Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 3 Oct 2024
THERE ARE “SERIOUS deficits” in the government’s environment legislation and policy programmes, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stated.
The EPA has released an in-depth State of the Environment Report looking at all areas of Ireland’s environment and climate policy, identifying problems and advising what changes need to be made.
It outlines that “serious deficits remain in Ireland’s implementation of environmental legislation and related plans and programmes” and that “environmental policy responses to date have been insufficient to halt or reverse environmental decline”.
“We need to scale up and speed up the implementation of measures and critical infrastructure in energy, transport, waste and water to protect our environment and human health,” the EPA says.
Ireland is currently performing poorly on climate, nature, water quality and circular economy markers, the report has found.
The EPA assessed Ireland’s performance in various areas of environmental policy and found that none of them are yet where they need to be, nor are they firmly on track to meet goals and targets.
The best performing area was air quality – which the EPA ranked as ‘moderate’, saying that Ireland is largely compliant with air quality standards for many pollutants but missing WHO and EU standards for others.
Its assessment of nature said that Ireland is doing ‘very poor’, marking no improvement in the rating of nature policy since 2020.
Protected habitats and bird populations are deteriorating and Ireland isn’t on track to achieve policy objectives for nature.
Similarly, the outlook for achieving climate goals is weak and performance in the area has been ‘poor’.
There has been progress in beginning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve climate adaptation, which has moved the assessment from ‘very poor’ in 2020 to ‘poor’ in 2024, but the situation still leaves much to be desired.
To meet 2030 and 2050 climate targets, there will need to be full implementation of the Climate Action Plan, plus additional measures.
Water quality, the circular economy and waste are also in a poor position.
EPA Director General Laura Burke has said progress has been made but it is “nowhere near good enough”.
“We are always playing catch-up. We now have virtually no seriously polluted rivers, but we have hardly any pristine ones left, either. We now recycle more, but produce more waste than ever and export much of it,” Burke said.
“We are taking positive actions across multiple fronts, but they are not keeping pace with the growing pressures, and our environment is being squeezed. Increments now are not best use of scarce time and resources: We need to make a fundamental shift.”
The sweeping report highlights a myriad of failings and problems in Ireland’s climate and environmental policy.
For instance, there are currently nine Court of Justice of the European Union cases and 16 infringements open against Ireland for failures in implementing EU environmental legislation.
Our consumption of material items is increasing but our recycling rates are not keeping pace and it’s likely that Ireland won’t be compliant with EU recycling targets.
85% of Ireland’s protected habitats and nearly one-third of protected species of flora and fauna are in unfavourable status, more than half of native plant species are in decline and more than 50 bird species are of high conservation concern. The leading causes of the declines are changes in agricultural practices (like intensification), pollution, spread of invasive species, and climate change.
Fishing at unsustainable levels is impacting habitats and the food chain, while in farming, there is “no clear evidence” that the measures currently being taken will be enough to achieve the scale of environmental outcomes that are needed.
And crucially, Ireland is not currently projected to achieve its 2030 emissions reductions targets or to meet national or EU reduction targets.
To begin to address the problems, the EPA is calling on the government to develop a national policy position on the environment and to rigorously implement environmental plans and programmes.
There needs to be a transformation of the energy, transport, food and industrial sectors and more investment in water, energy, transport and waste management infrastructure, the report details.
Minister for Climate Eamon Ryan said this morning that he “welcomes and agrees with” the report.
“We really have to address the environmental challenge we face for our future, for our health, for our security. I welcome that they recognise there has been progress, particularly in this government. We have started to change. We can do it in this country. But we need to go so much further,” Ryan said.
He said in relation to the EPA’s call for a national policy position: “Government will respond. We’ve actually been doing that. I’m going to go to my Government colleagues next week and circulate a memo that we have been working on, which will actually set out exactly that: Bring together all the policies that we’re introducing and put it into a coherent economic plan for the country, for our people.”
