I want to make one final reference to the situation regarding the possibilities of integrating at some future stage Trinity College and the National University. My comment arises as a result of a statement published on to-day's paper attributed to the Home Secretary in the House of Commons yesterday where, in a message to the Six County Government, he stated: "Your Border is our Border and your soil is our soil." If the speeches made in this House are correctly understood, it would appear that many Deputies who oppose the integration of these two Universities, even in 20, 30 or 40 years' time, believe that the Border around the Six Counties should be extended to include Trinity College as well. I am sure Deputies reject and repudiate any such audacious claim on the part of Mr. Butler.
We should also reject and repudiate the suggestion that Trinity College should now be regarded as outside the scope of Irish nationalism and Irish life. That institution produced great patriots and great Irishmen in the past, irrespective of whatever mentality governed it. I feel that, whether a decision is taken now or in the near future to integrate these two Universities, it will still produce its quota of great Irishmen for the benefit of the country as a whole.
I suggested last night it was my duty and the duty of every back-bencher to speak in this debate, if only for the purpose of arousing public interest in what I would describe as a fait accompli. There is a dangerous apathy outside the House, a feeling of “I-could-not-care-less” as far as this measure is concerned. That is a sad commentary on the public outlook and it bodes ill for the country. But even worse is the subdued atmosphere among Deputies themselves. When you meet them in the corridors, and discuss this matter with them they suggest “What is the use of talking about it? It is all over. The decision has been taken.”
I shall not repeat myself on that aspect of the matter except to say the Universities should be the home of democracy. They should teach how precious democracy is. That should be their aim. Instead of that, from the example given by the authorities of the National University, it would appear that they have nothing but contempt for this democratic institution here when they presumed seven or eight years ago to go ahead with this scheme without the sanction of the people. The proposals and plans outlined in the red Booklet produced by the University authorities are more like some obscure imagining of ancient Greek scholars than the product of modern alert minds. In my opinion, the Minister acted first and then decided to think afterwards. He should have given full consideration to the problem he mentioned in the course of his long and detailed speech as reported at Column 932 of the Official Debates, dealing with the five medical schools and the engineering schools. He said:
We could probably therefore do better and less expensively with a lesser number of medical and civil engineering schools, but the question would be which College or Colleges would be prepared to give up its school.
He asked that question at the same time as he is giving authority to University College, Dublin, to remove itself, bag and baggage—every Faculty concerned—out to Belfield.
Would it not be commonsense to decide now how many medical schools we need, how many engineering schools we need, and where we are to place them? Having decided that on a rational basis, we could then decide whether or not University College, Dublin, needed the wide expanse at Belfield. That would be the action of a Minister who had freedom of action but I believe the Minister is being used. I have the greatest personal respect for the Minister but he is being used as a rubber stamp in this instance.
At the same column in the Official Debates, the Minister is reported as referring to the position existing amongst architects. He said that there is a certain amount of emigration amongst architects, of whom 25 or more are produced annually, about 20 from University College, Dublin, and five from Bolton Street College of Technology. There is an admission that we have the University and Bolton Street producing architects and at the same time, we have the position that the Minister himself admits that there is a link between the vocational school system and the Universities.
He referred to the fact that this was brought home to him as a result of what he described as a consultation held last November in Paris by O.E.E.C. The excellent group of experts there pointed out to the Irish educational representatives that there was no opportunity in Ireland for the gifted technical student to obtain his University degree in the particular subject in which he was interested and the Irish Government were asked to remedy that position.
Is it not the position to-day that a great proportion of our youth who are getting anything more than a primary education are getting it in our technical schools? However, they will still be prevented from getting the opportunity of taking out their degrees, even if we give this money to U.C.D. to move out to Belfield. There is no suggestion that provision will then be made for them as a result of the extra space available. Only a few months ago, a motion was moved in this House calling on the Government to extend the school-leaving age so that our young people might get an opportunity of technical training, of an extended course in primary schools, or of a secondary education even in a limited way. The Government accepted the principle of that and the Taoiseach himself came into this House and said they were in agreement with the proposal to provide further education for the youth but that they were up against big difficulties. I agree the difficulties are big and I do not suggest they can be solved overnight, but I think they should be first conquered as a priority measure, rather than that we should do what we are doing here to-day. We are surmounting many difficulties in this field of education but we are ignoring the foundations.
I should like to comment on the position with regard to University College, Galway. I made a brief reference last night to the desirability of stopping the trek to Dublin by enlarging and improving the constituent Colleges in Cork and Galway. I understand that the Minister received a deputation yesterday from certain interests in Galway city and county in connection with an appeal for the Faculty of Agriculture in U.C.G. This is the second deputation the Minister has received within the past three weeks and I think these deputations have not considered their cases properly before approaching the Minister.
I believe that U.C.G. is at the disposal of all Connacht, portion of the southern counties and over as far as the midlands, and if any deputation is to be received by the Minister, it should be representative of all the counties of Connacht, and perhaps some of the Munster counties, so that the widest and strongest possible case will be made. I take a very dim view of a few people setting themselves up in Galway city and county as the representatives of that entire province. It is only in their own minds that they are so representative.
There is very strong criticism with regard to some of these people who will not consult the proper authorities and public bodies in the other counties concerned, but, in spite of all that, I support strongly the proposal to make a complete Faculty of Agriculture available in Galway. At a time when agriculture is looked upon as our primary industry, such a proposal should receive the greatest possible consideration from the Government. We are lacking in graduates in horticulture, agriculture and various aspects of farming and the opportunity is ripe for the Minister to take action. In my opinion, this subject should have been part of the examination prior to the decision which is the subject of this debate.
Before I conclude, I should like to pay a tribute to Tuairim for the very excellent booklet they produced and for the first-class help they gave Deputies in making available the fund of information which they took so much pains to gather. It is an excellent production and one that should have helped Deputies on all sides of the House because it is non-political. Although the people who are identified with Tuairim have no association whatever with me and possibly look the other way politically, it does not take away from the fact that they have performed an excellent service for the community. I join with other Deputies in condemning those who have suggested that the people who performed that service were nosey-parkers, busybodies sticking their noses into something that did not concern them. Of course it concerns them. They are the younger generation in this State.
As has been suggested elsewhere, there is a fresh wind blowing in more places than in Africa. I hope it blows much stronger than the wind blowing here and that it will blow many cobwebs out of the minds of people inside and outside this House. I would prefer that it should blow the cobwebs from their minds than that the breeze would become so strong that it would blow these people out of existence.
The discussion here has been on a non-Party basis and I cannot understand why a decision is not left to a free vote of the House. I appeal finally to the Minister that the decision on this matter, which will affect every future generation, should be left to the consciences of each individual Deputy, that the Whips should be left off and that Deputies should express their belief as to the correct solution for this problem. I would ask the Minister to consider that plea and, even at this late stage, allow a free vote.