely read, discuss, propose theories, do higher mathematics, become involved in scientific arguments or acquire a great volume of knowledge about different subjects if, having acquired all this, he is unable, for instance, to fix an electric plug.

In my primary school I have always encouraged not only the boys, but the girls also, to learn as much as they can at home or at school or anywhere else about such things as attaching electrical fittings and the various other miscellaneous jobs that have to be done in a home. I advise them to take an interest in carpentry, home decoration and so on, because if we wish to survive in this particular age, there must be all-round development of mind and body. The Swedes, while they may have given us bad example in some respects, have given us good example in many ways. In Sweden girls require many skills that were traditionally associated with boys, while boys, in addition to their traditional skills, are also taught such arts as sewing, knitting and crochet which were always associated with girls.

Excellent sentiments are expressed in the Minister's address. He said, for example:

My Department with a view to having comprehensive educational facilities provided in the most economical way without waste or overlapping has been encouraging co-operation between secondary and vocational schools so that comprehensive educational facilities can be provided in each area of the country. In a number of centres in which co-operation between secondary schools and vocational schools is being developed proposals have been made for the sharing of specialist facilities and ancillary accommodation, e.g. science laboratories, assembly halls, gymnasia, playing fields, etc....

Probably the Minister had in mind in that "etc." such things as musical training, library facilities, art and swimming, because all of these are of vital importance in the age in which we live. Some years ago the then musical director of the Radio Éireann String Quartet—an Englishman living in Cork —and I were discussing a certain secondary boys college. This was indeed a very famous college and it so happened that at that particular time this college had two or three excellent musicians who happened to be students of this particular gentleman. He was lamenting the fact that there was no orchestra whatever in the college. In passing, I mentioned the name of a secondary school for girls across the road from this particular college where there was a small orchestra. He suggested on hearing this that perhaps these two institutions might combine with a view to having a fine orchestra. I must admit that my reaction to this was something near to horror. Of course, this was some years ago. My idea then was that, no matter what might happen, such co-operation between a boys and a girls school was not possible.

However, as we all know, there have been many changes in the past few years. Barriers have been broken down. I have no knowledge as to whether these two particular institutions to which I referred ever combined in the musical sense but I am sure that, if the same situation prevailed today, there would be co-operation.

That brings us to the question of co-education. This matter has been mentioned already by a number of Senators. Apart altogether from the economic factors that would be involved by way of saving of money and in relation to specialist teachers and specialist facilities, co-education could have a salutary effect on the youth of today. I teach in a mixed primary school and down through the years I have seen the advantages of boys and girls studying together. They develop a normal relationship and they learn to treat each other with proper respect. I have often had visits by children from elsewhere—boys who were attending schools exclusively for boys and girls who were attending schools exclusively for girls—and I found that those children became very embarrassed when in the company of the opposite sex. I remember a boy who came to us from Cork where he had been at an all-boys' school. I found it necessary to take that boy aside and advise him because he became very upset in class by reason of his not being used to a co-ed school.

The wind of change is blowing; so also is the wind of charity. As a result of this Bill I can foresee large scale co-operation between secondary and vocational schools throughout the country. Of course, as the Minister is probably aware already, there will be some difficulty. Excellent as the Bill is, its implementation is another matter. There are bound to be petty jealousies in certain areas and people may read into the legislation things that are not there at all.

A sentence in the Minister's speech is probably the finest statement in the whole speech:

It will be the task of my Department to secure the maximum degree of co-operation so as to ensure that the resources at our disposal are used to the greatest possible benefit of the children of the nation.

That is a splendid statement. I know that the Minister has the very best intentions and that his heart is in this particular matter. We wish him the greatest success. I only hope his sentiments and our sentiments will be understood to be sincere and genuine. I hope this anxiety to do the best we can for our children with what resources we have will bear fruit. I hope the message will be understood by the various teachers' organisations so that they will come together for the good of the children and for the dignity of their own profession. It is unfortunate that there is disagreement among them.

When speaking on the Finance Bill I made a major point about the dreadful dangers of the wrong use of leisure time. A five-day week is generally accepted and sometimes even a four-and-a-half-day week. The big question is: what are workers going to do during their free time? I pointed out yesterday that unnecessary spending on consumer goods and on pleasure contribute in a large way to inflation. On the other hand, the right use of leisure time could have a most ennobling effect on all concerned.

The vocational school—the vocational cum secondary school when this Bill is implemented—could help a great deal if it could attract people to study such things as music, art, drawing, woodwork and so on. There is no reason why a tradesman who uses his hands during the week could not learn a second or third language. Likewise, there is no reason why a man in a sedentary occupation should not be given an opportunity of acquiring such skills as painting, woodwork and drawing. It will no doubt be said that this is already being done in major centres of population, but I would like to see people in rural areas being given the same opportunity to do this. Many people in rural areas can travel in their cars to the local towns, but if national schools could be used as centres where people could study I believe this would have a tonic effect on the whole community. It would give life in rural Ireland a new dimension.