“And then we have to go further because there is a leap needed. We’ve been taking good strides in the last four years, particularly in this government, but that needs to hasten, to pick up speed and make a real leap,” the minister said.
“We have to think of the environment. In everything we do, we have to put it centre stage. That’s what this state of the environment report says. I agree with it. That’s why our party exists, is to make that happen.”
This is a great move. I do believe education and religion should be taught separately. Let’s keep our schools for teaching and science. And those that wish can attend church in their own time.
Learning about religion and different religions is a part of education
Imagine coming out of primary school at 12 and not knowing anything about people’s faith
It’s a great move. I’m happy for my kids to learn about religion as opposed to just learning religion. As an academic subject I think it’s important as it has influenced our culture for 1500 years.
Add Astrology, parapsychology, quackery and comparative superstition. Alien abduction should be taught.
Why can’t parents teach their children religion, if they want to.
Religion could be taught in the context of social and cultural anthropology.
All schools should be neutral and not dominated by a particular denomination. Comparative Religion should be taught to give the children (and their parents) a wider view of world religions. Education not indoctrination should be the goal.
Amen to that, John.
And why can’t the parents teach this 12 year old about faith
There’s nothing wrong with teaching religion as long as it’s a balanced view of religion as a concept and equally spread across the beliefs of all major religions including the non-belief of any religion.
I agree that religion should be taught with a balanced view sort of like history. I remember being taught history. Can never find this tir na nóg place on a map. I’m still looking for Fionn’s burial ground too. I’ve also been fishing in the boyne but never found that special salmon. This sort of history should be taught alongside religion. The same chap must have wrote it all.
Although what we have now (with the exception of Educate Together schools) is Religious Faith Formation rather than education about religions, I still am not sure that we need to devote a whole subject area to Religious Education. Why? You could learn the tenets of the main religious belief systems in a few hours. Could it not be part of a wider subject?
Barry Burke…how liberating!
Yes Barry, good point, however, we don’t teach about different religions as it currently stand. We only teach our religion.
That is the problem.
I agree with John that church and education should be seperate, but the school should obviously still teach about religion as a whole, covering all religions, not just Catholocism.
It’s not necessarily about teaching religion, more about the religous patronage of schools. No new National School opened should be run by the church, and the government should be looking to broaden the availability of secular primary education. This, the 8th and one or two other minor issues are the last steps towards becoming an equal republic as envisaged 100 years ago…. In a religious sense at least…
We do an awful lot of church bashing, but the reason why all the schools are religious is because the church were the only ones investing in education in the state for hundreds of years.
The deal is that catholic kids gets first draw . The state don’t like it, then don’t provide funding. But wait they can’t, because the state have only built like 10 school themseld .
Church own them . Build your own if you don’t like them
Excuse me but the church owes us and its victims millions in compensation. It could start by selling off school property to the government.
Well the state are building these 3 so it should be a no brainer.
The government can’t afford them
There about over 1000 primary schools and god knows how many secondary schools but I would value them at a quick guess of about 30bn + easily
State can’t afford them.
Your excused
Church in the past interested in primary education for purpose of indoctrination. This is still the case.
They can take the cost out of the money they owe us
The state covers almost all the costs of running most primary schools. Your post is nonsense. Who pays the salaries of teachers?
Barry, who pays for the maintenance of those church schools?, since the 1960′s who has paid for the renovation and construction of those schools? Who pays for the staff salary for teachers and support staff? Who pays for the electricity and heat?
The answer to all of the above is the state not the church.
I’m definitely not a religious person…but isn’t a subject where the values of each of the major religions in the world a worthwhile subject? I mean ALL major religions, not just catholicism. Given all the problems that religion is causing is it not a good idea to educate children as to just what is different between the religions so we all can stop looking at each other as a bunch of savages? I think ignoring this is actually depriving somebody of a social education which is a great tragedy
@john , what exactly do they owe us
Yeah sure, they pay the salaries and renovations. But they still own the building as they own the land. That’s the law.
