andMr. Barrett asked the Minister for Education if his attention has been drawn to the statement recently made by the President of University College, Cork, relating to the serious overcrowding in the university, and to the intention of the President to recommend that the number of students be drastically reduced in 1967, and that college fees be substantially increased in order to curtail the number of students entering the university; if so, if he will state what proposals, if any, he has to alleviate the overcrowding referred to; and if in view of the Government's stated policy on education he will state what, if any, are his proposals regarding the President's recommendations.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - UCC Accommodation.
144.
I have seen newspaper reports of the statements referred to, but have not been furnished with a copy of the President's address.
The position in relation to University College, Cork, is that the Government approved in February, 1964, a proposal for the erection of a new building to house Physics, Chemistry, Mathematical Physics and a Science Library. The President of the College was so informed on 29th February, 1964, and, following the submission of sketch plans, he was authorised on 22nd July, 1965, to proceed with the erection of the new building.
Tenders were sought for the erection of the building and they have been submitted to my Department for approval for the placing of a contract. I hope to be in a position to communicate a decision in regard to the matter to the President of the College at an early date.
Is the Minister aware of the widespread discontent and annoyance that was caused by the President's statement in Cork in which there was a threat of increasing substantially the fees of students, and, if so, will he take this opportunity of saying he will not allow that to happen?
I am not aware of what the Deputy has stated, but if what the Deputy states is correct, I think it is due to a misinterpretation of part of the President's speech, which the Deputy apparently interpreted as meaning that fees would be increased in order to keep out students.
That is true. That was the impression created.
I do not think that was what was said. I do not know what the President intended to convey, but it seems to me, on looking at what he did say, that was not what he intended to convey but rather that if the number of students had to be kept down, this might lead to an increase in fees. I think he was putting it the other way around.
Can we take it, now that there has been a discussion here in the House, where a matter of such importance should be discussed, that the President will take an early opportunity of clarifying his statement?
This, of course, is a matter for the President.
Could the Minister have a word in his ear?
I am not quite sure whether it is within the functions of the Minister for Education to do that, but I have no doubt the President's attention will be brought to the discussion here.