Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
A NEW BILL on education will see waiting lists, admission fees and explicit discrimination in admissions all banned.
Education Minister Richard Bruton this morning announced the approval of the Education (Admission to Schools Bill).
Among other things the new laws will:
Ensure that where a school is not oversubscribed (80% of schools) it must admit all students applying
Ban waiting lists, thus ending the discrimination against parents who move into a new area
Ban fees relating to admissions
Require all schools to publish their admissions policies, which will include details of the provisions for pupils who decline to participate in religious instruction
Require all schools to consult with and inform parents where changes are being made to admissions policies
Explicitly ban discrimination in school admissions
Provide for a situation where a child (with special needs or otherwise) cannot find a school place, and allow the National Council for Special Education or Tusla to designate a school place for the child
April Duff of Education Equality Ireland gave the bill a guarded welcome, saying it will help erode soft barriers placed by some schools against special-needs children.
Advertisement
“It’s welcome progress,” Duff told TheJournal.ie.
“It’s a good bill but doesn’t address religious discrimination in schools. In that respect, I’m not sure what the point of it is.
It makes there be transparency in admissions, but transparent or hidden discrimination isn’t any better.
“The bill effectively skirts around the edges, in that it would seem it fails to address the most pressing problem in school admissions: discrimination on the grounds of religion in accessing places.”
The government hopes the legislation will be enacted before September 2017.
The minister conceded that many schools remain oversubscribed, adding that “they cannot be blamed for that”.
“But they must be fair and transparent in deciding how to prioritise children for admission to the school. This Bill will make sure that is the case in all schools.”
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Everyone knows the problem exists where local schools do not have enough capacity for local students. Apparently that schools are still allowed to discriminate.
Do these politicians think we’re a bunch of thickos? This bill will do very little and we know it. They think they’ve sorted the problem and will point to it every time they are pushed on discrimination in irish schools which they just okayed.
@odhran not when the government, therefore the taxpayers are funding those schools. If they are paid for by all taxpayers they should serve all taxpayers equally.
No we cannot all agree that is a good thing. School should be about equipping children with the skills needed to get a job. Religion should play no part in that. All schools should be non denominational.
Why don’t atheist families get together a form a school, the Government will fund it if a proper proposal was submitted.
The reason why the Church are so slow on handing schools over is because the majority of parents in these schools don’t want the ethos to change, simple as. What we have is a very loud, vocal minority that wants change.
Besides, the issue of admissions isn’t really an issue in 80% is schools that aren’t oversubscribed. All in all its not really an issue for a lot of people.
Plus, remember, baptising a child is free if you can run out the door fast enough once the water is poured and you don’t hand over the envelope!
If a school wishes to have any special ethos. Religious or otherwise by all means do so but become private schools and self fund. All state schools should be secular and about education only.
Ban religion from schools, children are there for an education, not indoctrination. Its time the clammy hand of the Church was taken from young people.
So a parent who have lived in an area all their lives, contributed to a school, attended that school themselves, then registered their child within weeks of their birth could lose out to a parent that just moves to the area four years later? Seems unfair.
Deccan, what is fair about allowing a child to have a better choice of schools just because it’s parent was attentive enough to enrol them years in advance? Do children with bad parents deserve a lesser chance at education?
I appreciate what you’re saying Neal, however the system seems to have been give an “overhaul” with this legislation and it does not address all the issues. Consideration needs to be given to the children first and then the schools trying to administer the admissions. This legislation does not do that.
It is crazy that a school in modern Ireland can discriminate based on religion. Imagine a hospital refusing to accommodate a sick child because the child is not a Catholic. Religion should have no place in a modern secular country.
But will you support the leagues of foreign born families insisting their children be taught in their own traditional means I.e. Segregated based on gender, teaching about dirty kaffir etc.?
He, like many in Ireland, would most likely support a complete separation of religion and education. No Catholicism, no Islam, no religion in schools whatsoever.
We are a republic – we are supposed to have a separation of church and state. Our constitution says the state is not allowed to endow or favour any one religion!
Educate Together schools have Religious Education ABOUT religions (just like in ALL other European countries), as opposed to indoctrination into one religion only. If we have more multi-denominational schools and insist that our state-funded education system is fully inclusive, then we will surely have very few faith schools of any faith – only the rich will be able to pay the full cost of schools that is now paid for 100% by the state.
There’s an Autism specific special school in North Dublin with a waiting list of over 150 and they’ve stopped even adding names to it now. Six kids in each class. Most of that 150 will never get in the door. More ASD Units and ASD specific schools please. Not all kids with ASD can cope in Mainstream classrooms.