The state knows this and continues to operate under rte agreement
If the state don’t like it. Stop paying for it and build their own. On their own land.
Folks, at the end of the day, the church can say, that’s it, we have ennough.
Close all the schools. We’ve had ennough.
Then we will see how much you want an educate together school
They owe us for the Irish children they sold, for the years and years of unpaid work they took from girls in their laundries, they owe us for every single second of pain and fear they instilled in the children they abused and their lives that they ruined, they are and have always been funded by people whom they brain washed and indoctrined from birth, our ancestors and above all else they owe us millions in unpaid taxes. Their buildings would be a paltry payment in return for all of that.
Oh Barry, they won’t do that, that is the only way they have left to try brain wash followers now that people don’t actually attend mass. Let them close the schools but also cough up tax money and the money they owe with regard to abuse and there will be more than enough to cover their buildings. But as I said, they won’t do that because they would lose their way in to children’s minds.
Barry and the state could take a large % of them as part of the 250 million still owed to the state and its citizen in reparations from child abuse.
I would love if the church took your advice and closed the schools. It would finally force action on a badly ignored topic
As far as I’m concerned the state should just seize all the schools from the church.
@dell all then things you are clamping however are a legal dispute between the victim and the church.
You have to take each on a case by case basic. And if they in each case they have proved to be at fault, the state can not benefit from it…(ie the state can not gain a building because of somebody’s abuse)
Also the state are to blame for a lot of them abuses.
I’m not defending what the church did , but rather pointing out. Like it or lump it they legally own the buildings.
I’m not suggesting that they should close the schools. I’m pointing out they legally can.
Claiming*
Bloody auto correct
@todd. Can’t do that.
You can’t just seize property from organisation you don’t like.
Barry, no there is an agreement in place to stop individual claims against the church, the RC church is 250 million short on what it owes to the state and its citizens, under that deal.
Perhaps the state should just take the property instead of waiting for the church to do the right thing. There not great at doing the right thing as we have seen over the years
The state actually can, and if they needed legal justification, they could just have the CAB do it, or they could call it reparations for victims of the laundries, workhouses, orphanages, clerical abusers etc..
The Catholic Church, as far as I’m concerned, should not still own ANYTHING in Ireland. The abuse of the people of Ireland by the church made it’s worldly goods forfeit.
The church is supposed to be impoverished.. so make it so!
Unfortunately Todd you’re watching democracy in action. The religious voters in this country are incredibly vocal and terrify rural politicians into action. The main ruling parties (FF and FG) owe much of their support to rural areas and wouldn’t dare to upset the religious voters in their constituency.
Barry your initial post is historically inaccurate and ignorant. The National School system set up in 1831 by the British was multi-denominational,the Roman Church only hopped in post-Independence to indoctrinate,discriminate and abuse children. Your ‘Hundreds of years for the good of the country’ statement is galling.
Are you REALLY serious??? The real situation is that those buildings were given to the church in the first place. The ones that were built by the church were done so with the money of our parents and their parents – the church IS the people – and so are community assets.
Of all of the religious controlled schools in Ireland, they have ALL been maintained, refurbished, extended and a huge number completely re-built fully at the expense of the state – while remaining the asset of the religious order – a windfall you might say. In my own town, THREE religious run secondary schools have been completely rebuilt to the tune of millions in the past year – completely at the cost of the state – and two primary schools are getting new buildings from state coffers. What is scandalous is that, in recent years, many of these orders have put these buildings beyond reach in trusts. Perhaps this was because they did not want them to be seized by the state in lieu of the millions they undertook to pay to the state as their share of compensation for the crimes of their past employees – a tab that remains unpaid and so we are all forced to pick up.
In addition, these schools are being massively funded specifically to deliver the state education system. The church pays NOTHING at all towards these schools – either in direct funding or management and running of the delivery of the curriculum.
