Quotas on Catholic primary schools for non-Catholic children

[patslatt]

Recent press reports say that Catholic Church and Church of Ireland officials have written to managements of primary schools to require baptismal certificates for all new entrants. The purpose is to maintain the ethos of Catholic and Protestant schools.

Since the presence of a minority of non-catholic children does not affect the religious instruction of catholics,the question is how could it affect the ethos? Are the churchmen implying that the minority presence somehow contaminates the moral outlook of catholic and protestant children?

Instead of retreating into a narrowly provincial,exclusionary version of their faith,in the multicultural society that Ireland is becoming the churchmen ought to show some Christian charity towards minority children by admitting them.

If the churches proceed with this segregation, it will lead to the creation or reinforcement of non-Christian minority ghettoes as minorities are forced to live in areas where they can access the relatively small number of Educate Together schools, or set up their own fee paying private schools,many of them in mosques.This ghetto tendency would delay the full integration of non-Christian immigrants into Irish society for generations.

Couldn't the government build enough schools for minorities? It is useless to hope that the government will build enough Educate Together schools to accomodate the needs of non-Christian immigrants in the foreseeable future,witness the poor conditions of many primary schools using prefabs.

As taxpayers,and under human rights entitlements,significant populations of non-Christian immigrants and non-Christian Irish are entitled to widespread access to educational services. One way to bring this about in the short run would be for the Department of Education to dictate admissions policies and non-Christian quotas for the primary schools.There is a compelling social interest for this and after all, he who pays the piper calls the tune.The quotas could be based on census bureau data and volumes of applications.

While imposing quotas may seem politically impossible,it may not be so in another decade.An article in the April 9 Sunday Independent "More people having brunch" quotes MRBI figures on the decline of religiosity: 1.Just half of Catholics go to Sunday mass v 90% in 1977 2. 82% said their children are free to make up their own mind on religion v 7% in 1977 3. Atheists are 12% of the population.

Finally,politicians should not be afraid to lecture the churches on the ethics and morality of a state-financed school system excluding a sizeable minority of children.After all,the churches are continually lecturing politicians on politics!

patslatt

[Pidge]

What does a baptismal certificate actually change?

[Limerick Lad]

Seeing as how the taxpayer pays for the maintenance and building of most primary schools and for the payment of the salaries of the staff of these schools, the time has come for the ending of the system that allows for the local Catholic PP or COI minister to be appointed as school manager and for primary schools to become nondenominational with religious instruction being the sole responsibility of each religious denomination.

[dubsthcentralboy]

Recent press reports say that Catholic Church and Church of Ireland officials have written to managements of primary schools to require baptismal certificates for all new entrants. The purpose is to maintain the ethos of Catholic and Protestant schools.

Since the presence of a minority of non-catholic children does not affect the religious instruction of catholics,the question is how could it affect the ethos? Are the churchmen implying that the minority presence somehow contaminates the moral outlook of catholic and protestant children?

Instead of retreating into a narrowly provincial,exclusionary version of their faith,in the multicultural society that Ireland is becoming the churchmen ought to show some Christian charity towards minority children by admitting them.

If the churches proceed with this segregation, it will lead to the creation or reinforcement of non-Christian minority ghettoes as minorities are forced to live in areas where they can access the relatively small number of Educate Together schools, or set up their own fee paying private schools,many of them in mosques.This ghetto tendency would delay the full integration of non-Christian immigrants into Irish society for generations.

Couldn't the government build enough schools for minorities? It is useless to hope that the government will build enough Educate Together schools to accomodate the needs of non-Christian immigrants in the foreseeable future,witness the poor conditions of many primary schools using prefabs.

As taxpayers,and under human rights entitlements,significant populations of non-Christian immigrants and non-Christian Irish are entitled to widespread access to educational services. One way to bring this about in the short run would be for the Department of Education to dictate admissions policies and non-Christian quotas for the primary schools.There is a compelling social interest for this and after all, he who pays the piper calls the tune.The quotas could be based on census bureau data and volumes of applications.

While imposing quotas may seem politically impossible,it may not be so in another decade.An article in the April 9 Sunday Independent "More people having brunch" quotes MRBI figures on the decline of religiosity: 1.Just half of Catholics go to Sunday mass v 90% in 1977 2. 82% said their children are free to make up their own mind on religion v 7% in 1977 3. Atheists are 12% of the population.

Finally,politicians should not be afraid to lecture the churches on the ethics and morality of a state-financed school system excluding a sizeable minority of children.After all,the churches are continually lecturing politicians on politics!

patslatt

I haven't seen any of these press reports. Where was it reported?

As regards your point about politicians lecturing Church leaders, the separation of Church and State is a two-way street. The Church musn't impose its morality upon the State and vice versa.

[Wednesday]

I haven't seen any of these press reports. Where was it reported?

It was in the Indo a couple weeks ago and Orla Barry did a show on it. People were phoning in telling her that they were having their children baptised just so they could get them into a local school.

[GalwayIndy]

I fully agree with the OP.

After we learn to integrate non-Catholic and non-COI children, we can start including minority ethnic/minority religion (or lack thereof) teachers into our schools!

