School patronage

Absolam

Michael Nugent wrote: »

"Sovereign political entity" and "Sovereign political State" are very different things. The membership of any political party or advocacy group, or the leadership of or membership of any church, can be a sovereign political entity with regard to sovereignty over its own organisation's political activities, but that doesn't make any of them a State..

They are, yes, though I don't think many States (or international organisations such as the UN) is likely to accept your broad definition of sovereignty, are they? I think they would happily exclude political parties, advocacy groups and many churches on the basis that their soveriegnty is strictly limited and subject to a greater power; generally the sovereign State in which they reside, so they are not, in fact, sovereign political entities in the way that a State, or the Holy See, is whose power is not subject to another's. Like it or not, the Holy See is considered analagous to a State by other States, and not unreasonably.

Michael Nugent wrote: »

None of the entities involved in this shapeshifting entity has the attributes normally demanded of a body recognised as a State, including a proper population who are born and live and die as citizens or subjects, an actual territory larger than a few buildings in a city in an actual State, and a proper government and policing and economy and public services that are not dependent on the actual State in which it is situated..

Well, one point of view is that the only attribute neccasary to be recognised as a State is recognition as a State. And it's widely accepted that a State can exist even if not recognised as such by others. There are actually no requirements for what it is to be a State, just varying ideas of what generally constitutes one. By and large, the Holy See fulfils most of those criteria, and certainly the most significant; it's existence is recognised by other States.

Michael Nugent wrote: »

The Catholic Church/Vatican City/Holy See State is a convenient nod-and-wink fiction that people go along with in order to enable the Catholic Church to exercise an influence on world politics that goes beyond what other religions are allowed to exercise. It is an international diplomacy version of Charlie Haughey's "Irish solution to an Irish problem"..

The thing is, it's not a fiction, it's a fact. It doesn't exercise that influence because it's a tiny little no mark State; how many larger States have no influence whatsoever in comparison? The Church exercises the influence it does because it so important to so many people, because it is engaged with so many aspects of so many peoples lives, and because unlike so many other religions it has a huge centralised organisation which can act globally. Like it or not the Catholic Church is a potent force in the world, and I think the recognition it receives at UN and international levels has far more to do with that than it's control of a tiny city-State.

Michael Nugent wrote: »

So what we object to is that the thing in question is treated as a sovereign State, regardless of how it and others choose to portray it or name it in order to make the conceit more palatable..

I think you're missing the mark in that case; firstly it is no conceit, and whilst it's not palatable to many, the Church's temporal power more than justifies the treatment it receives from other States.

Michael Nugent wrote: »

We are recognising the de facto reality that, on the ground, despite our reasonable objections, the Irish Government is actually treating the Catholic Church/Vatican City/Holy See as a State. And unlike us, the Irish Government actually runs the education system, which is where a great deal of the influence of this fiction plays itself out. So it is perfectly reasonable for us to hold the Government accountable for the de facto reality of what it says and does, while simultaneously arguing that it shouldn't be doing it in the first place..

Sorry, but I just have call shenanigans on that one. There is no knowing wink in the line "This has consequences for minorities in the education system as their Relationship, Sexuality and Moral education will be taught and controlled by the agents of a foreign state and contrary to their convictions." There's nothing de facto about Irish school teachers being agents of a foreign State, a state you argue doesn't even exist. Except for when you claim it does; "The Holy See, a foreign State", accurding to the last article you linked. You're complaining about the Catholic Church trying to have it both ways, whilst doing exactly that; saying it's not a State so shouldn't be treated as one, yet claiming it is a foreign State using agents to interfere in Irish affairs. That's not holding the Government accountable, it's engaging in a knowing deception of your readers to create hyperbole that will support your position. It's dishonest Michael, and anyone with the slightest ability to read critically will not want to associate themselves with that kind of messaging.

Michael Nugent wrote: »

By the way, I would make a distinction between Bishops and teachers in Irish schools. The Bishops are agents of the chameleon entity, being appointed by the Holy See under Canon law. Teachers are employees under contracts that under Irish law can discriminate against them on the basis of the religious ethos determined for the school by the Bishops.