So we have a situation where they are legally, if not morally, ‘owned’ by religious orders, and have applied for and received massive state funding in contracts, in return for which they undertake to deliver the state curriculum. What is independent about that? Is it not a bit like a teenager living at home, with board and lodgings and pocket money all paid by their parents, declaring themselves to be living a completely independent life? Without their 100% state funding, these schools could not continue and would collapse.
Do you not think – like with universities, libraries or other state services like hospitals where the state pays for everything and builds the buildings – that the state has a right to say this is how we want you to deliver the state service, in return for your privileged access to state funding to do so???
The state could stop giving privileged access to state funding to deliver the education system, and stop funding the upkeep and refurbishment and complete re-building of those buildings. It is beyond belief that the state re-builds all these buildings to the tune of so many millions every year and just hands that to the religious orders. Why does the state not set conditions on its continued patronage of the church? This state has channelled billions of our money to the church and the church is now trying to hold all of us over a barrel.
I believe that religion would still be taught as a subject, but in the context of teaching about it not as faith formation or as a way of segregating children.
That is certainly the secular approach that most people identify with.
The churches were given the land by the people to cater for the education needs that the state couldnt afford at the time. All we want now is that the church gives the land back to the people.
Please God that’ll happen.
im not defending the church , yes they did awful things. But the also did good things.
As for somebody saying communities built schools , yes ,they did in some cases, But on church land.
If i build a house on your land. It is your house.
You may not like the law. But that is what it is !
Yeah Barry, the church has a fantastic history of respecting the law.. I was abused by a member of the church along with thousands of others worldwide. You say the state was partially responsible well the church was the state, the church ruled the state so saying that the state was partially responsible is passing the buck bog time. As for the good they have done well that’s great, I’m sure Hitler did some good too. It’s a corrupt organisation right to its very core and any other organisation that would have aided and abetted pedophiles and sadistic sociopaths would have been investigated thoroughly and had its assets stripped a long time ago.
All schools should be secular. Teaching of a specific religion doesn’t belong in schools. The argument that parents should be able to have to children thought Catholicism by a public school is nonsense.
It’s not practical to have schools available for every religious leaning in every locality.
Time would be better spent on useful subjects that we currently don’t teach and no subjects we don’t teach enough of.
Hallelujah!!!
Indeed – up until now it has not been possible under the law to have a school that was just a school teaching all children, without being defined by religion. It is mind-boggling that the state is still basically endowing, and facilitating the faith formation of, one religious body with all our money, because the church pays nothing towards this and every aspect of the running of our state education system is paid for and carried out by the state, except for the most local management committee stuff.
The argument that the church own the buildings, therefore they can teach our children absurd lies is ridiculous. Any other organisation that raped, abused, trafficked and murdered children in the thousands would have had all assets seized long ago. They’ve gotten away with murder (literally) and we’re expected to be OK with this? Not a hope
What lies do they teach.
You may not believe it, it doesn’t make it lies.
The state are to blame is well, where do all their assists go
Why don’t the teachers and teacher’s unions strike to have religion removed from schools? Surely if students are being pounded with RC fairytales all day and the hierarchy running the schools is an evil body of murderers and rapists, then surely those foot soldiers, the teachers, carrying out their orders and indoctrinating our kids should strike to have this evil organisation removed? That would be interesting.
Indeed, when you look at it, many of those buildings were give to the church in the first place and then our parents and their parents contributed every week to build more (there has never been money coming from Rome for schools) – so they are truly community assets that belong to all of us.
In addition, for many years now the state has been investing massively to the tune of likely billions at this stage in the maintenance, refurbishment, extending and often total rebuilding of many of these schools – while they amazingly remain the assets of the church. In my own area three large second level (religious) schools have been completely re-built in the past year and two primary ones are getting new buildings – completely at the cost of all of us via the state to the tune of many millions.
As for the general management and funding of every aspect of what are for the most part 100% state funded schools (well the parents fundraise to make up short-falls for special activities in all schools, but the church contributes absolutely nothing) that is done by the state, except for the oversight of the patron to ensure the religious ethos is imposed – which involves religious faith formation ‘versions’ of what are already perfectly good state curricula in all areas of the curriculum.
