Half of post-primary schools apply for phone pouch funding
phone pouches
scheme.
A total of 380 out of the country's 722 second-level schools have made applications under the €9 million plan, announced in the budget last year, to provide smartphone pouches or storage boxes to restrict the use of mobile phones by pupils during the school day.
The initiative sparked criticism at the time and Opposition parties labelled it
'wasteful' and 'unnecessary'
.
But in reply to a parliamentary question from Labour education spokesman Eoghan Kenny, Minster for Education
Helen McEntee
confirmed that 380 schools had applied for funding of €25 per pupil by the June 24th deadline.
READ MORE
Payment has already been made to 304 schools and 'processing of the balance of those schools is under way, with funding to issue to eligible schools shortly'. The funding can only be used for pouches and phone lock boxes.
Ms McEntee said the phone restriction policy 'will build on the existing school policies in this area and will enable children to disconnect from their online world and connect more with their peers for the duration of the school day. Consultation with the school community is a key feature of this measure'.
However, Mr Kenny said phone pouches were far down the list of priorities for schools that had contacted him. 'The biggest issue for schools is the lack of funding for very basic things like electricity, heating, IT equipment, funding for caretakers, for example,' he said.
He said they need funding to paint doors, walls and windows at the end of the year and 'there are so many additional costs that you need, to keep the school running as opposed to storing phones'.
Mr Kenny, a former secondary school business studies and religion teacher said 'this amount of money could be used in a far better way than storing phones'.
[
Schools told they cannot spend €9m phone pouch budget on other education needs
Opens in new window
]
He pointed to difficulties with the phone pouch policy. 'I'm not saying every child is going to do this but if you've a child of 15 or 16, they are going to bring in an old phone, put it into the phone pouch and then go off with their original phone.
'So it's not an effective way of actually stopping them from using their phones.'
He acknowledged the Government's concerns about children's use of social media but said while there are issues in trying to keep students off phones, 'the majority of the time mobile phone policy in schools works'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
John Hume's life provides lessons for addressing Palestine-Israel conflict
Having worked for and with the former leader of the SDLP , John Hume , I often get asked about how he might respond to the challenges of today. On the fifth anniversary of Hume's death, a new appreciation of the transformation he brought to the lives of so many offers space to consider how his political ethic and method could be used to address the appalling situation in the Middle East . In response to doubts, frustration and the emotional impact of atrocious events, Hume would revert to: 'If the underlying problem has not changed then the underlying solution has not changed.' He would stress that the dimensions of the problem had to be at least matched by the dimensions of any purported solution. Hume looked at problems through two lenses – rights and relationships. He also applied the light of responsibility to better discern salient issues and duties – both moral and legal – of agency. READ MORE He used the line 'you cannot be reconciled with someone whose boot is on your neck' to stress the essential requirement for the protection of rights, equal human dignity and respect for difference. [ John Hume: His life and times Opens in new window ] He would also allude to the maxim of Olof Palme that we cannot really be secure against each other, we can only achieve true security with each other. Such ethical instincts would, I believe, have guided (in his thinking prime) Hume's empathy, analysis and laser logic if looking at the dire suffering of Palestine today. Like others, he cautioned against superficially equating different situations and conditions of conflict but he would cite some comparable precepts. I think that Hume's strong lines on the global community's obligations of human solidarity and international law against Apartheid in South Africa would be amplified in the current context. (Kader Asmal acclaimed Hume's groundbreaking justification of sanctions against Apartheid South Africa as not just means of marking moral distance and/or trying to exert some economic leverage but also to manifest solidarity with the struggle for democracy in South Africa). If 'the underlying solution' that has not changed in the Middle East is a two-state solution, would that not have better chance of advancement if there was more semblance of a two-state process? The Hume-promoted schema for our peace process saw negotiations convened by both governments, deliberately inclusive of all parties, in an absence of violence, framed on three institutional strands, also addressing rights, equality and the valid democratic contest of legitimate constitutional preferences. That delivered an agreed outcome which spanned all those ambits even though different parties had rejected various inherent premises. It might be observed from Irish experience that qualitative 'givens' of a diplomatically desired solution gain better prospect