I would too; Irish teachers are the people who will be teaching the curriculum; "their Relationship, Sexuality and Moral education will be taught and controlled by the agents of a foreign state and contrary to their convictions". That's who you're attacking. And yes, Bishops do control Catholic Schools, whether it's nominally or with an iron fist. But they're not agents of a foreign State either, are they? Because as you have been busy pointing out, the Vatican City is a State, not the Holy See. And the Holy See derogates appointment of Bishops to the the Congregation for Bishops, a Congregation that has nothing to do with running the Vatican City State, or the sovereign entity of the Holy See. I don't think you can make any case for their being agents, other than their belonging to aspects of the same overall enormous organisation. An organisation that you really can't characterise as a chameleon entity; it doesn't change from one to the other, there is no attempt to disguise, is there? It is all the things it claims to be; a State, a Church, a sovereign entity, a collection of affiliated organisations and independant entities, and it's capable of encompassing all those things and remaining cogniscant of the differences.

As I said in the beginning, I'm a fan of Atheist Ireland, I think they do some great work, and I'm a fan of yours. I also believe the world needs more windmill tilters. But I think articles like these do you more harm than good.

silverharp

it seems odd to open a religious school which will only have a minority of students of that religion


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/first-church-of-ireland-secondary-school-since-state-s-foundation-opens-1.2821002?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Ffirst-church-of-ireland-secondary-school-since-state-s-foundation-opens-1.2821002

First Church of Ireland secondary school since State’s foundation opens
Temple Carrig in Greystones says it caters for the educational needs of entire community

The first voluntary Church of Ireland secondary school to be established since the foundation of the State has been officially opened by Taoiseach Enda Kenny.

Absolam

silverharp wrote: »

it seems odd to open a religious school which will only have a minority of students of that religion

Perhaps they feel they feel that catering for all prospective students from their own religious community along with students from other backgrounds is aligned with their ethos?

Peregrinus

silverharp wrote: »

it seems odd to open a religious school which will only have a minority of students of that religion

Why would that be odd? It's a common enough situation where the religion concerned is a minority religion. Which is what you'd expect, really, if you think about it for a few minutes.

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

Why would that be odd? It's a common enough situation where the religion concerned is a minority religion. Which is what you'd expect, really, if you think about it for a few minutes.

its common enough because the schools were setup when they only catered to their own, so I understand their motivation to open up to keep going. Given that its the first since the creation of the State its clearly not common enough to be opening new schools. In this school they expect 20% of the pupils to be COI and 60% to be Catholic.

Peregrinus

Christians provide schools, basically, for the same reason that they provide hospitals or homeless shelters or whatever; because they think education is A Good Thing. Considerations like catering specifically to the Christian (or particular denominational) community are frequently secondary. Of course, they are likely to have a greater appeal to the particular denominational community, and to get more applicants from that community, and they may also have a secondary motive of serving that community and may preference applicants from that community, as Catholic schools in Ireland typically do. But this isn't necessarily the case for schools of other religious traditions, or indeed for Catholic schools outside Ireland. I imagine most CoI schools in Ireland - in the Republic, at any rate - have a majority of CoI pupils, and certainly no Presbyterian or Methodist school would have a majority of pupils from their own denomination. And in other countries the same would be true of Catholic schools. In India, for example, there's a network of several thousand Catholic schools; outside of Goa, probably only a handful of them have a majority of Catholic, or even Christian, pupils.