Ridiculous that 98% of the schools wouldn't hire me because of my lack of religion, yet I have to pay full taxes for these schools to exist and run. Educate Together schools do not receive the same funding as these schools!

In any case, until the Church(es) relinquish their control over the DoE&S, this is a lost cause. Mary Hanafin and her ilk are only too happy to take a hands off approach and insiste time and time again that the schools are in full control of their own admissions policies and hiring. Isn't this a convenient way to keep the status quo (majority religions/culture ruling the roost) while still shoving the Intercultural Education priniciples down teachers' necks with the other hand!!

Very sad state of affairs.

[St Disibod]

Seeing as how the taxpayer pays for the maintenance and building of most primary schools and for the payment of the salaries of the staff of these schools, the time has come for the ending of the system that allows for the local Catholic PP or COI minister to be appointed as school manager and for primary schools to become nondenominational with religious instruction being the sole responsibility of each religious denomination.

How many times do we have to go over this? Well play it again, Sam.

here[/url]) wrote)]

Let's see. I don't believe in God, and I disagree with organised religion - that's the minority I'm in, yes?

Now, in order to treated the same as everyone else in the overwhelming majority of schools I have to put my child through a religious ceremony that makes her a member of a church...

Can you perhaps see how that treads rather heavily on my rights as an atheist parent to bring my child up as I think right?

Well technically you can educate your child at home- in terms of the way the national school policy was formulated this might be considered option 1. Option 2 is to get together with members of your community and organise a co-operative to run a school and apply for state funding- and Churches have picked up the tab on 98% of these option 2 schools. I’m not trying to trivialise your dilemma- this system was designed specifically so that it would be saturated with Church influence and so can hardly be considered fair to the non-religious- but in its own roundabout way your rights are left strangely intact in terms of choosing how to bring up your child.

And I think it’s worth emphasising that the problems are not limited to sham religious observance (which I actually think is a very real threat for the Churches- see my earlier post here). I do not think it is beneficial to have a child learn one ‘truth’ in class and an opposing ‘truth’ in the home. I’m not condescending enough to think that such an act will fry a child’s brain or anything, but it’s simply not something I am too enamoured about having reinforced by the education system.

However spotting the flaws is the easy part, mapping a solution is significantly harder. Should the state build-up a second, non-denominational infrastructure in parallel to the current denominational ones, or should the state buy the Churches out- considering the bill would likely soar into the billions with the amount of land and access routes involved? The status quo whereby interested parents can set up a non-denominational school themselves with the necessary organisation is hardly perfect, but it’s definitely the easier option for a government when the alternatives are thought through. Are there enough parents sufficiently discontent with that status quo to justify the effort that would be required for one of the alternative options?

A proper public debate is required on this matter before the answer to that final question can be known- as people need to understand there is a sizeable price-tag connected to such major policy shifts before you start counting their votes.

Ridiculous that 98% of the schools wouldn't hire me because of my lack of religion, yet I have to pay full taxes for these schools to exist and run. Educate Together schools do not receive the same funding as these schools!

In any case, until the Church(es) relinquish their control over the DoE&S, this is a lost cause.

The Department recently announced that it would begin establishing more state (i.e. non-denominational) schools; a decision which received the, er, Churches blessings.

And Educate Together schools do not receive less state funding than denominational schools- they just don't receive ecclesiastical funding. Surely you're not suggesting that is unfair.

here[/url]), I]Alright, I’ve done the necessary Google-ing.

citizensinformation.ie has all the answers, and is impressively up to date. The quote below has been lifted from here, and was last updated on Thursday 8th March.

It turns out that most of, what I would consider, the necessary changes have already been introduced. If it is still proving problematic for parents on the ground to establish a school I would reach for one of four conclusions (or a combination):

- the reforms came bundled with too much red tape
- insufficient state funding was allocated to see the reforms through to realisation
- local communities do not know about or are not bothered to utilise the reforms
- there is no demand for these schools

I would quantify conclusion no. 4 by saying that I am well aware of the hunger for schools in certain areas of the country, but do these people want a specific type of school or do they just want a school, built as rapidly as possible?

Funding of Schools

Traditionally, the site for national schools was provided locally - either directly by the patron or as a result of local fundraising. There was also a local contribution to the building costs and the running costs. Changes were made over the years as multi-denominational schools and Gaelscoileanna were being built and did not have a "local" funding base. New arrangements were introduced in 1999.

Private primary schools get no state funding.

Cost of site - new national schools

The state pays the full cost of the site. The patron still has the choice of funding the site cost. If the state pays, then the state owns the school building and leases it to the patron under a lease or a deed of trust.
If the patron pays, the patron owns the school. If the state pays, it does not change who the patron is.