of agreed outcome if they are insinuated as working givens of the negotiating process. Hume knew the folly of parties turning objectives into their preconditions. However, he strongly canvassed the conditioning value for dialogue of key affirmations by duly involved governments and authoritative indications from other international actors. Lateral interests leaning in supportively with valid, balanced and principled influence proved to be beneficent even though their motivation or modes were rejected or resented by given parties. Hume's dictum that 'the framework of the problem has to be matched by the framework for a solution' could usefully extend to include 'the framework of the process'. This can provide a distinctive accent on Ireland's cogent rationale for state recognition. It might be commended to a UK government which claims part credit for our Belfast Agreement. Recognising the state of Palestine is one way of other states leaning in to underscore a fundamental premise for a solution rooted in international law. [ Gaza is also a war on the human instinct for compassion Opens in new window ] Many tributes after Hume's death on August 3rd, 2020 recognised a resilient single-mindedness, both in repudiation of violence from any source and steadfast pursuit of political developments which could bring us out of the deepening rut of division and destructive conflict. However, Hume never really saw his work of leadership towards dialogue and agreement as a single-handed role or achievement. His Nobel Prize acceptance speech paid tribute to other party leaderships, both Irish and British governments – including successive administrations – US and EU support and the people's resilience. This showed an ethic that believed in the efficacy of dialogue and the value of inclusion underpinned by the compelling assertion of rights. That generous acknowledgment understandably sidestepped the frustrating and tragic reality that many of those parties had persistently repudiated his analysis of the 'three sets of relationships'; rejected his regard to the equal legitimacy of nationalist and unionist aspirations; dismissed the value or validity of signal engagement between the two governments; and/or resisted concepts around institutional democratic partnership and North-South political co-operation. All of these precepts – plus more that Hume had long espoused – were framed into the Belfast Agreement. Stones that wreckers had rejected from the builder had become the cornerstones. The agreement was capstoned by its overwhelming ratification in island-wide referendums: the form of articulated self-determination conceived by Hume to endorse a model of agreed Ireland that could allow further democratic change. [ From the archive: Nationalist leader who championed 'agreed Ireland' Opens in new window ] The Belfast Agreement embodies much more than a few days' word-craft from 'the hand of history' in April 1998. It compacted layers of understanding achieved in many earlier initiatives, events or efforts, including some tagged 'failed' in media commentary. Indeed more of its text is upcycled from earlier process drafts, previous documents or formal declarations than is often acknowledged. Perhaps in Beckett's spirit of 'Try again. Fail again. Fail better', numerous hands and strands should be credited for such milestones. Not for today a cast and credits list for such as Sunningdale, the New Ireland Forum, Anglo-Irish Agreement, Hume-Adams dialogue/papers, the Brooke/Mayhew talks, Downing Street Declaration, Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, framework documents, Mitchell principles, ground rules (renegotiated) for multi-party talks etc. The single common determinator in all these – and more – was Hume. His long pathfinding mission that entailed close collaboration with successive governments and serious engagement with his political counterparts also personally cultivated influential US involvements and harnessed EU relevance and effectiveness. That knack of purposeful partnership and productive rapport with other political and diplomatic players can be overlooked in some appraisals of his singular contribution. It was interactive as well as iterative. His constancy of robust analysis did allow for adjustment or refinement of argument, hearing other takes and refiling his ordered ideas. No account could exaggerate the partnership importance of his wife Pat Hume – an alchemist of optimism – to John's famous 'stickability'. [ John Hume: The mesmerising persuader the public rarely got to see Opens in new window ] Scanning today's wider political domain, it would be hard to speculate how a leader who used to warn us about the risks of 'falling into reacting to reaction' might cope in an age where prejudicial political communication sets agendas and narrows debate. A Denis Lehane line observes that people like sides, not subtleties. John Hume could both address sides and express subtleties in a way that few could match. If infective invective sets the heat and beat of polarising exchange rather than respectful, cooler, logical challenge, such signal leadership as Hume's will struggle for traction in what still passes for public discourse. Mark Durkan is a former leader of the SDLP and served as Northern Ireland's Deputy First Minister between 2001 and 2002.
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Twenty five years on, is Ireland still closer to Boston than Berlin ?