We badly need an end to active religious ‘formation’ being the main aim of nearly 100% of our state funded and state run schools. And I’m not sure about Religious Education being a subject in its own right, when you have so many other things that young people say they wish to learn (for example, in consultations they put social and emotional learning at the top of their list of all subjects they wish to learn – religious does not figure). You could learn the basic tenets of the main world religions in a few hours really. Perhaps a subject that is more about exploring ethics could be useful, but I would say on balance ditch the subject. The problem with the new ERB (Education ABOUT Religions and Beliefs) is that the starting point is that everybody is seeking meaning in their lives and has beliefs – are they; do they??? I prefer mindfulness where you strive to live in and enjoy the present moment for the short time we have on this beautiful planet.
Sean, are you aware that ‘faith formation’ is indeed the main aim of any school run under the patronage of the Catholic Church? Are you aware that it is a fact that the ‘formation of the faith’ goes across the entire curriculum? Are you aware that the church has taken perfectly good and evidence-based state curricula (like Religious Education and Relationships & Sexuality Education) and created Catholic faith formation versions out of them? If schools with Catholic patrons do not follow these guidelines of faith formation across the whole day, they are disobeying orders.
Ah the aul ‘following orders’ excuse. So the teachers have been indoctrinated by the church and the kids are being indoctrinated by the teachers?
Yes Sean that actually covers it. Also there is a heavy church presence if not influence on the school boards who employ the teachers.
Excellent. Choice is everything. And when there’s proper choice the religious schools can stop the pretence and be religious schools again. The kowtowing they do to Muslims and atheists is nauseating and I say this as an agnostic.
So what you want are multiple schools in which children are segregated according to the religious beliefs of their parents?
This is long overdue. If a family feels strongly that their particular faith is so important in the childs life then let them teach it themselves. Can anyone honestly say they learned anything from it? Absolute doss class.
Eh, no, choice is NOT everything. Individuals cannot dictate to the state and want them to provide a state service in line with their own private belief system. If that were the case, we would have to have several schools of different faiths in every small town in Ireland – that is not feasible or affordable where you may only have a population big enough for one school. And do we really want a situation like in Northern Ireland where they have schools where children enter by the one door and then go left and right to the Protestant and Catholic halves of the school as a way to try to start bringing them together – they only mix in the playground. That is both ridiculous and tragic.
State funded schools that are contracted to deliver the state curriculum should not be religious at all. Patrons who cannot do the job of delivering an inclusive state education system for all citizens should not apply for the funding. They should apply to the church instead for funding – it is insane that the state is directly sponsoring and facilitating one religion to form the faith in children – that is not the job of the state or state funding.
Schools with a religious ethos have been with us and are part of our cultural baggage since the foundation of the state and before. The problem as I saw it was that there were no secular schools. If we can add them to the mix that is a good thing. The problem with atheists and political liberal progressive types is they want to ban religious schools and have only the type of schools the ethos with which they agree. Fanaticism is not the prerogative of the religious you know
They want to stop state run religious schools. Not all religious schools. Stick to the facts Marg. Lying is a sin.
Marg, adding a handful of non-discriminatory schools to the mix doesn’t really fix the problem. The remaining schools still discriminate. If the discrimination was based on race rather than religion, I doubt you’d be making the same argument. (Of course, given that religion is a cultural marker, religious discrimination very often results in de facto racial discrimination.)
I am delighted if religious schools want to set up, pay for their own buildings and all their own costs – carry on. Otherwise you are just like a teenager living at home getting board and lodging, expenses and pocket money and declaring that they live an independent life. Any private organisation that wishes to contract with the state to deliver a state service needs to be able to do it inclusively, or not take the money.
I am not a believer in any god or gods, or religion, but I do not want to ban religious schools. Nor do I want to see atheism promoted in any school. Schools should not be about indoctrination of any kind. Secularism is not an ethos – if it is, then our hospitals (funded and built 100% by all of us but controlled by the religious) are secular, as are our libraries and universities.
