Looks like the Government will have to back track on baptism barrier policy

evolving_doors

ted1 wrote: »

You be welcomed under 5.3, which effectively says if we are not over subscribed you will get a place. So once again the issue is supply and demand

If 5.1 said 'whites first' and they got a place under 5.3 would you still say there's no discrimination issue?

evolving_doors

seamus wrote: »

Yep. Spoke to a mother at a birthday party recently enough. Her house is 20 metres from the front gates of the local school and she had his name down two years ahead of time.

Her child was refused a place because he wasn't baptised.

I know of lots of other people whose children got in the same year who live several km away and got in through a combination of Granny's home address and baptism.

The baptism issue is far from a smoke screen.

Your trying to use logic here.
The smoke screeners will say they were refused because there wasnt enough places. That's the ONLY reason.
Then it'll be the suggestion that the parents should go away and build their own school for the junior infant (like it's bleedin Minecraft or something.)

Vronsky

seamus wrote: »

Yep. Spoke to a mother at a birthday party recently enough. Her house is 20 metres from the front gates of the local school and she had his name down two years ahead of time.

Her child was refused a place because he wasn't baptised.

I know of lots of other people whose children got in the same year who live several km away and got in through a combination of Granny's home address and baptism.

The baptism issue is far from a smoke screen.

She could have had the child baptised. Problem solved.

evolving_doors

Vronsky wrote: »

She could have had the child baptised. Problem solved.

Bishop says no.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/baptisms-to-gain-school-entry-wrong-archbishop-says-1.2505546

RDM_83 again

This being boards we will only hear one opinion, do the majority of the parents have a problem with their local Catholic school giving priority to local Catholic children, I would hazard no, 78% of people consider themselves Catholic but reading threads on here you'd get the impression that the country was 80% atheist.

And actually the figure is going to be higher as Church of Ireland and other denominations operate schools

eviltwin

Vronsky wrote: »

She could have had the child baptised. Problem solved.

Why would she if she isn't Catholic?

Grayson

RDM_83 again wrote: »

This being boards we will only hear one opinion, do the majority of the parents have a problem with their local Catholic school giving priority to local Catholic children, I would hazard no, 78% of people consider themselves Catholic but reading threads on here you'd get the impression that the country was 80% atheist.

And actually the figure is going to be higher as Church of Ireland and other denominations operate schools

So you figure the christian/catholic thing is to discriminate against children based on religion?

RDM_83 again

Grayson wrote: »

So you figure the christian/catholic thing is to discriminate against children based on religion?

Yep way to miss the point, I don't think there is anything in biblical or church teaching that would indicate that it's problematic to look after children of the faith first anyway.

The_Valeyard

seamus wrote: »

Yep. Spoke to a mother at a birthday party recently enough. Her house is 20 metres from the front gates of the local school and she had his name down two years ahead of time.

Her child was refused a place because he wasn't baptised.

I know of lots of other people whose children got in the same year who live several km away and got in through a combination of Granny's home address and baptism.

The baptism issue is far from a smoke screen.

I find this interesting, considering a lot of schools are forbidden to have waiting lists and the remainder of schools are phasing them out.

Most schools are operating on a lottery basis.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/children-to-lose-school-places-as-waiting-lists-phased-out-1.3100688

Hotblack Desiato

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Yep way to miss the point, I don't think there is anything in biblical or church teaching that would indicate that it's problematic to look after children of the faith first anyway.

It's not a church 'looking after children'

It's a State service funded by taxpayers. Discrimination in the delivery of public services is not acceptable.

evolving_doors

The_Valeyard wrote: »

I find this interesting, considering a lot of schools are forbidden to have waiting lists and the remainder of schools are phasing them out.

where does it say they're forbidden to have waiting lists.
Do you mean that every school has the exact amount of applicants that is needed to take the available places?
What does a school do if they are oversubscribed? (Apart from tell the students to go away and build their own school )

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Most schools are operating on a lottery basis.

Nope, it's the criteria system.

I think that's just in a small part of limerick they have a type of random selection... even then it's not a 'pure' lottery as there are other discriminating criteria.

The_Valeyard wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/children-to-lose-school-places-as-waiting-lists-phased-out-1.3100688

That's behind a paywall so I can't read it... But the picture I see is Belvedere. Maybe have another look at they're enrolment part on their website. It ain't a lottery.

The_Valeyard

evolving_doors wrote: »

where does it say they're forbidden to have waiting lists.
Do you mean that every school has the exact amount of applicants that is needed to take the available places?
What does a school do if they are oversubscribed? (Apart from tell the students to go away and build their own school )


Nope, it's the criteria system.

I think that's just in a small part of limerick they have a type of random selection... even then it's not a 'pure' lottery as there are other discriminating criteria.




That's behind a paywall so I can't read it... But the picture I see is Belvedere. Maybe have another look at they're enrolment part on their website. It ain't a lottery.

They cant use waiting lists of previous family members anymore. When a child applies for the school if they are in a zone 1 area (locality) they are first preference, if not oversubscribed, then moves to a zone 2, etc.

If the school is over subscribed then a lottery system is used instead. Many schools will not allow waiting lists to gain entry.

Ill check this out, because most schools in my area will not allow names put down, its a lottery. Same with the school I went to as a child.

So, can you show me the criteria system where it states this?