Building Costs

There is still a local or patron contribution to building costs. It is now limited to 5% of the total cost and capped at 63,486.90 euro.
For special schools and schools designated as disadvantaged, the limit is 5% up to a maximum of 12,697.38 euro

Renovations

The local/patron contribution to the cost of renovations is 10% up to a maximum of 31,743.45 euro. For special schools and schools designated as disadvantaged, the limit is 5% up to a maximum of 12,697.38 euro.
Gaelscoileanna

The funding for new Gaelscoileanna is now on the same basis as other new schools. The previous arrangement continues for Gaelscoileanna that have either permanent or provisional recognition from the Department of Education and Science. The previous arrangement for Gaelscoileanna meant that the Department bought the site and paid the full building cost. In practice, a significant number of Gaelscoileanna are in rented accommodation and the state pays the rent.

Running costs of schools
The state pays a direct capitation grant of 133.58 euro per student to each primary school. The state pays the teachers' salaries. Enhanced capitation grants are paid for children with special educational needs in special schools or who attend special classes in mainstream schools. Capitation grants are used for the day-to-day running of schools and for teaching materials and resources.

Primary schools also receive a grant for caretaking and secretarial services (called the Ancillary Services Grant Scheme) and this is 133 euro per student. A local contribution was formerly required but has now been abolished.

Each school gets a grant towards the cost of minor works. This is now 3,809.21 euro plus 12.70 euro per student. Schools with special units get four times this amount in minor capital grants.

Some schools qualify for enhanced funding under various schemes (Disadvantaged Areas Scheme, Breaking the Cycle, Giving Children an Even Break and Early Start).

Held against this light, what the petition at the foot of this thread is asking: that "The Educate Together network asks that the State, through the Department of Education & Science, takes responsibility for the planning and delivery of new educational infrastructure which provide equality of access to all families regardless of social, cultural or religious background;" seems a bit loose fitting.

Are they asking for the state to step into a state-wide patronisation of new national schools, resulting in a costly and wasteful overlap?

Or are they asking the state just to set up a few new schools in the image of those run by the 'Educate Together' network, but run by the state? I'm not sure how that would work. How would one decide where to build them? If one was to work on the basis of need, i.e. where there is a shortage of schools, would a Church be able to derail the process by expanding one of their school's in the area to cut the queue to zero (or would such accusations become possible)? What I am driving at in this regard is that the Church-run schools might become constrained; where they to expand in areas where there is demand they might upset and could be vilified by parents who want a non-denominational state school. And what of the social effect, in a country where primary education is deeply rooted in the local community you would introduce a desert of local involvement in expanding areas such as the Dublin commuter-belt.

Has this petition considered the nuances at play, or am I reading too much into a simple equation?

[Ronanr]

As far as I am aware, a Catholic or Protestant school can only turn away a child on religious grounds if there is another school in the catchment area that can more appropriately admit the child. (i.e., a Catholic school can turn away a C.of.I. child if there is a C.of I. school in the catchment area, and vice versa).

However, if there a situation where there is no appropriate school convenient, say a Muslim family turned up at the door of a school in rural ireland, and the next nearest Muslim school was in Dublin, 150 km away, i think the Catholic school would (eventually) have to admit the Muslim child. (not sure of the exact mechanics of it though).

It has been an issue before, I know, with Jehovah's Witnesses children. I know of one incident in a certain area, where a Catholic school was basically FORCED to admit Jehovah's Witness children by the Dept. of Ed., but I am not sure how the situation worked out.

[St Disibod]

As far as I am aware, a Catholic or Protestant school can only turn away a child on religious grounds if there is another school in the catchment area that can more appropriately admit the child. (i.e., a Catholic school can turn away a C.of.I. child if there is a C.of I. school in the catchment area, and vice versa).

However, if there a situation where there is no appropriate school convenient, say a Muslim family turned up at the door of a school in rural ireland, and the next nearest Muslim school was in Dublin, 150 km away, i think the Catholic school would (eventually) have to admit the Muslim child. (not sure of the exact mechanics of it though).

I don't think the schools are all that empowered in terms of refusing entry. Rather, their powers lie in exercising preference. If they have one place and two applicants, they may prefer one who is a member of their own religion. So, if a school has lots of empty places it can't really say no to anyone. But if a school has lots of applicants it can't say yes to everyone- so it prioritises.

And as we all know re-zoning and construction are finely tuned arts in Ireland, as opposed to planning which is something of a taboo. Hence lots of young children in areas with very few schools- am I right in recollecting that a school in Meath was running a dual junior infant programme, one class by day and one class by evening.

I don't think the churches are being scapegoated on this issue- despite the knocks since the mid-ninetees the collar must still demand more political respect than the stethoscope. But I don't imagine the politicians will mind if people turn against the churches for what is the fruit if their (the politicians') labour.

The problem is too few schools in fastly developing areas. Still though, we could take a page from the French presidential election and blame the European Central Bank. It's convoluted, but not entirely illogical. Now, that would be scapegoating.

[Ronanr]

I don't think the schools are all that empowered in terms of refusing entry. Rather, their powers lie in exercising preference.

So basically only Catholic schools in areas where there is a shortage of school places (in other words only a couple of dozen schools in the country, out of a couple of thousand primary schools) have this ability.

So in other words, you need not worry about the whole baptism certificate issue unless you live in Dublin 15, or a few towns in North County Dublin, Kildare, Wicklow and Meath?