There is no requirement to be baptised to join a catholic school. There is no discrimination against non baptised children. There is priority given to a baptised child. There is a difference.
To discriminate would be to refuse to take non baptised children.
There is no such ban.
The non denom schools prioritise siblings of current pupils. Isn’t that discrimination?
Catholic schools will take children of all faiths and none.
Even for baptised children, religious classes are not compulsory. Nor is receiving the sarcrements.
No Tom, to give preference to a baptised child over a non baptised child is clearly a discrimination no matter how you spin it. Would you say giving preference to white children over black is a discrimination?
treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit:
racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment:
She chose the colors with great discrimination.
Seems pretty clear cut that it is indeed a discrimination.
Whites over blacks is discrimination.
Exclusion is not the same as discrimination. I can be excluded from first preference in buying a ticket for an all Ireland final because I’m not a member of the GAA. That’s not discrimination.
Would I be discriminated against if I wanted to send my non Islamic kid to the Islamic school in Clonskeagh if they took an Islamic kid ahead of mine?
That’s the very same issue here.
If there was only 20 catholic schools in Ireland, nobody would be crying discrimination. The issue for many is that they feel they have no choice.
That is a different issue.
These schools have been built and provides for by the church.
The church only pay for teachers and upkeep, as they should.
The church are completely law compliant in their preference to Catholic children as the GAA or the IRFU are in their ticket allocation policy.
tom; I have three letters from my local school when after applying when she was born – one which states my child has a place, a second in the year before she started which states my child will not have a place as baptised kids are prioritised, and a third that states we have a place after all as we meet with the principal and kicked up a fuss at a social event and highlighted that our daughter had sisters in the school (who we “baptised” in private the week before starting school or she would not get her place). That is 100% constitutionally supported discrimination.
To prioritse siblings makes it easier on parents than having to send their kids to many different schools thus making a lot of them late in the mornings
@tom have you ever heard the saying, it’s hard to win an argument with a smart person but damn near impossible to win against a stupid person! You don’t lost arguments do you?
I’m for separation of church and state as much as anyone but the reality is catholic schools except everyone I should know I’ve sent my atheist children to one of them, no doubt someone here will ask why and simply put they are one best schools education wise in the area, if that means they have to put up with some meaningless waffle at the start and end of every day than so be it. Was asked on enrolment were they baptized I asked why and the response was sorry we ask everyone so we can get an idea of where the child is coming from or if the child is Irish, we accept all but it’s just so we can get an idea numbers wise, knowing someone else who works in a school in another part of the country they confirmed this by saying it’s a soft question designed to get information it has nothing to do whether the child has been baptized and more to do with assigning classes, they can’t outright ask if a child is Muslim as this would be perceived as racist when all the school want to do is make sure that there’s an even ratio of kids in each class also if there are only two of one religion or culture in a particular year they will generally put them in the same class so they have a friend they can relate to. State run schools are very inclusive, years ago if you went into any school in the country you be hard pushed to find a child of a different religion or culture, nowadays most schools are like sesame street and I don’t mean that in a derogatory way I’m just saying they’re inclusive to all, my own children’s school is quite proud of that fact as they have a map of the world in the main hallway showing the diverse range of countries their pupils come from.
My children’s school, a heavily catholic school might I add has African’s, Polish, Korean, Chinese, English, American among others and that’s just in one year, there’s five atheists alone in one of my children’s classes I’d say that’s fairly inclusive, also we were outside the catchment area and had to apply a bit of pressure to be accepted but it was down to numbers as classes have an average of 33 pupils per class, this whole argument isn’t about religion it’s about numbers.
Its not just religious discrimination that happens in schools.
Many of the more ‘academic’ schools will not take children with any sort of learning/behavioural difficulties or any other SEN. Many of these schools are very well equipped to deal with these children but simply give preference to others.
Anna – so what? How do you know these African, Polish children etc are not catholic? The fact remains there are many schools that do not accept children of other or no faith, with children of no faith being treated least favourably.
That’s ok Seth.
I’m stupid. Happy?
Don’t shoot the messenger.
If you feel it’s discrimination then take an action against the state.
Let smarter people than me confirm that I’m not so stupid after all.
Discrimination is a 2 way street.
Is it sexual discrimination that I’m prevented from using the ladies?
The key point here is these are Catholic schools. They are owned by the church.
They are absolutely within their rights, legally, to prioritise baptised children.
