Post by Wasp on Oct 8, 2009 21:21:50 GMT
Minister's discriminatory attempts to rewrite history
The Protestant battle against Education Minister Batt O'Keeffe is only beginning, writes Alan Ruddock
Sunday October 04 2009
DONOGH O'Malley, the enlightened Fianna Fail minister who introduced free secondary education more than 40 years ago, would be deeply ashamed of Batt O'Keeffe, the current Minister for Education.
At a stroke last year O'Keeffe tore up O'Malley's legacy and decided that the time had come to discriminate against the Republic's small Protestant community by attacking their schools.
Perhaps he thought that Protestants would simply accept his sectarianism with quiet dignity, or perhaps he fell for the lazy ideology that characterises all fee-paying schools as bastions of elitism and thought that an attack on Protestant fee-paying schools would have populist appeal. Perhaps, of course, he did not think at all.
One year later, however, and the anger in the Protestant community burns deeper and at a conference yesterday in west Dublin, church leaders and educators took their campaign to a new level. They will not relent; O'Keeffe has started a war that he and his party will regret.
When O'Malley introduced his free education scheme in 1967 he recognised that boarding schools were an essential part of the Protestant education system because the Protestant community was scattered across the country.
O'Malley could not formally include them in the free education sector because they had to charge fees to cover those boarding costs, but he put those schools on a par with the free sector. They would get the same grants that were paid to free, and overwhelmingly Catholic schools, and would enjoy the same pupil-teacher ratios. He told the Dail that Protestant schools would be treated "at least as favourably" as Catholic schools.
Michael Carty, parliamentary secretary to the Taoiseach at the time, went even further: "We in this part of the country should show that we lean over backwards to ensure that the pupils of the minority religion are afforded equal -- if not better -- opportunity with those of the majority faith. There are very few of them and they are scattered all over the country. They have to get special assistance. That the minister recognises this problem is a credit to him and something on which he must be congratulated."
The critical point was the simplest: Protestant schools charged fees because they took in boarders from a dispersed community. In all other respects they were no different from the free school sector. To defray the costs of those fees, the Protestant proportion of the grant paid to all free schools was grouped into a lump sum that would then be shared out to parents who could not afford to pay, ensuring that Protestant schools, though fee-paying, would embrace the entire community and not just the wealthy. In rural Protestant schools, more than 50 per cent of the pupils receive grants and at the top end of the scale those grants cover most of the cost of sending a boarder to school in Sligo, Bandon or Kilkenny.
It is the closest a rural Protestant family can get to a free education in their own ethos, and it is the antithesis of elitism.
O'Keeffe, however, has decided that must change. He has aligned Protestant schools with the rest of the fee-paying school sector, deciding that Protestant education is now a lifestyle choice for the "elite" rather than an appropriate choice for Protestant parents that should be considered on a par with the free sector. In last year's Budget O'Keeffe cut supports to Protestant schools that other schools in the free sector enjoyed, saving €2.8m, and increased their pupil-teacher ratios. Under his rules, Protestants must accept a lesser education for their children if they want them educated in their own ethos (unless they are lucky enough to live near the handful of free Protestant day schools in Dublin and Cork).
The change in the pupil-teacher ratio means that Protestant children will have higher class sizes and fewer subject choices, all because of their religion. The only way that a Protestant family can now access the same quality of State provision of education as their Catholic neighbour is to deny their child a Protestant education.
To justify his discrimination, O'Keeffe then started to rewrite history and sully O'Malley. Protestant schools were never part of the free education sector in the first place, his department claims, so there is no change; they still get most of the grants that free schools get, recognising their special place in his affections; they charge fees, so they can afford to take the hit; if he did not cut their funding, he says, fee-paying Catholic schools could launch legal actions against the State because they were being discriminated against. His claims are disingenuous, at best.
The legal action he should fear is not from Catholic fee-paying schools but from Protestant parents who are now being denied the rights afforded to their Catholic neighbours. Already denied choice and expected to pay for their own ethos, they are now expected to accept lower standards from the State.
If O'Keeffe has his way, those standards will fall further as the pupil-teacher ratio for fee-paying schools will continue to deteriorate. As it does, Protestant schools will be forced to close and many Protestant families will no longer be able to choose a Protestant education for their children. Whatever the reasons -- ignorance, ideology or incompetence -- the result is undeniable: O'Keeffe has chosen discrimination over equality, has besmirched Donogh O'Malley's fine legacy and has roused lasting anger in the Protestant community.