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

Christians provide schools, basically, for the same reason that they provide hospitals or homeless shelters or whatever; because they think education is A Good Thing. Considerations like catering specifically to the Christian (or particular denominational) community are frequently secondary. Of course, they are likely to have a greater appeal to the particular denominational community, and to get more applicants from that community, and they may also have a secondary motive of serving that community and may preference applicants from that community, as Catholic schools in Ireland typically do. But this isn't necessarily the case for schools of other religious traditions, or indeed for Catholic schools outside Ireland. I imagine most CoI schools in Ireland - in the Republic, at any rate - have a majority of CoI pupils, and certainly no Presbyterian or Methodist school would have a majority of pupils from their own denomination. And in other countries the same would be true of Catholic schools. In India, for example, there's a network of several thousand Catholic schools; outside of Goa, probably only a handful of them have a majority of Catholic, or even Christian, pupils.

but there is also an inherent self interest of spreading the faith and a bit like that other thread of the kids coming into school for a surprise retreat, will the kids be subject to Protestant evangelicals coming for some happy clappy awesomeness or being made contribute to those dodgy xmas shoebox collections?. What will the hiring practices be? will they have a preference for hiring Protestant teachers?

Absolam

All questions that don't really seem to have anything to do with the notion that it seems odd to open a religious school which will only have a minority of students of that religion, if questions that might be asked of any school one way or another I suppose. Though "being made contribute to those dodgy xmas shoebox collections" does seem to add a little extra spice on top of the tales put forward...

Peregrinus

silverharp wrote: »

but there is also an inherent self interest of spreading the faith and a bit like that other thread of the kids coming into school for a surprise retreat, will the kids be subject to Protestant evangelicals coming for some happy clappy awesomeness or being made contribute to those dodgy xmas shoebox collections?. What will the hiring practices be? will they have a preference for hiring Protestant teachers?

They will have a preference for hiring Protestant teachers. As it will be a national school, no child will be compelled to participate in religious instruction against the wishes of their parents. While they could be required to participate in other religious activities, if 80% of the pupils are non-CofI I think the schools' policies and practices are going to have to reflect that reality.

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

They will have a preference for hiring Protestant teachers. As it will be a national school...

Its a secondary school actually, and they definitely have a preference for hiring CoI staff.
That Irish Times article is surprisingly inaccurate BTW. The school has been open for two years now, but maybe this was the "official" opening as not all building work was finished when it opened.
Its not the first voluntary CoI school since the foundation of the state. Its not even "a voluntary school". By definition..

Voluntary secondary schools are privately owned and managed. They are under the trusteeship of religious communities, boards of governors or individuals.

There are numerous CoI schools fitting this description which have opened since the foundation of the state, the nearest one being only a few miles down the road at East Glendalough (opened 1987)

The school featured in the rubbish article, Templecarrig, is wholely owned and was built by Dept of Education (ie the taxpayer) on publicly owned land. The CoI was awarded the management contract (the so-called Patronage) but has never paid a cent towards building costs or staff salaries. The CoI promised not to use religious discrimination while the patronage was being decided, but in the second year of opening they did introduce a special priority admissions category for active members of the CoI.
So now its a publicly funded school with a preference for pupils of a certain religion, and a missionary function towards the majority of its pupils which are locals from the other (non-CoI) local feeder schools. A truly bizarre situation, which is the result of a dysfunctional system that insists on only providing free state education via middlemen (the so-called patrons).

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

Its a secondary school actually, and they definitely have a preference for hiring CoI staff.
That Irish Times article is surprisingly inaccurate BTW. The school has been open for two years now, but maybe this was the "official" opening as not all building work was finished when it opened.
Its not the first voluntary CoI school since the foundation of the state. Its not even "a voluntary school". By definition..

There are numerous CoI schools fitting this description which have opened since the foundation of the state, the nearest one being only a few miles down the road at East Glendalough (opened 1987)

The school featured in the rubbish article, Templecarrig, is wholely owned and was built by Dept of Education (ie the taxpayer) on publicly owned land. The CoI was awarded the management contract (the so-called Patronage) but has never paid a cent towards building costs or staff salaries. The CoI promised not to use religious discrimination

where did they say that not in this dept of ed assessment https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Establishing-a-New-School/New-Post-Primary-Schools/New-Post-Primary-Schools-2013-2014/Greystones%20Assessment%20of%20Applications.pdf

recedite

Their reps said there would be "no religious discrimination" verbally when canvassing at public meetings for the benefit of parents from the non-CoI primary schools. This while asking for support in taking patronage/control of the new secondary school which was at the time "up for grabs".
The parents of kids at the various local primary schools had a kind of "voting rights" with Dept. of Education at the time. In the sense that the popularity of each possible patron was gauged by the number of primary school pupil names they could gather on a list, the highest number of names indicating the majority parental preference for the patron.