You may not like it, but that’s not to say it’s discrimination.
But hey, don’t listen to me. I’m stupid after all. Mortgage your house and take legal action.
It might be worth noting that the same thing happens in the uk also.
Tipper
That’s a dictionary definition.
In a court of law they don’t look up the dictionary. They look up the legal definition of discrimination.
That is what the judgement will be based on.
You mightn’t like it (I bet you don’t) but the Catholic schools are not discriminating. They will happily give a place to a non baptised child in accordance with their admissions policy.
This will be decided by a court, not by a bunch of head bangers on the journal.
Tom – the church has an exemption under the legislation, but why would they need one if it is not a discrimination.
What exactly is your definition? You state that treating a black child differently to a white child is discrimination, but different treatments on the grounds of religion is not, rather contradictory. I assume you would have no issue if the public sector favoured church of Ireland applicants for employment over Catholic, you know, like they used to do in the North; after all, by your reckoning there would be no discrimination.
Simply put Tipper alot of their mothers turn up to collect their children wearing a niqab and one mother in particular wears a burka, that doesn’t scream catholic to me, some Polish catholic yes but not all and as far as I’m aware there are only three Jewish children two of which are from the same family I know this as they are in one of my children’s classes (twins and a non relative to the twins) the majority outside of catholics are Muslim at a ratio of about 60:40 in favour of the indigenous population which isn’t surprising as there’s bound to be more locals, there’s one pupil in a wheelchair and the school installed wheelchair ramps and a lift to accommodate the child as the building is quite old. Can anyone give me an example of exclusion when within a catchment area based on religion or skin colour, I’d be very interested to hear a real account of what happened. Perhaps you Tipper can give me a list of the “many schools” you speak about that exclude children based on religion.
Anna – for the “many schools” just read the experiences of posters on here, read the reports of April Duff and Paddy Monahan. My children were refused entry to all of the schools local to Dalkey/Killiney and we had to revert to the department of education. The church schools all refused us on the grounds that “children of no faith” we’re at the bottom of their admissions criteria and Dalkey School Project, because we were too far down on the waiting list.
Religion & education should not be mixed. Religion is a matter for parents to teach their children at home if they so wish. It has no bearing on academic skills.
Hi Anna. I’m a teacher and had a significant role in writing my schools enrolment policy. While doing so (and as a point of reference for my toddlers future schooling) I got copies of enrolment policies from a dozen schools in my area. They did not all discriminate on religious grounds regardless of their ethos but 8 did. Of this 8 4, as far as I know, are traditionally oversubscribed each year so their discrimination in relation to prioritising has real world implications for students and their parents who apply for a place. Not all schools with a religious ethos discriminate but enough do for it to be a problem and our government consciously allows this.
Trisha
Why shouldn’t religion be an option in school? Theology is a university subject. School is about options to develop.
It isn’t all about academic.
It’s why schools do sports.
I constantly rang the principal Trisha and asked whether my child was accepted or not, we were just outside the catchment area for the school, the principal kept putting us off saying they didn’t know yet and they’d have to look at numbers which I accepted, I was also asked why their school in particular and not the one in my catchment area and I gave an honest answer that from what I heard they were one of the best schools in the city, I got a letter of acceptance in may and my eldest started that September, to say I was happy is an understatement, it’s a fantastic school even if it is religious.
Fair point Graham and I’ll accept that there are some who do but on the other hand I don’t believe it’s as widespread as opinion would suggest. I’ll also accept your point that the government turn a blind eye which is why I’m all for a separation of church and state. Saying all that though if the church ran my children’s school without government funding I’d still probably send them there as it genuinely is a great school, hate the fact that it’s religious but hey it’s their school and their rules, my children are taught different at home.
Anna, totally agree on separation but even with little bit of research I’ve done it really is that widespread, 2/3rds of the schools whose policies I got copies of have this clause. Such discrimination should simply be illegal. There’s also no way the church is gonna start funding schools. And, pardon the pun, thank Christ for that cos they’d want a hell of a lot more direct involvement then.
That said their actual involvement in my school is one class a week, quick prayer twice a day at assemblies and their reps on the board whose ethos has never impacted a decision I’ve seen.
Oh and are you saying schools don’t discriminate on special needs grounds?
