At first glance, the announcement by the Minister for Education that the Government will provide 100 per cent of the cost of all new school sites appears to be a bold initiative: in an education system with a pronounced denominational flavour, the State will henceforth become the owner of all new school sites and buildings. Mr Martin has described the plan as "the most significant change in the State funding of school capital projects since independence". The Minister's initiative is welcome. It will have a positive and practical effect on schools' finances. Under existing procedures a £1 million school project extension would have required a "local contribution" of some £150,000; in future, the school will be required to provide just £25,000 in funding.
But this is scarcely radical. A more pertinent question is why it took so long to introduce - given the real hardship imposed on schools by the "local contribution" rule and the relatively small additional cost (£4 million per year) to the Exchequer? It may be that successive governments took the view that any such measure might have been interpreted as greater State encroachment on Catholic education and could have risked a Church-State confrontation. These days, there are few such political risks. The ethos of Catholic primary schools has been guaranteed in the recently concluded Governance of Primary Schools Agreement, while the Church itself will no doubt be grateful for the additional financial support from the State.
For all that, it is important not to underestimate the work done by the Catholic Church in providing schools and other facilities when the State, in less prosperous times, abdicated its responsibility. There are scores of schools in housing estates and in communities throughout this State that would not have been built without the vision and commitment of the religious. To their credit, both Mr Martin and his predecessor, Ms Bhreathneach, have sought to address the democratic deficit that is often a feature of a largely denominational education system.
Mr Martin's Education Bill is conservative when compared to that framed by his predecessor but it does, at least, seek to give a greater voice to parents in the management of schools. In truth, there is probably little public appetite for radical measures in the management of schools. There is little public criticism of Ireland's "world class " educational system; indeed it is often cited as a key ingredient of current economic success.
But there is still much that Mr Martin can do to make a real difference to future generations. The recent initiatives to combat educational disadvantage and to support pupils with special needs are welcome, but the State can afford to do better, especially at primary level. Primary schools are still desperately underfunded, the pupil-teacher ratio is still too high and the investment in remedial and support services is limited. At a time of plenty, Mr Martin and his Cabinet colleagues can afford to have higher ambitions for the educational system.