Also, its not behind a paywall for me.

finally (edit)

Here is another easier headline to read about the ending of waiting lists

http://www.thejournal.ie/waiting-lists-secondary-schools-3416857-May2017/

and when Lenin himself started it off back in 2013

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/new-school-entry-rules-will-ban-application-fees-and-waiting-lists-1.1512675

evolving_doors

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Yep way to miss the point, I don't think there is anything in biblical or church teaching that would indicate that it's problematic to look after children of the faith first anyway.

Interesting. I wonder could the Sisters of Mercy apply the same baptism criteria for admittance into temple Street?
Would that be wrong?

evolving_doors

The_Valeyard wrote: »

They cant use waiting lists of previous family members anymore.

When is that ban coming in. I'm a bit confused as I just checked one school at random and this is the criteria:

Offers are made in the following order:

- Pupils of our own Junior School
- Brothers of present pupils and past pupils
- Sons of Past Pupils/sons of Teachers of the College and sons of persons related to members of the Carmelite Order.
Etc.

The_Valeyard wrote: »

when a child applies for the school if they are in a zone 1 area (locality) they are first preference, if not oversubscribed, then moves to a zone 2, etc.

If the school is over subscribed then a lottery system is used instead. Many schools will not allow waiting lists to gain entry.

Ok is this the proposed system that ALL schools must follow in the future.

Ill check this out, because most schools in my area will not allow names put down, its a lottery. Same with the school I went to as a child.

The_Valeyard wrote: »

So, can you show me the criteria system where it states this?

The example above.


Hmmm read the exemptions in the 2016 bill itself
http://www.education.ie/en/The-Education-System/Legislation/Education-Admission-to-Schools-Bill-2016.pdf

(2) In the case of—
...
(b) a school to which section 7(3)(c) of the Act of 2000 applies, whose objective is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, the admission statement of the school shall include a statement that the school does not discriminate in relation to the admission of students where it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others or it refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of that denomination and, in the case of a refusal, it is proved that the refusal is essential to maintain the ethos of the school.
.
.
.

(6) An admission policy shall—
......
(iv) in the case of a school whose objective is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, where the school refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of that denomination and it is proved that the refusal is essential to maintain the ethos of the school

That's my reading of the new 2016 bill anyway.
So no change on the baptism barrier.
Ethos plays trump card.

Unless I'm reading it wrong! I'm open to correction.

suicide_circus

evolving_doors wrote: »

Look at the health system, charities (both religious and non-religious) are picking up the slack and doing things which should be done by the state as a matter of course for it's own citizens. e.g. A colleague from Germany was asking why a children's hospital was shaking buckets at the end of a checkout counter in Dunnes Stores, he just couldn't understand the concept, it actually made me feel embarrassed, we find it normal here.

This is probably the single most shameful aspect of government in Ireland. You've every right to feel embarrassed, I share the feeling. It is totally insane. People go on about how generous the Irish are to charities - only because tax money is mismanagement to a criminal extent!

Skedaddle

To be honest, hospitals having trusts that raise money through charitable contributions isn't unusual at all anywhere in the English speaking world. I've seen plenty of it in Canada and the UK and elsewhere too.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/give-to-gosh-great-ormond-street-changed-my-life-says-tv-presenter-alex-brooker-a3161651.html

Ireland's total health expenditure (public and private)
$5528.40 (3878 government/compulsory)
Germany : $5550.60 (4698 government / compulsory)
Finland $4033 (3016 government / compulsory)

Source OECD https://data.oecd.org/chart/52VD

We actually get very bad value for money for a public and private spend.
A lot of our "voluntary" is non compulsory health insurance, not charity contributions, but you can see how the Irish system is spending per capita amongst the highest in the EU yet is returning sub.

The USA total spend is off the scale nearly twice as much yet it doesn't even produce a universal health system. Sadly, that's the model we are probably just a less extreme version of. It's a mess of a system and without total reform it will never be right.

We've a non compulsory insurance model with a chaotic public system that has no incentive to reform as it is just pushing people into more top up insurance.

I think Ireland needs to realise that we don't have a proper European style public health system. If we did, we would have a compulsory insurance element and a single tier access. It's like the USA lite.

Like it or not, there's actually a strong incentive for Irish systems to make the public system unpalatable and push more patients into voluntary insurance so that they make more money.
You still get your public funding, but you increase private spend.

You can just "offload" patients into the private system, fail to get value for money and have many of them pay for services twice. Queue for 12 hours in public A&E ... Now you can pay for private A&E! Even though you've already paid for public A&E via taxation.

Wait months and months for treatment in the public system, or pay twice and have it carried out quickly in the same hospital by the same consultant?

You can see how there's absolutely no incentive whatsoever for services to reform.
A perception or bad service in the public system means more money for services because you get more voluntary insurance, which is driven by a fear of bad or inadequate access to treatment not seeking luxury.

We've basically got a situation where we've got a large for profit element in the system whether that's trusts, private hospitals or even publicly owned hospitals seeing private revenues as a source of income they can tap aggressively, consultants getting large private fees, general practice that pushes always towards being self employed etc etc etc ..We've a for profit model under the whole system.

The model is basically not social healthcare. It's more like an unreformed pre-NHS British approach that was just increasingly state funded as the years went on.

Oddly, despite all for ranting and raving about republics, Ireland very much kept a formalised class system in healthcare. You can pay for middle class or fist class, or you can go in steerage.

And they're STILL shaking buckets looking for even more money after all that!!

We are being screwed over by a system that doesn't even comprehend that it's screwing us over.

awec

The government should just respond by slapping a nice big fat tax on the church and their profits.