No I don’t think there’d be enough funding for that to happen and as it is most schools bleed parents dry and that’s with state funding can you imagine the cost without it?! I know the reps on the board in my children’s school are heavily involved, there’s prayers in the morning, prayers for lunch prayers at the end of the day and religion lessons three or four times a week, it’s annoying but I chose to send them there and believe me they complain about it but it’s a small price to pay so they can get a good education, in regards to special needs I was responding to Tipper and I wasn’t saying they weren’t discriminated against just that my children’s school didn’t discriminate. Unfortunately I know some first hand cases in other schools where a child was refused because they have autism or another disability I don’t think that’s right or fair and agree fully that those schools need to be called out on that.
There was I just about to get on my high horse about how secondary schools discriminate against students with autism (I run an ASD Programme in a mainstream secondary school). Ah well I’ll save my ire for Tom
Sorry to take the wind out of your sails on that one ;) Jayzus it’s a bad day when I’m viewed as being on the same page as Tom, I don’t subscribe to any one view and actually like to engage in a positive way with other commenters, I also listen and like to hear other viewpoints. It’s nice to have an adult exchange without having your head bitten off and on that note Graham it’s been a pleasure, have a great day. :)
Anna – actually you were far more dismissive of the point than your response to Graham suggests. You said “state run schools are very inclusive” and even asked me to provide details of the “many schools” that do discriminate. This is a very widespread problem, which is the discrimination in the grounds of religion against 4 year old children, yes 4 year olds. You may be comfortable with that and try to dismiss it as exaggerated and not an issue, but frankly it disgusts me.
I think Tipper is a little confused … discrimination is just a common term that carries no legal weight on is own, like other words it has been hijacked and context loaded for other ends. I can quite legally be discriminating about the company I keep, the books I read and who I invite to a party, that’s my right to discriminate. This is not about religion/no religion per se. The Catholic schools are run by their parish for its membership. It allows entry to others, as much as the feel they can, to balance fairness and obligation. But membership based admission is a discriminatory right. Membership of any organisation brings benefits that are exclusive to members, that is the right to assembly. I’m sure you are or have been a member of something at some time in your life. Even here you cannot comment unless you become a member direct or through FB etc. The real issue is why the state won’t take these schools under their own control ( to make a balls of, no doubt).
Tipper your initial response came across as a little hostile hence my response although to be fair I feel that was because I had a somewhat similar stance as Tom on the matter and you were expecting the same reaction from me, I can only comment on my children’s catholic ethos school and other catholic ethos schools that I know of first hand, all appear to be inclusive that doesn’t mean to say that all aren’t but I also feel alot of cases have to do with catchment areas and numbers. I asked you to provide details because it seems as though some schools look like their discriminating when they ask if a child has been baptized when all it is is a question to get some accurate numbers. Again that doesn’t mean some schools exclude on religious grounds but I have yet to come across a person in real life that this has happened to. On the other hand I do know people who’s children were excluded due to them having a disability. I really am all for a separation of church and state, I believe religion classes are a complete waste of time and doesn’t serve any purpose other than to try to indoctrinate young minds. I’m not comfortable with a school that excludes children simply because they didn’t get some water thrown over them when they were babies. In my (very) honest opinion if I applied to a school and they gave me that response I wouldn’t push to send my children there anyway, their ethos would give a child a bad example to follow.
Tom Burke, you should have been a Jesuit! Discrimination is treating someone differently. It does not necessarily mean total, overt exclusion. If the Roman Catholic Patrons were truly Christian they would treat all pupils equally. As pseudo-Christians and hypocrites, they claim not to discriminate against non-Catholics, but to give priority to Catholics! Astonishing as this stance is, what is even more astonishing is that they expect us to accept it without question. The ultimate reason for astonishment is, to me, and to many others, that the Roman Catholic Church, given its criminal past in relation to women and children in Ireland, is allowed to even enter the premises let alone run it! Out with ‘em!
Tipper you seem to have no problem discriminating against those who choose to send there children to a catholic school, you have no problem denying there rights.
BigJake – where have I advocated discriminating against children of Catholics? In fact where have I even asked for one group of children to be given preferential treatment over others?
Anna Bee, can you not see that, with 96% of all our schools funded, managed, staffed, maintained, built supported, inspected etc by the state, but still allowed to impose a religious ethos, there really is no choice for all those parents who are not Catholic but to send their children to these schools?
To say that what amounts to our state education system allowing non-Catholic children to attend what are in effect state schools is somehow ‘inclusive’ is awful – schools that are not so popular that they are over-subscribed actually need the numbers they get from us pagans so that they don’t lose funding.