The CoI were careful enough not to state that in writing, but only to promote the equality idea verbally. The nearest I can find to a citation online is this complaint by a parent from a local RC primary school, one year on;

The changes made to the 2015 enrolment policy introduce serious discriminatory factors in favour of applicants of a particular religion, which will result in significantly fewer places being made available to children from the seven local schools in the Greystones/Delgany area who cannot claim Church of Ireland affiliation.
I supported the Church of Ireland bid for the patronage of this school on the basis that it would not prioritise one religion over another and that it would satisfy local demand before admitting children from outside the area.

Absolam

recedite wrote: »

Its not the first voluntary CoI school since the foundation of the state. Its not even "a voluntary school". By definition.. Voluntary secondary schools are privately owned and managed. They are under the trusteeship of religious communities, boards of governors or individuals. There are numerous CoI schools fitting this description which have opened since the foundation of the state, the nearest one being only a few miles down the road at East Glendalough (opened 1987)

Though it has to be said that they actually describe themselves as the first voluntary CoI secondary school, whereas East Glendalough describe themselves as a comprehensive school. And Anglican News did expand on the point; "The COI has established other schools in the state, but these have been under the comprehensive model. “This is the first Church of Ireland secondary school in the voluntary model to be established since the foundation of the State,” a spokeswoman for the Diocese of Dublin & Glendalough said. “While it is under Church of Ireland management, Temple Carrig School provides education for the whole community in the Greystones and Delgany area.”".
As for your definition of a voluntary school, well, Citizens Information is a very good service, but I don't know about definitive. the DoE categorises the school as a Voluntary Secondary School, and you'd think they know who owns the building. Perhaps ownership of the building isn't necessarily salient to whether it's a Voluntary Secondary School or not?

recedite wrote: »

The school featured in the rubbish article, Templecarrig, is wholely owned and was built by Dept of Education (ie the taxpayer) on publicly owned land. The CoI was awarded the management contract (the so-called Patronage) but has never paid a cent towards building costs or staff salaries. The CoI promised not to use religious discrimination while the patronage was being decided, but in the second year of opening they did introduce a special priority admissions category for active members of the CoI.

Well, I'm pretty sure they don't have 'so-called' Patronage, they were actually awarded the Patronage, weren't they? And I think I recall Lazygal pointing out (on this very thread!) that the Patrons of voluntary secondary schools cover both a portion of salaries and running costs, so there's that too... As for promising not to use religious discrimination... didn't you yourself say they did no such thing at the time?
"When they were bidding to be the patron of this new State funded school, the C of I said that they would give priority to kids attending local schools, but they refused to guarantee that there would be no religious discrimination when further prioritising within that group of local kids.". Hmm.

recedite wrote: »

So now its a publicly funded school with a preference for pupils of a certain religion, and a missionary function towards the majority of its pupils which are locals from the other (non-CoI) local feeder schools. A truly bizarre situation, which is the result of a dysfunctional system that insists on only providing free state education via middlemen (the so-called patrons).

Really? You can link to their proclaiming this 'missionary function' maybe? Or are you just making stuff up again? Like the notion that patrons are 'so-called'.... or this nonsense;

recedite wrote: »

The parents of kids at the various local primary schools had a kind of "voting rights" with Dept. of Education at the time.

Which you know was debunked long ago.... more than once, in fact. Do we really need to do it again?

recedite

I have to say Absolam, I am impressed by your ability to remember and research the arguments that people have previously made on these threads
Also, I fully realise that I cannot win a nitpicking argument against you.

Lets just say that the exact meaning of labels such as "comprehensive" and "voluntary" seems to be somewhat fluid, and the citizens advice I quoted is still employing the previously accepted meaning. Whereas now, there is something new afoot.