How much does a baptism cost? The Catholic Church is such a great business. They’ve thought of everything. Even in the deepest recession people will still need to get baptism certs. Also you’re not getting to heaven without one so they can charge what they like and you can’t pick one up in your local Spar shop.
Ah I don’t know, there losing the game a bit.
Sure you can pick up one of them marriage certs in Centra from Thursday onwards
Is it 50euro for baptism? Is 150 to get married in the church.
Kerching
I think Barry just showed his true colours, he’s still bitter about the marriage referendum, the poor pet
I disagree with you there. Before my grandmother died my local parish priest visited her every single day and never asked for a penny. You resent paying €150 euros to a priest to marry you but you would pay that to a register to marry you? You’d pay €2000 for a good wedding band or at least €10000 to a hotel. Let’s be realistic here!
I think the amounts are perfectly acceptable. It’s very reasonable, the cheapest part of baptism or a wedding is the church… The money is spent on everything else.
€50 to get into heaven and your local primary school. That’s actually very reasonable.
Will they be refusing to take off holidays associated with the Faith, Easter, Christmas, St. Patrick’s day?
Not sure what you mean. These are traditional feast times that go back to long before Christianity (well, except for St. Patrick’s Day). Every country has state holidays (the word holiday if you like seems to have come from holy day). We do have that religious inheritance, but those holidays no longer have a religious meaning to most people. If we said get rid of the names we would be called fanatical. So I am happy to keep the names Easter and Christmas personally. I celebrate them for what they are – very ancient feasts to mark the changing of the seasons.
What I am getting at is those who run these institutions, being teachers, spend so much time sitting and not really working, would they, if they are ‘secular’ forgo those normal Irish holidays, all of which, even the mid-July stuff in the six counties, are associated with Christianity!
If they’re secular, they will want nothing to do with such leave so, why not teach all year, take the statutory holidays only and do not take double time for working holidays, indeed, why take off Sunday’s?
New Year’s is not a Christian feast, simply one week after Christmas however, if we wish to celebrate new year’s, why not do so over the Celtic new year, in October, leave Christmas, la Sa Phadriag, Easter etc and take your holidays when your Principal can allow you to, kind of like everyone else.
To me this, for those who appear to oppose religious instruction in schools, albeit by far the minority, this would remove them from their quandary.
@Joey, if you think teachers don’t work at all, then I think you should take your head out of your behind and start living in the real world.
Firstly Larissa, you miss my point, second, are you one?
I’m husband to one, Father to two, unlike them, I trained, specifically, to live in the real world, hard work is done by those who work hard, remember the old saying,
‘those who can do, those who cannot, teach’!
I just hope, your wife and children don’t read your stupid comments here, you may be looking at a divorce suit and being disowned by your children otherwise
Doubt it
Shows the benefits of a hung Dail. The leftwing parties and Independents should make thus a redline issue. Even religious countries like America balk at our theocratic education system.
What if the independents are right Wing. :O
It’s not a major issue
Indeed, we know from successive polls that a majority of Irish citizens do NOT want schools with religious patrons. So it should be an issue.
even “EQUATE: Equality in Education” which i can guarantee is a bias poll says that 54% people want religious schools.
Even the lonely left polls cant support their own bullshít
For anyone interested EDUCATE TOGETHER is also applying for the school, and a group of parents have been campaigning for this for 4 years. If you would like to enroll your child go to http://www.educatetogethernc.ie – it only takes two minutes
No thanks.
Don’t trust the ethos.
Any school that doesn’t teach about talking snakes,phantom conceptions,zombies and sky fairies should be viewed with deep suspicion.
I thought Educate Together were the first seculars?