You are aware, I am sure, of the Catholic ‘integrated curriculum’ at primary level, that means ‘faith formation’ takes place across the entire school day and all subject areas. How is that inclusive? Remember again that we are talking about an education system where the religious patrons contribute nothing except the ethos – the state does everything else.
In addition, the religious orders have committed to hand over buildings to the state that they legally (if not morally) ‘own’, as a token to offset the 1.5 billion bail out they received from the state to pay for redress for victims of their orders’ past abuse. They have not done it. The reality is that these patrons and the church are hugely indebted to the state, rather than the other way around, and they should not be allowed – together with the huge benefit of such massive state support and privileged access to funding – to exercise favouritism for their own in our state education system. They are not allowed to do it in hospitals (where the state again pays for everything but religious orders retain control of the ‘ethos’) – so why education?
My local (Balbriggan) Catholic schools admission so policy is catholics in the catchment area first then catholics outside the catchment area then others so a child of no religion who lives next door the school would be at the end of the list to get in. Pretty unbelievable for a publicly funded school in 2016.
Also could I make a recommendation? Would it be possible for ye to link to the relevant bill when ye are reporting on a new bill being introduced, debated, enacted etc. It would be very handy to be able to quickly reference it.
Tom, please do a bit of research. Read the INTO history of primary schools and you will see that all the National Schools were built by the government of the time in the 1850s, on land that was donated by individuals or the parish for the purpose of building a school. The Catholic church resisted this provision of ‘schools for everyone’ but eventually came round, when they got their own way about patronage. The schools were originally supposed to be under the patronage of a RC, and Anglican and a Presbyterian priest/minister. There was supposed to be limited religious education at specific times of the day. The RC gradually ‘took over’ most of them, Patronage was regarded as ‘owning’ the schools. In most cases the church has contributed little or nothing financially to the schools.
Schools that were actually built by Orders in the Catholic Church were originally built as fee paying schools, rather than schools for everyone.
Hijacking the school patronage system was a means of generating cash for the Catholic Church. In the 1960s the church had more brothers, priests and nuns than soldiers, sailors, airman and Gardai combined. All these had to be fed and watered.
Hijack the school and health system and not only can you control the Ethos but you can control the hiring and firing and give the jobs to your own staff. Give said staff pocket money and the organisation pockets the remainder. Said staff’s public sector pensions now propping up the organisation too.
Tom – again you are showing your ignorance, which quite frankly is plentiful. C Diff and MRSA are largely caused by a growing resistance to anti biotic drugs. Perhaps you should have spent less time in religion at school and you would not show your ignorance in so many matters.
Now back to the point, the church did not build the schools, the state did, perhaps you can stop perpetuating this lie.
Schools and their buildings are held in Trust for the patrons …Its a charity trust so the Gov built them but they did so on Church land ..You cant get the building back
Poor Tom is clearly unaware that most of our major hospitals are still ‘owned’ (on paper) and ‘controlled’ by religious orders (even though we all, of course, via the state, pay for every single aspect), who monopolise the board! The bishop is the head of our National Maternity Hospital (funded, staffed, managed and paid for by all of us of course).
So if you want to blame anybody for the state of the hospitals, they are unfortunately still in charge!
And where, Tom, are the buildings religious orders were supposed to hand over to the estate in token payment of the 1.5 billion bailout from the state, who tragically decided (like the bank bailout) to take on this debt that does not belong to us, but is the debt of the orders for redress payments to victims of their past abuse.
Any sign of any of those buildings – or have they all by now been put beyond reach in trust – we know that most have.
@tom, i have never seen a school building claim it was one religion or another. my theology is not perfect, but i know they refuse to baptise dogs , so I’m sure Irish government buildings are well beyond getting to heaven when they die (that’s what catholic is, isn’t it?)
It’s a state school (the state provides, pays for, supports, manages, maintains and re-builds buildings, the whole shebang) that has a patron that is allowed to impose a religious ethos. How is that a ‘Catholic school’???
If schools want to prioritise their own – let them pay for those schools themselves – hands off our state education system! We would not stand for it in the hospitals that have religious patrons but are staffed, built, run, managed by the HSE, would we, putting Catholics at the top of the list?