Would you agree that this Templecarrig secondary school is actually "a first"...
the first ever state-owned "denominational school" in the history of the state, or even in the history of this island?

Absolam

I'd certainly agree that they say they're the first voluntary CoI secondary school, but I'd be surprised if they were the first State owned school with a denominational Patron.

recedite

Would this example fit your definition of "a voluntary CoI school" ?..

recedite wrote: »

There are numerous CoI schools fitting this description which have opened since the foundation of the state, the nearest one being only a few miles down the road at East Glendalough (opened 1987)

AFAIK all existing denominational secondary schools were both owned and operated by some religious patron as per the traditional model, in which the state funds teacher's salaries etc.. but does not own the facility.

So Templecarrig is a new departure. The first time that the state has put its property at the disposal of a religious institution.
It would be a scandal in a secular republic such as France or the USA, but here in Ireland it hardly raises a ripple of concern. The fact that the majority of pupils don't even belong to that religion only adds to the irony of allowing it to control a state facility for its own benefit and purposes.

And now, the RCC is keen to follow this precedent.

Hopes have been raised that up to five new Catholic schools could be opened over the next two years.
The Irish Catholic can confirm that CEIST, a Catholic schools trust founded by five religious orders, are applying for patronage of up to five of the nine new post primary schools opening next year and in 2018.

Because

..diversity has to work both ways..

So the divestment of church schools to the state may have failed utterly, but the handover of state schools to the church has only just begun.

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

So Templecarrig is a new departure. The first time that the state has put its property at the disposal of a religious institution.
It would be a scandal in a secular republic such as France or the USA . . .

Hardly. In France, a large number of state-owned properties are made available to religious institutions for religious purposes.

There are more models of secularity than the US one. If you don't know about the other models, its probably best not to cite them in your arguments.

Absolam

recedite wrote: »

Would this example fit your definition of "a voluntary CoI school" ?..

I never claimed to have (or even that there was) a definition of a voluntary CoI school. I said that

Absolam wrote: »

It has to be said that they actually describe themselves as the first voluntary CoI secondary school, whereas East Glendalough describe themselves as a comprehensive school.

Remember?

recedite wrote: »

AFAIK all existing denominational secondary schools were both owned and operated by some religious patron as per the traditional model, in which the state funds teacher's salaries etc.. but does not own the facility.

I think it's fair to say that when you say 'AFAIK' it simply means you haven't actually investigated and so haven't made any effort to be aware of anything that might contradict your position, or you're deliberately not remembering what you know. Going on past form anyway. Would you disagree?

recedite wrote: »

So Templecarrig is a new departure. The first time that the state has put its property at the disposal of a religious institution.

That would be the case if you had investigated and could tell us that it is a fact... but you haven't, have you? For instance, the nine original Model Schools, owned by the State and under the patronage of the Minister, operate as five Catholics schools and four Protestant schools, and have operated so for the best part of a century. You yourself claimed they'd been plundered from the State by the Churches, remember?

recedite wrote: »

It would be a scandal in a secular republic such as France or the USA, but here in Ireland it hardly raises a ripple of concern. The fact that the majority of pupils don't even belong to that religion only adds to the irony of allowing it to control a state facility for its own benefit and purposes.

So... countries that operate a different system would find it scandalous if they had schools that didn't operate according to their system? Probably as true of Ireland as it is of France or the US to be honest.

recedite wrote: »

And now, the RCC is keen to follow this precedent.

Well... be honest, they haven't said anything at all about following any such precedent, have they? Though it's not surprising, given that you just made it up. Still... they seem to be interested in continuing to apply for patronage of new schools just as they have been for years, so I guess they don't think there's a lack of interest from parents in having Catholic schools, eh?

recedite wrote: »

So the divestment of church schools to the state may have failed utterly, but the handover of state schools to the church has only just begun.

What divestment of church schools to the state? I don't think something you've imagined can be said to have failed, and if you're claiming the running of State owned schools by religious organisations is a 'handover of state schools to the church' you can hardly say it has only just begun when the Churches have been involved with State owned schools for longer than you've been alive....