Many households feel they pay too much tax and get too little back in return in terms of State services. But what kind of 'deal' do the public actually get from the Irish Government? In terms of what tax we pay and what Irish people benefit from in terms of Government spending, new research from the Fiscal Advisory Council, the budget watchdog , written by economist Niall Conroy, provides new pointers. 1. Boston or Berlin? The overall picture is that both tax and State spending are relatively low here by the standards of other richer EU countries. However, in terms of the numbers, Ireland sits between the high spending levels of higher-income European countries- used as comparators throughout the study – and the lower spending US. In 2000, then Tánaiste Mary Harney opined that Ireland was spiritually closer to Boston than Berlin. In terms of spending and tax levels, the headline figures suggest we remain closer to other English-speaking countries, but even more so to the UK and Canada than the US – you could say more Bristol or British Columbia than Boston or Berlin. Government spending here, at around 40 per cent of national output (using adjusted gross national income or GNI* for Ireland to remove multinational distortions) is well below the 49 per cent in the dozen other richer EU countries. However, part of this is due to demographics and a strong economy, both of which mean Government spending is a bit lower. More than 60 per cent of this gap is accounted for by the younger age profile of the Irish population and the stronger economic growth rates here. And so we are a bit closer to European spending levels than it looks at first glance. READ MORE However, even accounting for this, the spending gap between Ireland and the richer European group is still around €1,800 per person. (The group used to compare us to includes Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden). But while State spending here is lower, so too are taxes. The tax 'gap' is around €2,600 per person. The IFAC paper points out that this includes what it classifies as 'excess' levels of corporation tax due to multinational planning, which boosts the Irish coffers. Excluding these windfall receipts, the gap rises to €4,700 per annum, on IFAC calculations. So on the face of it Ireland is a lower tax/lower spend economy than many other high income European countries. But as the population ages, Irish spending will inevitably rise – particularly in areas like pensions, health and social care. This may move Ireland close to a European model but with key policy decisions to make. 2. How does what Irish people pay in tax compare? : Government revenues in Ireland are towards the bottom of the European league – as a percentage of national income. The tax 'gap' here, compared to an average of other high-income European countries, is calculated at 4.7 per cent of national income, or €2,600 per person. Looking beyond Europe, Ireland's tax share is more in line with countries like the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, but still higher than the US. So how come many households still feel they are paying a lot of tax? There are reasons. The biggest gap between Ireland and other higher-income European countries is the lower levels of tax on income here. But two things are worth noting. Irish people pay similar levels of income tax on average as the European comparator group, but much lower levels of social security, or PRSI in the Irish context, is paid by both employers and employees. The relatively young age of the population may be a factor here – and more PRSI may need to be collected in future to support a rising State pensions bill. An important point when comparing social contributions is that what really matters is not just what you pay, but also what you get in return in terms of services. In some European countries this includes, for example, better healthcare services. The second key point is that the low level of taxes on income here 'is driven entirely by lower-income households' who face low effective rates, according to the paper, particularly if they have children. The paper adds: 'In contrast, higher earners in Ireland face similar combined rates of income tax and social contributions as those in other high-income European countries.' OECD data show that a low earning household in Ireland (on less than €50,000) pays combined tax and social security of about 17.8 per cent of income, compared to a European average of 23.4 per cent. An average earning household (earning just over €70,000) pays around the same as other better off EU countries at around 28-29 per cent while a higher earner here (€118,000) pays a bit more – 37.2 per cent versus 36.4 per cent. So if you are a middle or higher earner, you pay the same or a bit more than those in other rich European countries. The other area where Ireland stands out, of course, is corporation tax, where Ireland collects roughly twice as much as other richer European countries in terms of share of national income. As the paper points out, this helps to support lower taxes and higher spending elsewhere – for as long as it lasts. Looking at taxes on consumption – like VAT and excise – Ireland has traditionally levied more. These days, however, the State is slightly below the European average due to decreasing revenues – as a percentage of the total – from excises on alcohol, tobacco and petrol. 3. What about the services the public receive, paid for by their taxes? The paper looks at key services accessed by the public and again compares Ireland with other richer European countries. This is vital, too, for living standards. It is easy enough to measure spending here in areas like health and education and compare it with other countries. But comparing the actual services people receive is more complicated, depending on the structure and efficiency of what is delivered. However, the paper makes some interesting points. In education, it finds that Ireland spends its money relatively efficiently. After adjusting for Ireland's relatively young population, the paper finds that Ireland spends a bit below the average of other richer European countries in this area. But, despite this, Ireland's level of overall educational attainment is high, ranking below only Finland. And Ireland has the highest proportion of the population with a third-level degree. Ireland also scores well in standardised tests in areas like reading, science and maths. In other words, Ireland gets good outcomes from a relatively low spend. In healthcare, the picture is different. Ireland is a high spender, particularly when adjustment is made for the young population – and insurance-funded spending is also higher here. Ireland does have good health 'outcomes' in terms of life expectancy and population health, but key pressure points in accident and emergency services and in public waiting lists remain. The paper asks whether better value is needed from the money spent, with the cost of delivering services having soared in recent years. Looking at pensions , Ireland spends less than other richer European countries, even when adjustment is made for the younger population. Irish pension payments- while they rose during the 2000 to 2010 era – remain lower than the European average. A key point here is that Ireland's state pension is not linked to inflation, as it is in most other countries. In childcare and family social protection, meanwhile, Ireland has a lower level of spending – again adjusted for the population. However, cash transfers to families are higher here. Where Ireland falls behind is that, in most other countries, the State plays a bigger role in investing in and providing childcare services. 4. The policy questions : The vital policy question is that the population is ageing and revenues will be needed to pay the higher bills that will come with that in areas like healthcare and pensions in particular. On the other side of the exchequer equation, Ireland is increasingly reliant on corporate tax revenues, which are potentially volatile. Meanwhile, spending is rising rapidly, though the result in terms of better services to the public is mixed. The Government is working on a medium-term financial strategy for the autumn and thus has much to grapple with, most importantly how to pay the bills coming down the road.