Check out the catholic schools in dublin west all colours some people dont get in simply because there isnt a place for them and then think its because of colour or religion
It’s just as hard to get your child into a school if you’ve just moved to a new part of the country ! Nothing to do with religion or numbers already in the school either …
Now bear with me here: are you actually saying that written down admissions policies in state-funded schools that clearly state that unbaptised children will be bottom priority are a figment of our imagination? It is clearly documented and accepted by all (including the church) that this happens! If nearly 100% of our state schools are religious ethos, is it any surprise that they have to take in local kids who are unbaptised too? The schools that are not so popular that they are over-subscribed do indeed take in us pagans – they need us to keep up the numbers or else their funding from the state will get cut! Also children of ‘all colours’, as you put it, are quite likely to be Catholic or Christian if they are immigrant children – the real demand for multi-d schools is from Irish citizens who are no longer religious – and about half of Irish citizens in polls say they would prefer multi-d schools.
In the meantime, while the government is getting its act together to provide them, we do not wish to be excluded from our state education system or forced to baptise our children against our conscience just to get the right of an education.
Not a bad bill fair play to Bruton he seems to consistently do good work. If only he had won the heave we would not have to endure Enda for the last five years.
Stark contrast to the other bill the attacks our right to privacy and exposes the emails of every business in the country that Enda and Francis are trying to rail road through.
This bill is opposed by all campaigning for education equality! It makes our children second-class citizens instead of third-class – it is an insult and he will not get away with it. In fact they have kicked the can down the road about the issue of admissions and inclusion of unbaptised children in our state education system – they realised with the big recent demonstration and fuss from Irish citizens – as well as criticism from human rights organisations and polls showing a majority in Ireland want an end to this discrimination – that they have to bring in change – so they have kicked it to an Oireachtas Committee to ‘look at it’.
I’m not speaking for all schools here but I know that some playschools presume you are going to send your child (or grandchildren as the case may be) into the primary school it’s attached to, most schools ask for a baptismal cert when your child (if catholic) is enrolled that way they have it on file for when the child reaches first holy communion age. You don’t have to provide one but they ask anyway. Seems like this playschool is asking on behalf of the primary school it’s attached to. I was asked too even though I’m atheist, when my eldest reached communion age they forgot about our previous statement and asked again and I told them again we didn’t have one. There was never a problem, they also asked if we’d like our child to receive a blessing on the day so my child could feel included, I didn’t want to but I sat down with my child and we talked about it, ultimately I left the decision up to her and she chose to be blessed. Hope this helps. :)
She was in second class and didn’t want to feel left out like most young children of that age, I could have put my foot down and said no but I teach tolerance and understanding at home I’d be a pretty hypocritical person if I taught one thing and practised another, her class is making their confirmation next year and she faces the same choice again, she’s already stated that she doesn’t want to participate as she’s old enough and sensible enough not to have her peers influence her decision this time round. I’ve told her I’d be happy either way and it’s totally up to her, as of yet she hasn’t changed her mind and I don’t think she will.
That’s what happens Anna – rather than a free choice in a system where children learn ABOUT all religions, they have ‘faith formation’ in Catholic schools across all subject areas – so no child can escape it and of course they do not want to be made to feel left out or different – that is why many parents actually do baptisms of convenience too – so their child will not be made to feel different in a religious environment. It is just wrong Anna, and I cannot believe you are excusing it. It sounds as if you think the school is brilliant for tolerating your child and trying to accommodate the fact that she is ‘different’ – that is just not good enough – a state-funded learning environment should treasure and include all children equally.
I don’t see any reference to the admissions on the basis of children of past pupils which is patently discriminatory and must be outlawed. Also, no guarantee that discrimination on the basis of “selective” catchment areas, on the basis of “traditional feeder schools” will be tackled by this bill. These are key issues that appear silent. More transparent discrimination isn’t much better than what we have. Discrimination is just that.
They have limited to 25% the number of children of past pupils who automatically get places. They have not defined catchment areas, which is an issue – it means that state schools that now prioritise Catholics from outside the area over an unbaptised child who lives across the road, who under the new bill will not be allowed to do this will simply be able to increase their catchment area to get around it.
The point most people are missing is this. These are Catholic schools, doing the work of the state in providing the school. They are legally within their rights.
An Islamic school is within its rights to prioritise Muslim kids.
Provided they don’t out up a sign saying no Catholics or non believers need apply.
They can prioritise.
The church own the 3,009 schools, not the state.
The church can do as they please with their own schools.
But Tom, the thing is back in the 30s or thereabouts the Irish government, heavily influenced by Charles McQuaid etc., essentially outsourced education to the catholic church. The church in turn were only too happy to have access to pretty much all the kids in the country for indoctrination (and worse). In many cases the state provided the land etc. for the school before handing ownership over to the church. Now fair enough many schools relied heavily on church staffing etc., but mostly because this was the model being used by the state. The state funds most schools now, ownership by the church is just a historical accident, so the church does not have its “own schools”.