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Hardly. In France, a large number of state-owned properties are made available to religious institutions for religious purposes.

I presume you refer to the churches that were plundered by the nascent (and somewhat overzealous) revolutionary French state hundreds of years ago?

Absolam wrote: »

That would be the case if you had investigated and could tell us that it is a fact... but you haven't, have you? For instance, the nine original Model Schools, owned by the State and under the patronage of the Minister, operate as five Catholics schools and four Protestant schools, and have operated so for the best part of a century. You yourself claimed they'd been plundered from the State by the Churches, remember?..

Ah yes, I knew I could count on you to jog my memory
You refer to the schools that were plundered by the churches from the nascent (and overly deferential) revolutionary Irish state long ago?

Well, what can I say, there are exceptions to every rule. I don't think a few historic mistakes should be dug up and held aloft as shining examples for future policy proposals, in either France or Ireland.

Absolam

recedite wrote: »

Ah yes, I knew I could count on you to jog my memory You refer to the schools that were plundered by the churches from the nascent (and overly deferential) revolutionary Irish state long ago?

The ones that are owned by the State and of which the Minister for Education is Patron? Yep sooooo plundered....

recedite wrote: »

Well, what can I say, there are exceptions to every rule. I don't think a few historic mistakes should be dug up and held aloft as shining examples for future policy proposals, in either France or Ireland.

Gosh that non existent precedent got promoted to a non existent rule very quickly! And your ideas about future policy proposals seem to have as much basis in fact as, well, your ideas about just about everything else I'd say...

Hotblack Desiato

Why Quebec may be the answer to Ireland’s school patronage debate

Would be nice but can't see it happening here any time soon

expectationlost

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Why Quebec may be the answer to Ireland’s school patronage debate

Would be nice but can't see it happening here any time soon

I really don't know what the point of that article is, other then it promotes her book, all it says is change takes decades.

recedite

expectationlost wrote: »

all it says is change takes decades.

One decade to be precise, 1998 to 2008. That's not very long in the overall scheme of things, considering they went from where we are now, to where we want to be. Its a road map showing how to make the transformation.
If we started now, it would be done in 10 years time. A baby born today would be still in primary school.

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

One decade to be precise, 1998 to 2008. That's not very long in the overall scheme of things, considering they went from where we are now, to where we want to be. Its a road map showing how to make the transformation.
If we started now, it would be done in 10 years time. A baby born today would be still in primary school.

but it doesn't say why anything changed in 2005 other then time passing

Hotblack Desiato

recedite wrote: »

One decade to be precise, 1998 to 2008. That's not very long in the overall scheme of things, considering they went from where we are now, to where we want to be. Its a road map showing how to make the transformation.
If we started now, it would be done in 10 years time. A baby born today would be still in primary school.

Would have been far more useful to discuss things like:

- public attitudes then and now towards religious school patronage
- how much opposition there was to change
- how this opposition was overcome
- what % went to private religious schools at the start and the end of this process
- what state funding if any do private religious schools get
- I'm sure there's more

As it stands the article is like the dance of the seven veils, tantalises with a glimpse of the possible but at the end you're still no nearer getting what you want

recedite

It says there

..a general convention on education established in 1995 concluded that “there was no valid reason any more, other than a historical hang-up, to constrain a public education system on the basis of denominational privileges”. In 1998, a new piece of legislation replaced the system of denominational control with new committees, or boards.

We could ask a gathering such as the currently sitting Citizens Assembly to look at the question. And then, instead of sending gob$hites over to Canada on St Patrick Day junkets, send some technical experts over to examine their legislation and its potential implementation and relevance in an Irish context.


But, we don't. And you can't blame the journalist for that.

Peregrinus

You might not even have to send the experts to Canada. Couldn't you just have the legislation sent to Ireland? They have this thing called e-mail, I hear . . .