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
The parallels between Nelson Mandela and Daniel O'Connell are many
Parallels between the impact Daniel O'Connell and Nelson Mandela had on their respective countries were drawn at a symposium in Trinity College Dublin last week to mark the 250th anniversary of the birth of the Liberator, the greatest political leader in Irish history. With a number of commemorative events planned in the run up to the bicentenary of Catholic Emancipation in 2029, the State is finally giving due recognition to a leader who set the country on its course to become a successful European democracy with his campaigns for Catholic Emancipation and repeal of the union with Britain. [ Daniel O'Connell would have enjoyed his life being celebrated 250 years on, says historian ] It is certainly arguable that O'Connell's message of non-violence and universal human rights has a greater relevance to today's world than the vision of blood sacrifice and armed insurrection that motivated the leaders of the 1916 Rising , which was so enthusiastically commemorated in the past decade. The parallel drawn by a number of speakers at the symposium between O'Connell and Mandela was appropriate. READ MORE Both were extraordinary leaders who gave their oppressed followers a sense of their own individual worth and national identity. As well as possessing enormous courage and political ability both had the moral authority to do truly great things. I had the privilege of shaking hands with Nelson Mandela and exchanging a few words with him at a reception in Dublin Castle in July 1990 when he visited this country just months after his release from prison in Robben Island where he had spent the previous 27 years. Nelson Mandela addresses a crowd in Dublin in July 1990 after he was freed from prison. Photograph: Frank Miller There was an aura about Mandela that differentiated him from other political leaders. Despite having spent so much of his life in prison, he conveyed a dignity and a tolerance, allied to an iron will, that left anybody who met him in no doubt that he was truly one of the great men of history. Years later I visited the house in which Mandela lived in Soweto before he went to prison. Our knowledgeable guide emphasised how Mandela was no ordinary person but came from a princely Xhosa family. One of his ancestors had been the tribal chief in the 18th century. There was certainly a regal air about Mandela. Whether in prison or as president of South Africa, he conveyed the absolute confidence that he was inferior to nobody, but he did it with a quiet dignity that made nobody feel inferior to him. There is another parallel here with O'Connell who came from a Kerry clan that had ruled much of the Iveragh peninsula for hundreds of years. Daniel O'Connell forced the British state to acknowledge that Catholics should be given equal rights Like Mandela, O'Connell never felt inferior to any of those who felt themselves to be his social superiors either in a courtroom or the House of Commons. While the British Tory press portrayed him as a country bumpkin before he took his seat in the House of Commons in 1830, he quickly established himself as a towering presence in the chamber. O'Connell's great achievement was to force the British state to acknowledge that Catholics should be given equal rights despite the diehard opposition of the monarch George IV. It took another Irishman, the Duke of Wellington, who was prime minister at the time, to force the King to accept the need for Catholic Emancipation. O'Connell was far more than a champion of the rights of Irish Catholics. He fought for the rights of the downtrodden everywhere and in particular he campaigned with passion for an end to slavery in the United States and was an inspiration for the former slave Frederick Douglass, who was a key figure in the anti-slavery campaign. O'Connell refused to accept political donations from Irish-Americans who supported slavery, much to the fury of his more extreme nationalist critics in the Young Ireland movement who felt that the cause of Ireland was the only thing that mattered. For O'Connell, the rights of Irish Catholics and universal liberty were inextricably linked. As well as campaigning against slavery he introduced a Bill in the Commons for the emancipation of the Jews and he supported the liberal movement in Spain as well as the right of the Polish people to their own state. In his own lifetime he was a figure of international repute and he became an inspiration for constitutional nationalism long after his death. Micheál Martin at a civic reception and unveiling of a commemorative plaque for the 250th anniversary of the birth of Daniel O'Connell in Cahersiveen, Co Kerry. Photograph: Government Information Service Unfortunately, following Irish independence O'Connell's reputation suffered neglect as his message of non-violence did not chime with the ideology of the new state. In his keynote address to the O'Connell symposium Micheál Martin said: 'When we see our history solely as a link to and from the events, movements and personalities of 1916-23 we lose enormous amounts of the social, political and cultural diversity of our history.' The Taoiseach made the point that concepts such as human rights and the rule of law were now being challenged to an extent which few could have imagined only a short time ago. 'And it is exactly because of where Daniel O'Connell stood on these issues – for his role and impact in promoting democracy and human rights both at home and abroad – that he deserves to be seen as a still relevant and still inspirational figure,' he said.