Sunday Independent
The Protestant battle against Education Minister Batt O'Keeffe is only beginning, writes Alan Ruddock
Sunday October 04 2009
DONOGH O'Malley, the enlightened Fianna Fail minister who introduced free secondary education more than 40 years ago, would be deeply ashamed of Batt O'Keeffe, the current Minister for Education.
At a stroke last year O'Keeffe tore up O'Malley's legacy and decided that the time had come to discriminate against the Republic's small Protestant community by attacking their schools.
Perhaps he thought that Protestants would simply accept his sectarianism with quiet dignity, or perhaps he fell for the lazy ideology that characterises all fee-paying schools as bastions of elitism and thought that an attack on Protestant fee-paying schools would have populist appeal. Perhaps, of course, he did not think at all.
One year later, however, and the anger in the Protestant community burns deeper and at a conference yesterday in west Dublin, church leaders and educators took their campaign to a new level. They will not relent; O'Keeffe has started a war that he and his party will regret.
When O'Malley introduced his free education scheme in 1967 he recognised that boarding schools were an essential part of the Protestant education system because the Protestant community was scattered across the country.
O'Malley could not formally include them in the free education sector because they had to charge fees to cover those boarding costs, but he put those schools on a par with the free sector. They would get the same grants that were paid to free, and overwhelmingly Catholic schools, and would enjoy the same pupil-teacher ratios. He told the Dail that Protestant schools would be treated "at least as favourably" as Catholic schools.
Michael Carty, parliamentary secretary to the Taoiseach at the time, went even further: "We in this part of the country should show that we lean over backwards to ensure that the pupils of the minority religion are afforded equal -- if not better -- opportunity with those of the majority faith. There are very few of them and they are scattered all over the country. They have to get special assistance. That the minister recognises this problem is a credit to him and something on which he must be congratulated."
The critical point was the simplest: Protestant schools charged fees because they took in boarders from a dispersed community. In all other respects they were no different from the free school sector. To defray the costs of those fees, the Protestant proportion of the grant paid to all free schools was grouped into a lump sum that would then be shared out to parents who could not afford to pay, ensuring that Protestant schools, though fee-paying, would embrace the entire community and not just the wealthy. In rural Protestant schools, more than 50 per cent of the pupils receive grants and at the top end of the scale those grants cover most of the cost of sending a boarder to school in Sligo, Bandon or Kilkenny.
It is the closest a rural Protestant family can get to a free education in their own ethos, and it is the antithesis of elitism.
O'Keeffe, however, has decided that must change. He has aligned Protestant schools with the rest of the fee-paying school sector, deciding that Protestant education is now a lifestyle choice for the "elite" rather than an appropriate choice for Protestant parents that should be considered on a par with the free sector. In last year's Budget O'Keeffe cut supports to Protestant schools that other schools in the free sector enjoyed, saving €2.8m, and increased their pupil-teacher ratios. Under his rules, Protestants must accept a lesser education for their children if they want them educated in their own ethos (unless they are lucky enough to live near the handful of free Protestant day schools in Dublin and Cork).
The change in the pupil-teacher ratio means that Protestant children will have higher class sizes and fewer subject choices, all because of their religion. The only way that a Protestant family can now access the same quality of State provision of education as their Catholic neighbour is to deny their child a Protestant education.
To justify his discrimination, O'Keeffe then started to rewrite history and sully O'Malley. Protestant schools were never part of the free education sector in the first place, his department claims, so there is no change; they still get most of the grants that free schools get, recognising their special place in his affections; they charge fees, so they can afford to take the hit; if he did not cut their funding, he says, fee-paying Catholic schools could launch legal actions against the State because they were being discriminated against. His claims are disingenuous, at best.
The legal action he should fear is not from Catholic fee-paying schools but from Protestant parents who are now being denied the rights afforded to their Catholic neighbours. Already denied choice and expected to pay for their own ethos, they are now expected to accept lower standards from the State.
If O'Keeffe has his way, those standards will fall further as the pupil-teacher ratio for fee-paying schools will continue to deteriorate. As it does, Protestant schools will be forced to close and many Protestant families will no longer be able to choose a Protestant education for their children. Whatever the reasons -- ignorance, ideology or incompetence -- the result is undeniable: O'Keeffe has chosen discrimination over equality, has besmirched Donogh O'Malley's fine legacy and has roused lasting anger in the Protestant community.
Sunday Independent