Does the church pay the wages of the schools staff?
Or does it provide the schools budget?
They cannot “do as they please” and I should as I’m on the board of one of their schools.
It is discrimination and one our government gave the church specific permission to pursue and which it could very easily revoke minimal if any opposition from schools.
Not that they’ll do it of course
Graham
The church own the schools.
Wages is only one aspect of it.
Why should the church pay the wages. The state should.
If there is discrimination then somebody needs to take legal action.
I think you will discover there is no case to answer.
‘Providing’ the school? When the heat/light/upkeep/extension/teachers/books/carpets and everything else is paid by the state.
Would a hospital that was founded by an order be allowed turn away an ambulance containing a Hindu, atheist, pastafarian? Would they defuq!
But 5 year olds? Yeah grand.
And 20% of primary schools are oversubscribed. The catholic ones accept Catholics first. While Catholics may miss out when they’re full, non Catholics do for certain. That’s the difference
My daughter with Down Syndrome was not admitted in 3 local schools. Only one of those schools placed her to waiting list. One school refused to do so. So discrimination, racism and arrogance are at full blossom.
The bill requires the school to detail what provisions it lays out for children not participating in religion but not that they must provide alternative provisions… it still allows for little timmy to be put down the back of the class during RE but only because the parents were warned it would happen before hand
So what should happen to little Timmy?
Timmy doesn’t actually go to the back of the class. Timmy can sit where he is. What can’t happen though is the class is stopped for everybody because little Timmy is used as fodder by his mother.
The Catholic School Partnership (a group of bishops etc the people who write the religion books for catholic schools) wrote a best practice paper last year on how to ensure the best and most positive experience for inclusive children in all catholic schools. A paper that is yet to be followed by most catholic schools. There are provision outlined that would allow for religious instruction to be taught in a positive and productive environment without deminishing the daily education and self esteem of both the relgion class or the opt out children. There are things schools can do to compromise to make both parties happy but simply chose to do so because the law and bills like this allow them to.
Sorry just to edit the above statement. Schools choose how they treat non religious and opt out children and families once they have jump through the hoops and finally become part of the school. Just because the hoops have been removed this bill states a school can choose to not allow for any provision (group activity, project, homewwork) still have the laws and this bills to back them up and schools will say it doesn’t say anywhere I even have to acknowledge your child during RE class in the law I just have to tell you I’m going to ignore them.
As a Teacher, it’s very interesting to read the different views. Unfortunately, changing admissions policies is not (at present) the government’s responsively. Schools are run by boards of management not the Department. They hire and interview the staff, they employ the builders for construction work, etc. While I’m not sure what the correct solution is, at present every school is legally entitled to have whatever admissions policy they want. It is also worth pointing out that a sizeable number of parents do want their child to go to the local Catholic schools (with or without partaking in the ethos). A lot of the admissions problems in catholic schools is about numbers; if schools had the room to admit any valid applications – there’d be no need for discriminatory admissions policies.
Thank you Richard.
I was about to make the point that there seems to be a conclusion that people don’t want religion in schools.
I would suggest that while mass attendance has gone down, most parents want their children to make their first holy communion and confirmation.
Of course schools with local management committees and religious patrons can do what they want – however, they have no entitlement to state funding to do what they want. Like any lucrative state contract that comes with 100% funding for your vital state service, if you wish to discriminate, you should not get the money.
I have been on a local school board – it is Dept. of Ed. regulations that has made them more accountable – however, we all know that while they have oversight and ultimate responsibility, they usually meet once a month, and it is the principal and staff that really run the school, in line with government guidelines and rules.
That’s because they are delivering the state curriculum and education system on behalf of the state with funding from the state. Schools who do not conform to dept. rules currently do not get funding.
Now that we know a majority of Irish citizens want this discrimination to end in our state-funded schools, the government is perfectly within its rights to deny funding to education providers who can not deliver our education system in an inclusive fashion.
Schools are NOT legally obliged to have any admissions policies they want – they are not supposed to discriminate. The loophole is that they are allowed to protect their ethos, but there is no burden of proof on them to show how an unbaptised child of four will bring down the whole school and destroy its ethos.
You assert that most parents want their child to go to their local school – yes they do, but a majority in all polls say they would rather it was a multi-d or non-d school – unfortunately we have 96% of our state funded schools with a religious ethos. I hope the government will act soon to rectify that and re-direct its funding to education providers who can be inclusive of all children. The promised divestment and handing over of buildings needs to accelerate greatly to facilitate this overdue move.