I compliment the Minister on his speech. I should like to pay a well deserved compliment to all the vocational committees throughout the country. They are doing a great job and are taking a practical interest in education. It is a fact that we who are very close to education often miss the point that can be seen by the man who observes from a distance. I am a member of a vocational committee and I always listen to and read the speeches of the members of these committees very carefully. They usually have something very sound to offer and they have no hesitation in offering it. I commend the Bill and hope it will be given a speedy passage through the Seanad. I wish the Minister and his Department every success in implementing it.

In common with other speakers I, too, welcome this Bill. I was a little surprised at Senator Keery's apparent lack of knowledge of conditions in this country. He seemed to be more au fait with conditions in South Shields when he was making his plea for the Press to be present at vocational committee meetings. I do not know of any vocational committee, perhaps Senator Keery does, which has banned the Press or where the Press are not welcome. I should like to pay tribute to the local Press, especially for the part they played in the early days of vocational education in making parents aware of the value of vocational education. I have had the pleasant experience of being a member of a vocational committee during my time in public life. Vocational schools were described before the coming of free secondary education, as the poor man's university. From a rather small start vocational education snowballed and vocational schools now play a very valuable part in educating less fortunate children.

There is an old saying that good things come in small parcels and this Bill can be described in just that way. It is a small Bill but what is contained in it is very good. In his introductory speech the Minister informed the House that facilities would be made available in secondary schools to students of vocational schools. He also said that vocational committees would be permitted to share such facilities as playing fields, assembly halls and gymnasiums. This is excellent but it will apply only in more populated areas. We all know of small towns with only a primary school and a vocational school but no secondary school. In these towns there are very few facilities available for the students. The one slight criticism I have of the Bill is that this type of area appears to have been overlooked. It is for this type of area that I want to plead. I would therefore ask the Minister to make funds available as far as possible to provide facilities for the primary and vocational schools in small towns. I am sure many Senators know of schools where there are no playing fields and during the lunch break the only thing for the children to do is wander around the village or town until it is time to reassemble again. At the end of the school day they may have to wait three-quarters of an hour before the bus will pick them up and take them home. All there is for the children to do until the bus comes is to walk around the streets.

Playing facilities are vitally necessary in all our vocational schools. I must pay tribute to the teachers in those schools. They do a wonderful job in providing recreation for children by seeking the co-operation of the local club—the tennis, football or hurling club—and using their facilities. There are inter-schools competitions within the counties and now it has gone further and there are inter-county competitions, provincial and all-Ireland. This is most desirable and should be encouraged. Perhaps the Minister will tell us in his reply whether he can hold out any hope, now that money is being made available to sporting organisations, that money will be made available to vocational education committees to enable them to provide the sporting facilities that are needed in all educational institutions.

I welcome this Bill and I am satisfied that it will have very satisfactory results where there are playing facilities or big secondary schools but I am a little worried about the other areas I have mentioned.

Ba mhaith liom comhghairdeas a ghabháil leis an Aire as ucht an mBille seo a thabhairt isteach. Maraon leis na Seanadóirí eile cuirim fáilte roimh an mBille agus tá súil agam go mbeidh toradh fónta leis.

Many of the points which I had hoped to raise here have been dealt with. There is a temptation here— because we have not got the opportunity the people in the other House have, of debating matters on Estimates —to have an Estimates type debate here when a Bill comes before us. We are tempted not to adhere closely to what is in the Bill. I shall try, as far as I can, to deal with the Bill and not to go outside it.

There is only a limited amount of money available to the Department to deal with post primary education. I welcome the Bill in so far as it will avoid wasteful overlapping as between the vocational and the secondary branches. The sharing of facilities will mean that, whereas in the past we had vocational schools and secondary schools all looking for expensive laboratories and gymnasia, now, especially in smaller towns, these will be shared. This will be of great benefit.

The second thing that is mentioned here is the question of sharing teachers. In some subjects it is becoming more and more difficult to get teachers of the standard required, particulary for subjects like science and mathematics. It is good that these will be shared between the various schools.

Even with the best will in the world there will be difficulty and delay in achieving co-operation. These difficulties should not be mistaken for reluctance or opposition. It is better that we should work out a proper system of co-operation between the various schools than to rush in and try to impose a solution. Nowadays everybody looks for instant results, whether it is in housing or anything else. We would all like to move quickly but we must move slowly. It is better that we should do that and work out a proper system rather than bungle it.

Senator Farrell referred to the desirability of introducing crafts to the post primary schools. Senator Cranitch referred to music appreciation. All these things are very desirable and we would all like to see them in our post primary schools but, speaking as a teacher in a day school, where we are limited in time, whereas the boarding schools are not limited to the same extent, we would find it very difficult to fit in these things. Pressures of the school time-table and of the buses cut down the amount of time available for extra curricular activities such as games and debates. It would be very difficult to find time to fit in all these other things that are being advocated.

There is one subject on which I speak with reluctance as a secondary teacher. The word "snobbery" has been tossed around in the House this morning a good deal. I agree with Senator Farrell who said that snobbery arises very largely on the part of parents. It is easy to attribute snobbery to one section of the system rather than another and to the teachers in that section but I believe the snobbery is on the part of the parents. It is to them we must look to get rid of any idea of snobbery. Like many of the difficulties in our educational system, all these things are relics of the past. We cannot change the past. It was because parents very often hoped for security of employment for their children rather than for snobbish reasons that they sent them to certain types of schools.