To be honest though, I’m not a fan of a group looking to run a school who name themselves “secular”, as if that should be the first and foremost thing you look for when choosing a school above other values. Not that I don’t support the aim of a secular school, all power to it, but secularity shouldn’t be the primary focus of any grouping looking to educate. “Educate Together” looks to the same aims, but emphasises that we must be partners in this world. Far better named approach.
You are completely misunderstanding what secular means – it is in no way a belief system! Our universities and libraries are secular. We are looking at a new kind of school since the law changed to allow it – up until now schools HAD to, by law, be secular either with teaching one religion as their aim, or teaching multiple religions (multi-denominational). It has not been possible just to have a school whose aim was not mainly to do with religion or religions. So this new system is secular. ALL that word means is that, as you say, it just provides an education without regard to religion as its main focus.
I have been involved in Educate Together schools – most people involved would love to see so-called secular schools, but because of the law multi-d was the nearest we could get. So what would you suggest that a school that is secular (which means just offering an education without religion being the main aim) call itself to differentiate itself from the schools that all now have a religious focus? It just seems so unfair to slate them for calling themselves what they are. The school will not promote ‘secularism’ (since all it means is doing something without reference to a religious ethos).
Sorry, I meant to say that up until now (the law has changed recently) schools were required to be denominational or multi-denominational – the main emphasis was on religion in other words. Now that has changed, it is legal for schools to be secular – which simply means that they will not have religion, or multiple religions as their main focus, but will simply be places of learning for all children – just as all our third level colleges and universities currently are run along secular lines.
Yes, but none of our universities etc put “secular” in their names. They just are. They practice all the way through without referring to it. I have no problem with schools that are secular, but ones that put it to the front as a primary attribute could implied to be, as opposed to a neutral, “decide for yourself” ethos, an anti theist “we must discourage religion” one.
Does a school define itself as a “non-faith” school, or a “faithless” one? There is a difference.
Adding more secular schools is just using sellotape to plug a whole in a huge Dam. It is nice to have more options and stem the flow for now but it won’t fix the cause of the problem. More and more babies are born and are forced into religious education. Education should be separate from religion. Open the doors of ALL schools to ALL children who want to learn and send them to church for their religious education. Should children in one estate catch a bus away from their friends and be labelled “different” (as it currently teaches them in the R.C. R.E. books, which I have read) to attend a different school, instead of the local school at the end of their road. I don’t understand why people are fighting for exclusivity when it literally exclused children and their families from receiving local education. Children who want to learn in a classroom with their neighbours and friends. It just breaks my heart.
Absolutely no way in hell I’d send my child to a ‘secular’ school.
No values.
No moral guidance.
No universal values.
No philosophical dimension.
No direction.
Indoctrination centres for consumerist society.
Sam, perhaps it would do you good to actually research this before commentating. You obviously have no clue as to how schools work if you think those things are only in place because of a religious ethos.
Secular values come with a secular ethos.
(whatever those are)
@Sam, sorry for butting in on your comments here and while I mostly agree with secular values in society and education, I have to agree with you on the downside of that secular ethos.
For instance, here in France, Muslims and Sikhs are discriminated against in the public services because of their cultural/traditional identity. To me it’s secularism gone so wrong as to have become intolerant of anyone else’s beliefs.
It is absolutely ridiculous that so many primary schools and churches require people to be hypocrites in order to get their children in. Parents are required to go to services in order to get their children quite against their own beliefs.
By my recollection Christ was quite down on hypocrisy, so it begs the question why do so many churches/primary schools make it mandatory?
Well I’m not doing it. I will not be a hypocrite. I’m reasonably sure that being a hypocrite is quite the wrong message to be sending to my kids.
Just wondering what holidays will they observe ? Will they make allowances for different dress associated with some faith,s ? If they DO then the whole idea of what the school,s are trying to achieve will be lost…
Nearly 100% of our completely state-funded and managed state education system is delivered through institutions controlled by the religious, and so faith formation in one belief system is in fact their stated main aim. In a secular school, you would hope that every student will be accepted and celebrated for exactly who they are themselves. School terms are set out by the state for all schools, regardless of their religious ethos. Do you mean will they celebrate religious festivals during school hours? I’m sure they will not expect children whose family background is a particular faith to hide the fact that there is a feast day, but they may not actually take up school time to celebrate the feast days of every religion – why would they? Does your place of employment take part of the work day to celebrate every religious feast day? Why would a place of learning do so? Do our universities? This narrow focus on religion and people’s personal belief systems in the delivery of what is a public service should end.
