In an article in the Irish Times, VEC teacher Sheila Maher has a piece argues against Catholic-run schools because they make children from non-Catholic backgrounds feel ‘excluded’.

She takes her cue from the fact that children in primary schools up and down the country are making their First Communions this month.

This ceremony, she says, has an exclusionary impact on non-Catholic children.

She suggests that, while 84pc of Irish people identify as Catholics, many, if not most of these are not genuine Catholics at all. She implies that, under the surface, there is big demand for non-denominational schools:

She says: “To many of my peers, my generation of 40-somethings who espouse liberal views on women’s equality, the environment, social issues and rights, and who are forthright and outspoken and for the most part proud of their tolerance on these questions, I say this: you have a blind spot when it comes to the Catholic Church and display much hypocrisy.”

Some of this may be true. However the problem for Maher is that the Department of Education’s recent surveys on parental preferences in terms of school patronage showed no widespread demand for non-denominational schools.

The surveys were conducted earlier this year in 38 different areas.

In 15 of the 38 areas (with 306 Catholic primary schools in total), there was little or no appreciable demand for a school with a different patron.

In 23 areas, the Department claims that there was sufficient demand for the provision of one school with a different patron.

In fact, it is arguable that the demand is even less widespread than even the Department’s reading of the results.

Even in the areas where the Department said there was an appetite for an alternative patron, the actual level of demand was very weak.

Based on department figures, the Catholic Church’s Council of Education shows that “those who expressed an opinion in favour of change amount in each case to between 2.2pc and eight percent of parents with children in school in these areas”.

In short, there is no evidence of a vast, untapped demand for multi-denominational or non-denominational education.

But even if it had, the Constitution would still clearly give parents who want a denominational education for their children the right to have it publicly funded.

Ms Maher might also do well to read this interview with Karin Svanborg-Sjövall, an expert for the Swedish welfare model.

Even in Sweden they are moving away from the one-size-fits-all model of schooling that Maher seems to favour.

In fact, Svanborg-Sjovall describes this kind of “centrally-controlled schooling” as “inhumane”.