I hope that with an expanding economy and a widening range of opportunities for young people any idea of snobbery will go. I have been teaching in secondary schools for 16 years and I have never found, among the secondary teaching profession, any snobbery or any idea of condescension towards any other branch of the profession. Perhaps this may exist among certain teachers but I have never found it and it is very annoying when the finger is pointed.

I will go along with Senator Quinlan and Senator Russell in their tributes to the contribution made by the secondary education authorities, the secondary school managers and particularly the religious orders, people who devoted their whole lives to education and ploughed back their salaries into buildings and facilities which we now hope will become available for both sections of post primary education.

I am very glad that nearly all of these orders are co-operating, or prepared to co-operate, in work either between schools for boys and girls or between secondary and vocational systems. I must express my disappointment with one order of teaching brothers which has a marvellous record in education and to which this State owes a great debt of gratitude for the way in which it inculcated nationalism and national traditions in many people and upheld national values in this city in particular. I am referring to the Irish Christian Brothers. I am disappointed that they have not seen their way to co-operate in co-educational experiments. The school in which I teach is run by another order of brothers which has a common co-founder with the Christian Brothers. Last year we had an experiment in co-education in our school. The girls from the neighbouring convent school came in for mathematics classes. I hope this development will expand in the coming year. I can see nothing except benefit coming from this arrangement. I hope the people I spoke of will give second thoughts to this development.

Senator Cranitch mentioned the benefits which can come from co-education. I would be fully in agreement with the Senator on that. There should be as much co-operation as possible between schools for boys and girls and between vocational and secondary schools. I welcome the Bill and hope that it will have successful results.

I, too, should like to welcome this Bill for a number of reasons. I have one small criticism of it which is probably unavoidable. It tends in its terminology to perpetuate the idea and concept of vocational and technical education which was common at the time the original Act was passed. This Act was a very good Act in its day but feelings on vocational education have changed considerably since that time.

One of the reasons why I welcome this Bill, and why other Senators have done so as well, is that it gives an opportunity to us to discuss an aspect of the educational system. We have all too few opportunities of discussing the educational system. Nobody can say that the Estimates debates provide sufficient opportunities for such discussion. This is partly because of the extraordinary lack of educational legislation in this country. We have, in fact, an educational system which is administered almost entirely by orders which are incapable of scrutiny in the Houses of the Oireachtas in the sense that ordinary legislation is. I look forward to more educational legislation in the future. It will become inevitable. People have gone on record with increasing frequency in the past few months as expressing their fear of State control in secondary education and more specifically in the academic type of secondary education which up to now has been run largely by the religious orders. Looking at the history of the vocational education system we have the answer to these fears. I am not suggesting that every vocational education committee has always behaved in anything but the best possible way, but people are human and institutions are composed of human beings. No system is perfect. When we look at the development of the vocational education system we have a good answer to the kind of fears which have been expressed by many people in the recent past.

My reading of this Bill is that it constitutes an invitation to the academic-type of private secondary school to co-operate. It is an invitation for co-operation as equal partners in the whole business of education. I would agree with Senator Brosnahan that the national schools are also equal partners in the whole work. Why has this Bill been found necessary? Technically, this Bill has been introduced to remove certain disabilities which may be adduced to prevent co-operation between secondary and vocational schools. The real reason is probably wider than that. One of the reasons why it is necessary is that so many of our schools at the moment are too small to provide for the children attending them the right kind of education. On the second page of the Minister's speech it is stated:

A large size school unit is now generally accepted as being a necessary prerequisite to the provision of comprehensive educational facilities at any kind of reasonabe cost and to making the best possible use of scarce teaching skills.

I find this understressed in the Minister's speech. I wondered whether this is so because the education in our national schools excites adverse reactions among so many people. We must grasp this nettle boldly and assure people that large schools are in no way dangerous but are the only way in which we can provide adequate education for our children. This will become increasingly obvious. We must realise that educational reform is taking place at two levels—in terms of actual physical structures of the schools and administrative arrangements, and also within the curriculum and examination system. If we are to be able to carry out the kind of educational reforms suggested by Professor McNamara and others, it would be impossible to do so without rationalisation of the schools system. In order to help to do this, we must persuade people how necessary larger schools are for their children's benefit.

I agreed with Senator Brosnahan when he spoke about our educational system and the division within it. It is not only divided into primary, secondary, vocational and university education, but it is split between boys and girls, between Protestant and Catholic, and, I am afraid, even between rich and poor. Whenever one looks at it it seems to split in another direction.

I see this Bill as one of the first steps towards knitting the component parts of this rather ramshackle structure. It is a small step and I think it will have to be followed by other steps. It is the beginning of a long process which will lead inevitably, I think, to some sort of joint management in this area. This is not within the scope of the Bill now before us but it is something we will have to face sooner or later. When that times comes the Minister will be faced with very difficult, delicate political decisions. As far as I am concerned he will have every understanding of the difficult job he will have to do.

Debate adjourned.
Barr
Roinn