It’s a nice idea, and I hope it works out, but it doesn’t get to the root of the problem. And, either way, Catholicism is still going to have monopoly on the public education system.
I, personally, think that a “particular religion for access” policy should be a luxury for private schools only, and public education shouldn’t discriminate.
Question. First secular primary schools? Really? Someone might need to clarify that.
Is not the already established “Educate Together” schools operating in same fashion (no actual specific religion taught during normal school hours) for the last five to seven years?
I mention this as my four children have attended an Educate Together school this last few years.
Either way, I like many, welcome these schools. More of them please.
Another 96% to go.
There is no doubt that the Catholic Church has been damaged by the evil actions of a minority, and what those individuals have done is without doubt the essence of pure evil. The faith has always remained in the hearts and souls of the people, during penal times when Catholic priests were murdered, mass was outlawed and yet faith in the Christian God remained, we saw the persecution in in Russia, Syria and the banning of the crucifix in China in the last month. It is interesting to see the level of pure hate and evil people carry in their hearts and souls directed under a disguise of remorse for victims at the catholic church, when in fact they deny Gods justice for those victims and are terrified that they should meet justice for the wrongs that they themselves have committed, this thought does not sit well with the atheist camp, knowing that they too will have to answer to the almighty. The new age militant atheist will tear down the unique teachings of the historical Christ that which are based on moral laws from a moral law giver and replace it with what? A secular atheist based cult of which it is without doubt a religion, based on the teachings of the delusion of Darwinism, natural selection and survival of the fittest? Frederick Nietzsche’s book was the first to coin the philosophy that God is dead, the same book the Hitler gifted Mussolini when they first meet, and that which was the inspiration for his moto ‘ I want to raise a generation of young people, devoid of conscience, imperious, relentless and cruel’. If Science has buried God? How so? Science has yet to tell us what energy is? What gravity is, not just a law to demonstrate it! and yet atheists are so absurdly confident and utterly arrogant they can say that God does not exist? There are few such on their deathbeds.
What an utter utter pile of arrogant, holier than though rubbish. As an abuse victim let me tell you that you and people like you are part of the problem. being a follower of one of the most corrupt disgusting organisations in the world is nothing to be proud of and in no way demonstrates you or any of the other members of the cult owning a conscience or any such thing
Some of the nastiest people I have ever met were catholics and some of the kindest most selfless were atheists. The Catholic Church should not be involved in state, school or hospital.
In all fairness, most religious run schools leave the day to day organisation to the local school administration and parent committees. Provided they embrace secular values, I don’t have a problem with that. Afterall, it’s not like the local parish priest is receiving a civil service salary just to oversee the dept. of education standards, is it?
But the Principal is receiving a civil service wage to oversee religious standards as they are appointed by the bishop and not the dept of education
Catholic schools in the inner city are in decline. I know his first hand, the funding is little or none for building up grades. We were approached by a group of Muslim men who wanted to teach a Saturday and Sunday school in the building, they paid big bucks. We didn’t even have Heating the building was that old, of course the principal said yes. This year they want to take make an approach to Edmund rice(the trust to buy the school). If not they are applying to buy the primary school that is vacant next door.
My point is don’t be so quick to want dramatic change. My aunts children in London have to travel 28 km to find a non Muslim school in neasdon. As someone said earlier, unfortunately it was the dirty perverts that were placed in schools but it was fundamentally the Catholic Church that set up schools, much like monks 1000 years ago. There’s nothing we can change about that. The educate together schools are great but these men wanted full Muslim only boy schools set up.
have your say