Originally Posted by
johnfás
There isn't additional monies paid, it is payable in a different manner to a different system. The Protestant fee paying schools, which are mainly boarding schools and serve vast areas of the country for the dispersed Protestant population, were treated as comparable to Catholic non feepaying schools. The point being that in all areas of this country a parent who wishes their child to be educated in a Catholic school has the option of sending them to a non fee paying school. In that sense, fee paying education is a real choice.
The converse applies to the Protestant population, who lack critical mass around the country and thus in most cases a parent who wishes to send their child to a Protestant school must pay fees. The exceptions being 5 comprehensive schools which are not numerically or geographically sufficient to serve the entire community, and indeed only one is a boarding school, it being in Donegal.
On that basis, in order to give effect to the Article 44 rights of a parent not to be forced to send their child to a school which violates their ethos, the State treated the fee paying Protestant schools as being part of the mainstream education system, rather than an elitist choice. That continued for 40 years with the support of all in Irish society until the last budget. In fact, the resumption of the status quo is still supported by the Catholic Church as demonstrated by an interview with the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin on Morning Ireland this morning who supported the resumption of grants to Protestant schools.
The difference in funding (until last budget) between Protestant fee paying schools and free Catholic schools was not in the level of funding but in its means of distribution. Rather than being distributed pro rata, it is given in block form and then distributed by a committee which is made up of the representatives of the Protestant Churches to Protestant parents on a means tested basis in order to subsidise the fees which must be paid in order to ensure the right to send a child to a Protestant school.
The argument that such grants is unconstitutional is entirely ridiculous, both morally and legally. For a start, it is interesting to note that this situation has never been challenged in the last 43 years on a Constitutional basis. Similarly, the idea that treating different categories in society differently (not inequitably, but differently) as being unconstitutional is legal nonsense, something which I would imagine came from the Minister rather than an extremely competent Attorney General. For instance, the Supreme Court has variously held that particular opening hours granted to Jewish shops over other shops was constitutional as it gave effect to the Constitutional rights of the Jewish community and furthermore that providing additional support to single mothers (which prima facie infringes the states obligation to uphold marriage) does not infringe the Constitution as it protects and gives rights to a particular portion of society.
What is at stake here is pluralism in our society. This matter should not be framed in respect of Protestants v Catholics v Anybody else. These cuts would be fine if it was the intention to push the churches out of education completely, to create a secular state in which schools with religious ethos were entirely private venture. I would disagree with such a move, but it is certainly a rational point of view. However, it must be noted that is not what is happening here. There is no apetite on the part of the State to create alternatives to allow these children to go to non fee paying schools which are non denominational because that would result in additional cost to the State. The simple fact is that the State is merely looking to cut costs, and it is doing so in an overtly discriminatory, and frankly unconstitutional and unjustifiable manner.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
)
