I move amendment No. 2a:
In page 3, line 43, to delete "amounts" and substitute "amount".
Section 12 is the most contentious and the most important section in the Bill. As it is drafted at the moment, the Bill still leaves open the degree of earmarking of the money by the Government and this is totally incompatible with the function of An tÚdarás as envisaged ever since the first idea of such a body was put forward in evidence given to the Commission on Higher Education almost ten years ago. In proposing that the plural "amounts" be substituted by the singular "amount", I would hope to get away from this and make it clear that the Oireachtas will vote a total sum to An tÚdarás which will then allocate it to the different bodies at its discretion and that the Minister's Department will not have a function in its allocation. That is the purpose of the amendment. I suspect that we face a frontal clash on this issue, but it is an important one and it would be wrong of us, having failed to persuade the Minister on Committee Stage, not to re-pose the issue here today and give him, shall we say, another chance to rethink this vital issue.
Perhaps the most disturbing feature of this debate — much of which has been heartening and some of which has been disappointing — has been the Minister's insistence on Committee Stage and on Second Stage on this principle of his Department continuing to play a role in the allocation of funds between institutions. The whole point, the whole purpose in the setting up of this body is to get away from that. I simply cannot understand why the Minister should seek to duplicate the work of his Department in the form of An tÚdarás while continuing to have the Department playing a role in the matter. We are setting up this body and financing it and giving it the necessary authority. We have spent many laborious hours in this House establishing this body with a view to transferring to it this very function which the Minister, by virtue of the wording he is proposing and by virtue of his stated intention in this House, intends to continue to duplicate in his Department. There can be no justification for this and I appeal to the Minister even at this late stage in the game to reconsider his attitude to this and to have regard to the cogent and compelling arguments put forward on this issue in the earlier stages.
I know that many of the issues which are brought up for debate by way of amendment by the Opposition are ones on which two opinions are possible. Indeed, I have been persuaded by some of the Minister's remarks to withdraw some of my amendments on Committee Stage when I heard the weight of the arguments against them. In other cases, although I pressed the amendment, I recognised that the Minister had a point in the particular instance. Here there is a very great difference of view and the Minister has failed to persuade me, and the Opposition generally, I think, that there is any case for wasting time and money in establishing this body if, in fact, the question of how much is to be allocated to the different institutions is still to be a matter concerning his Department.
The function of his Department as envisaged, and as it was envisaged by the Commission on Higher Education in the evidence given and the report put forward, and in the discussions which have taken place since on this subject, would be to decide whether the total sum sought by An tÚdarás after consultation with the universities was reasonable in relation to the requirements of the universities as put forward to An tÚdarás and as interpreted by it. If the total sum was thought to be reasonable it would be up to the Department to get the money from the Department of Finance, to get it voted and the question of how then it was to be used was a matter for An tÚdarás. If his Department takes the view that An tÚdarás has not made a good case, that the total sum required by An tÚdarás is more than is necessary to maintain and expand university education to the standard required in this country, then the Minister would be perfectly entitled to recommend a smaller sum to the Department of Finance and An tÚdarás would have to decide how to make do with that and where to impose the cuts necessitated by his failure and the failure of his successor to recommend the total sum required.
There is in that approach no room for the Department playing a role in deciding how much is to go to which institution. It is precisely because of the undesirability of that, because of the unhappy situation that has arisen through the exercise of that power by the Minister's Department that this Bill is here. The only function of this Bill is to get away from this earmarking to different institutions by his Department and it is inconceivable that having gone to the trouble of introducing this Bill and putting so much time into it, the time should turn out to be wasted by virtue of the Minister's insistence on this provision which makes nonsense of the Bill and really does make me feel that we have been wasting a lot of time if this goes through in this form.
I can see that An tÚdarás may still perform some kind of useful semi-buffer function. The more buffers you have I suppose the better the autonomy will be protected but whether, in fact, the amount of buffering An tÚdarás will be able to perform in the situation the Minister envisages by the provision we are talking about now will really warrant the time and trouble involved in setting up this body may even be doubted once this whole question of the allocation of funds to different institutions remains with the Department. The Minister should have been firm. He should not have allowed himself to be persuaded by his advisers to leave this power in their hands. He has in this respect on this issue to date — one hopes for reform even at this late hour — not shown the grasp of the basic concept behind the Bill or the kind of firm attitude to any attempts by his advisers to hang on to power that a Minister should show in circumstances like these.
I am extremely unhappy about the provision as drafted and I would recommend to the Minister even at this stage to accept the amendment and get away from the concept of earmarking by his Department and leave An tÚdarás when set up to carry out this function.