Diddy
A few questions.
Are these schools discriminating (in the legal context? I’m not talking about your opinion. I’m asking, in a court of law would this be discrimination?
I don’t think so.
‘Now that we know a majority of Irish citizens want this discrimination to end’….
Again, is it discrimination?
How do you know a majority??
Evidence?
I really do feel the focus of the secularist/atheist campaign is misplaced on this matter.
Too much anger and resentment.
They would be better advised to put their energy into fundraising for ‘alternative’ schools as religious schools have done historically.
Remember.
It’s far more productive to light one candle than cursing the darkness.
Who the holy hell upvotes these ridiculous comments.
“I am a Catholic so my schools should be funded by everyone’s taxes. But if you’re not a Catholic you should pay for your own school while continuing to fund mine”.
Or we could stop paying people to teach fairytales to kids, focus on real education, and stop certain organisations promoting discrimination against 4 and 5 year olds in state funded services.
So Odhran, you are unaware of the fact that the state ‘bailed out’ the religious orders to the tune of 1.5 billion to date, when it tragically undertook to pay the orders’ debts for redress to victims of their past abuse. We are all paying for that. In token recompense, the orders agreed to hand over buildings to the tune of about 350 million. They have failed to do that, and many have in fact recently put their assets and buildings beyond reach in trusts. In addition, the state has for generations been paying for all the refurbishment, maintenance and in many cases complete re-building of all these schools, to the tune of billions. So do not tell us to fundraise for ‘alternative’ schools. Those schools belong to all of us and we need to see some action on the promised divestment and handing over of buildings to be re-opened as the multi-denominational schools that at least half of Irish citizens have said in polls that they want.
If you were starting a school system today would anyone suggest that allowing segregation of Muslim, Catholic etc is a good idea for a future nation of people with understanding between differing cultures.
Seems unfair on the person moving but the person not moving shouldn’t have to suffer either. If you put your child’s name down first then surely that has to count for something. The only alternative is to set a date for applications every year and it will still have to be a first come first served basis but will instead of the current situation create chaos on this date where the result will be locals not getting places and having to travel to multiple schools with their children. Such idiots that we can’t figure this out.
“Admission fees are going to be banned”? In other words, we are going to have a secondary school system as poor of quality as our non-world class universities! If this bill actually goes through, we are going to have previously decent secondary schools effectively starved of funding.
This Fine Gael government is, effectively, a socialist government even though the Irish people did not vote for a socialist government. If a majority of the people wanted a socialist government we would have voted for the Labour Party, Sinn Fein or People Before Profit. Don’t ordinary Fine Gael members and voters feel even a little bit betrayed? They should be feeling a huge amount betrayed!
This bill does nothing to stop state funded religious discrimination of five year olds. A “Catholics first” admission policy is unjust; and needs to change quickly.
‘Perceive or constitute the difference in or between’.
You know, during the summer I like to buy an occasional icecream. I like Brunches, I don’t like Choc-ices. In other words, I prefer Brunches, and I discriminate between them and Choc-ices.
I discriminate between the two ice creams because I recognise a distinction or difference between them.
Maybe the government will soon rule that I don’t have a preference for Brunches, rather I have a prejudice against choc-ices. Pherhaps they will accuse me of being prejudiced against Choc-ices because they are, let us say, darker in colour.
Maybe by law I will even be forced to buy a Choc-ice instead of a Brunch, in order to end discrimination.
Or even buy one of each, after all that is ‘equality’.
I was thrown out of every school I ever attended.
An IQ of 170 meant I was bound to be a brat.
The problem is this:
The number of photons the universe outnumbers the number of hadrons. by a factor of 10 to the power of 32..
Matter particles outnumber anti-matter particles by the same proportion.
They kick bored smart pupils like me out of school.
I was kicked out.
Trump imposes 25% tariff on steel and aluminium coming into the US
Updated
5 hrs ago
25.8k
122
Artificial Intelligence
Tech titans and world leaders gather for Macron's global AI summit
Jane Matthews
Reports from Paris
5 hrs ago
1.3k
24
Dublin
Man still in custody after three people hospitalised in 'random' stabbing attack in Stoneybatter
Updated
22 hrs ago
125k
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 143 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 98 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 128 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 98 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 73 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 72 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 36 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 32 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 119 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 59 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 70 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 77 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 38 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 42 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 24 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 79 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 89 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 65 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 47 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 77 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 57 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say