I should have indicated that at the beginning. Extending the life of the existing bodies effectively means for the foreseeable future, at least for a year or more, that there is no prospect of the junior staff, who constitute two-thirds of the staff of the college, 70 per cent of the total staff in our college and a somewhat smaller percentage but still a very substantial proportion in the other colleges, and the students having any representation on the Senate of the National University of Ireland.
The Minister must surely realise how difficult it is at this point to persist in a situation in which no representation exists. It will be difficult enough to persuade the junior staff and the students that the exercise of the power of co-option is in their favour in regard to their representation on this and other bodies as it does not appear to represent any adequate concession over this period. I do not look forward to the task of trying to persuade people, who are at this stage extremely unhappy with their total exclusion from having any decision in the present running of their college, to accept such a limited concession for what could be quite a long period of time but I certainly will try to do so. But to tell them that the possibility of having representation on the Senate of the National University of Ireland has been dropped by an unnecessary decision to extend the life of the existing Senate and ask them in those circumstances not to press their demands and not to agitate further will be extremely difficult. In fact, it will be virtually impossible.
I have some experience of this. I have had over the last few months the experience of trying to persuade people that they should adopt constitutional means of seeking reform, that they should work under the existing system so long as it is there and seek to change it by constitutional means and that they should not beat their heads against a wall by demanding things which cannot be done at this point in time. The only way in which the events of February and March of this year in University College, Dublin, were brought to a happy ending was by holding out to the students the prospect that the existing system could be modified in a way which would solve the situation but to take a gratuitous action, which is totally unnecessary, will close off that possibility as far as the students are concerned and will make it less likely in their view that the appointments to the Governing Body of University College by the Senate will provide additional representation of this kind. This will create a very difficult situation.
The Minister will appreciate, quite apart from the question of co-option to the Senate itself, that the Senate has power of appointment with regard to the governing bodies of the colleges. It is hoped in our college, and I am sure in the other colleges, that the new Governing Body which will be elected in the autumn of this year and will take office in the early part of next year, will exercise their power of co-option in regard to representation in a situation in which 70 per cent of the staff and 100 per cent of the students have no representation whatever. It would be our hope also that the Senate of the National University would exercise their appointment to the Governing Body, would not follow the normal convention which has been followed hitherto by appointing people whose names are suggested by the president of the college, which is what has happened in practice for a long time past, but that they would exercise this power in such a manner as to provide further representation for those people in the college, who are almost totally unrepresented at present.
It seems unlikely that this power will be exercised in this way if the Senate, which will be called on to exercise this power of appointment to the Governing Body of UCD, is the present Senate, the Senate which have already by their actions five years ago shown that they are not prepared to depart from the existing convention and will exercise this power of appointment in accordance with the proposals of the president of the college concerned with a view to appointing people whom they wish to see appointed. We know that this Senate, although an alternative proposal was put to them at the relative meeting five years ago, rejected the proposal and followed the convention established by the three colleges, the horse-trading convention, under which the authority of each college of the Senate supported the authority of the college in question in exercising the power of appointment in a manner which suits them.
We know the Senate have done that. We, therefore, have good reason to believe they are likely to do the same thing again. To extend the life of the Senate which have shown they have exercised their power in this way so that they will have an opportunity of doing the same thing again next January or February is utterly wrong. If the election was held in the ordinary way we could have a Senate which would be much more likely to want to exercise this power in a manner designed to secure representation for the unrepresented bodies than the present body which is likely again to do something which will create unnecessary problems and difficulties.
I am not sure that the Minister has been aware of all those problems. It is, perhaps, asking too much even of a Minister who has been in office for a good while to know about the intricacies not only of the legal position of our colleges but also the conventions under which they are likely to operate, but to expect a Minister, as recently appointed as the present Minister, to understand those conventions, and to know how they have been exercised in the past, is, perhaps, asking too much. I must not be unfair to the Minister in suggesting he ought to have known of those facts. I put them to him now so that he will know the position and can check the veracity of what I have said. He should not persist with this measure where we will be in the position that the new Governing Body of UCD will have their Senate appointments made by the existing Senate and the possibility that they will now use the election in the same manner as they did the last time is something which we should try to avoid if at all possible.
It is for those reasons, which, perhaps, I did not explain in detail on Second Reading, as I was a bit hesitant to take up too much of the time of the House, as I thought if I summarised the position I would get my points across, that I have now explained the position more fully, because it seems necessary to do so. I am concerned we do not in this Bill do anything more than the minimum necessary to facilitate the National University of Ireland in carrying out the proper legal procedures in which they now find difficulty in doing so and the possibility of not having them left there for too long. I am hopeful that the Senate themselves would now reconsider their decision to seek a renewal at this point in time in view of the position of the Governing Body of the Senate. I believe the Senate were meeting this morning but I do not know whether this is so or not. It is for those reasons I press the amendments with the Minister and ask him to give them consideration.
I would also ask, although this, perhaps, would come in on the section, to make it clear what, in fact, is the effect of the Bill? Am I right in thinking that the Bill in its present form not alone allows the present Senate to be renewed for 12 months but allows it to be renewed indefinitely for 12 month periods thereafter at their request? Perhaps, the Minister might explain that also when replying.