Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Mary, what are you at!
Read more about: Education, Fianna Fail
Ahh, Mary, Mary, Mary. What are you on about. Today’s Irish Times reports that:
Fee-paying schools receive €96 million a year in supports from the taxpayer but Minister for Education Mary Hanafin has ruled out any change to their funding.
So basically tax payers are subsidising private industry that is already charging. I have no problem with private schools, but if a school is private it must pay its own way; the state can not pay its costs. The state can pay the fees for less well off students through school vouchers—my view on them—but it cannot subsides across the board.
Also:
However, the Minister has encouraged parents of children with special needs to begin legal action against schools if they refuse to enrol their children.
So this Minister is saying that these schools will get state funding but not have to comply to any standard conditions that the state schools comply with. If they don’t, the department is not going to use the leverage of the money the state gives these schools to make sure it complies with best practice. No, it is up to the parents to sue with the school, probably using some of the money it got from the department to pay for its defence.
I am very concerned about this practice, particularly given all the extra investment [ in special needs].
Mary, investment means jackshit if, at the end of the day, they are discriminated against that is something you should be more concerned about.
‘Cause Hanifin & the Government have been so accommodating to children who need special educational assistance, and haven’t forced them through the courts, nor have they appealed decisions where they were told to give kids a proper education.
Is it now Government policy that you have to sue to got to school?
Why on earth do private schools need public money? Should they be taken to court for false advertising on the back of the fact that they’re not really private?
As for telling parents to take schools to court, how idiotic is that? Talk about washing your hands of a problem and letting other people pay huge legal fees to try and get basic rights for their children… She seems to be saying that the Government has done all it can (or is willing to do) and if that hasn’t solved the problem, oh well.
In Sinnott v. Minister for Education Sinott was 23 years of age and an autistic adult. His mother takes an action on his behalf arguing that inter alia the Minister had failed to provide for free education for Sinnott.
Reference: Sinnott v. Minister for Education [2001] 2 IR 545.
Looks like this is a policy decision or direction. For those interested, the Supreme Court judgements of Keane, CJ. [former], Hardiman, J. and Murray, CJ. are of note. Keane was dissenting with Denham. Keane’s judgement is well thought out and he makes an interesting point on who is to say that a person of adult characteristics and age in time [who has not benefitted from his 'free education' allowances] can be judged to have reached expiry age under the constitutional provisions.
Generally, the majority judges suggested that it was clear from the Irish and English text of Article 42 that the guarantee of free primary education was confined to children and the court if it intervened to protect Sinott was in violation of the doctrine of separation of powers.
Bottom line: Litigation in this area is far from clear. Judiciary may side with legislators, who incidentally will be defending in most cases.
J.
Folk who send their kids to private schools pay the same if not a lot **more** taxes than many of those who send their kids to public schools. True not all folk can afford to send their kids to private schools, but that does not take away from the fact that the subsidies paid to those private schools should be at least proportional to the public schools. The parents have paid those subsidies after all… The governement is just giving them back value for THEIR money…
Lar, do you mean proportionate or equal? As for the taxes argument are you suggesting we audit the parents and find out how much of proportion of their incomce they have paid in taxes?
Fact is we have 3 systems of secondary education in Ireland, the free and the parents can’t afford anymore segment, the fee paying, and then the largest big which is technically free but for which parents are expected to contribute hundreds of euroes and sometimes more just to have the basics, like a sports team or perhaps a music class, or heaven help us some computers in school. I’m not suggest that we target only this middle segment can cut the free but can’t afford anymore folks adrift, but I was targetting my money in the department it wouldn’t be at the top segment.
ah come on Lar
Folk who send their kids to private schools pay the same if not a lot **more** taxes than many of those who send their kids to public schools.
The reason is because they have more money. It is called a progressive tax system.
True not all folk can afford to send their kids to private schools, but that does not take away from the fact that the subsidies paid to those private schools should be at least proportional to the public schools.
What of course it does. They choose to not go to the schools that the state provides, they choose to pay. Why should the state subsides that?
The governement is just giving them back value for THEIR money…
Bull they don’t give back money to people who choose to stay in the public sector why should people who pay private fees be any way different
The money the private schools get covers the cost of the teachers. The fees pay for the extras those schools provide that public ones don’t - thus no “false advertising”. Essentially they are getting the money paid to the private school that would be spent on their kid in the public sector.
Phasing out such fee support could be considered but it’s more important to look at a full re-examination of all schools in a way which directly connects local communities to their schools. For instance, VECs could be abolished and replaced with District School Boards with elected members rather than councillors getting another set of expenses. They would have responsibility for all primary and secondary schools in their district, including planning new schools and closing undersubscribed ones rather than everything being decided centrally.
Oh by the way, you should link and be aware of the following Constitutional provision before making rash statements [For those above who might have]:
Artile 43 Subsection 4.
The State shall provide for free primary education and shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative, and, when the public good requires it, provide other educational facilities or institutions with due regard, however, for the rights of parents, especially in the matter of religious and moral formation.
Note the wording above.
My comments on Sinnott were included as an adjunct to Simon’s article/post.
J.
If funding to private schools ended, many or most of them would probably fold, leading to an immediate school-places crisis. The government probably doesn’t want that.
True but there is only 55 in the country so not sure it would be a crisis but fair enough point non the less.
There’s only one way to kill private education. Make public education so good, the teachers so skilled, the facilities so pristine, that the private alternative doesn’t offer anything.
Get back to me when that happens. Not holding my breath though.