The Quebecois experience may be interesting and instructive, but it won't necessarily be directly applicable to Ireland. For a start, they'll have been starting from a different position, since their system evolved independently of ours. (E.g.: who owned the schools in Quebec?) And of course they are operating with the constraints of a very different set of constitutional provisions.

expectationlost

Minister Bruton announces patronage of 9 new Post-Primary schools to be established in 2017 and 2018 - See more at: http://www.merrionstreet.ie/en/News-Room/Releases/Minister_Bruton_announces_patronage_of_9_new_Post-Primary_schools_to_be_established_in_2017_and_2018.html#sthash.3S5zDAI0.fAj3Xo7C.dpuf http://www.merrionstreet.ie/en/News-Room/Releases/Minister_Bruton_announces_patronage_of_9_new_Post-Primary_schools_to_be_established_in_2017_and_2018.html

I notice one Dublin Lucan, Co. Dublin Dublin and Dún Laoghaire ETB with Scoil Sinead as Trustee Partner http://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Establishing-a-New-School/New-Post-Primary-Schools/2017-2018/Establishing-a-Post-Primary-School-Assessment-Report-Lucan.pdf


Reports for New Schools Establishment Group Patronage Process for New Post-Primary Schools Opening in 2017 and 2018 http://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Establishing-a-New-School/New-Post-Primary-Schools.html

who is Scoil Sinead? were DDLETB not looking to create another school until Scoil Sinead started campaigning?
http://scoilsineadss.com/about_us http://www.solocheck.ie/Irish-Company/Scoil-Sinead-Company-Limited-By-Guarantee-583130

apparently Scoil Sinead was set up by the people behind Hope monterssori and Autism Daycare centre, who wanted a school which specialises in autism, although they looking for it to be up to 1,00o pupil school, why did they think they could run it better then the VEC?

ps pg 13

CEIST provided details of 309 prospective pupils in support of its application for patronage of the proposed new post-primary school in the Lucan area.
Following analysis of the prospective pupil details provided, the following 291 records have not been included;
- 286 records did not include the child’s full name The remaining 18 prospective pupils were considered in terms of valid demand for the model proposed for the purposes of this process.
Lucan School

ouch

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

It says there
We could ask a gathering such as the currently sitting Citizens Assembly to look at the question. And then, instead of sending gob$hites over to Canada on St Patrick Day junkets, send some technical experts over to examine their legislation and its potential implementation and relevance in an Irish context.


But, we don't. And you can't blame the journalist for that.

im not blaming the journalist for lack of secular schools in Ireland im blaming the IT for a pointless article

recedite

Only 18 valid votes for the RCC patron "Ceiste" is pretty embarassing for them alright.
I see the autism specialists have been granted some kind of joint patronage, whatever that means.... Scoil Sinead as "a Trustee Partner" with the ETB for the new school in Lucan.

You can see here the stupidity of the whole system. A new patron who doesn't like autistic pupils being sent to separate schools applies to be patron of a new 1000 pupil school. So it would have been a school run principally for the benefit of a minority of its pupils. Echoes there of the new CoI school in Greystones (Templecarrig) Such a school receives some sort of "bonus points" from the Dept. in the selection process because, being novel and somewhat wacky, it "increases the diversity" in the range of local schools.

However, unlike religion, autism is not a condition which allows the "afflicted" any exemption from equality legislation. Therefore, those who would benefit most from such a school would be unlikely to get into it. Suppose they lived 5 or 6 Km away, they could not receive any priority admission over more local (non-autistic) kids. Very local autistic kids would of course benefit, but they would be such a tiny minority that whatever special facilities were provided would be under utilised.

It seems from the level of support the proposed Scoil Sinead received, that parents who recognise the poor environment for pupils on the autistic spectrum in most "traditional" schools have supported Scoil Sinead, even if their own kids would not directly benefit. Which is a great credit to the people of Lucan.

And as always, the obvious solution is ignored. The state should be the patron of its own schools, and ensure they are all equally suitable for all its citizens, including those from minority religions and those who are on the autistic spectrum. As a rare exception, if somebody is severely handicapped in some way, then they may be better off in a special school, again run by the state.