Deputy Brian Lenihan is in possession.
Private Members' Business. - Private Educational Institutions Bill, 1997: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I wish to give the remainder of my time to Deputy Tom Kitt.
That is agreed.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Like other Dublin Deputies, I have first hand knowledge of the plight of the students caught up in this scandal. Many of them have outlined their experience to me and the reason I am contributing to the debate is to ensure action is taken on their behalf and on behalf of the other students in the advanced college of technology.
When Deputies raised this matter on the Order of Business last week all they got was stone faced silence from smug Ministers. I referred to the commitment in the programme, A Government of Renewal, to bring forward legislation to regulate private education to ensure proper educational standards, consumer protection and employee rights. Like many other commitments in that programme, this commitment is not worth the paper it is written on. I am convinced the Minister was not even aware of this commitment when I referred to it last week. If the Government had legislated for this area and introduced a licensing system similar to the one proposed by my party this scandal would not have arisen.
Why did a Fianna Fáil Minister not introduce it?
It is a terrible pity the Labour Party has not changed its tune. I wish the Deputies opposite realised they are in Government and have responsibilities. I am referring to the programme, A Government of Renewal, which was put together by Deputy Broughan's party, Democratic Left and Fine Gael.
The owners of the advanced college of technology have behaved in a scandalous manner and I want them pursued vigorously. It is clear from the lack of action to date and the tone of the Minister's comments last night that there is a bias against private colleges. This is probably for ideological reasons. I have spoken to students and their families who had to borrow up to £5,000 to further their education. I am not talking about an elite group; I am talking about 500 students.
The Minister should have given a serious response to the genuine comments of Members on this side of the House instead of making nonsensical remarks and referring to the White Paper on education, the NCEA, Teastas and a series of programmes and procedures.
She has done more than any Fianna Fáil Minister for Education.
Her reaction was disgraceful.
Fianna Fáil's record in office is disgraceful.
I am talking about students with real problems who are studying computer programming, film, journalism and graphics. All they want is an opportunity to finish their courses in this college or, if this is not possible, in another college such as Griffith College. The Minister's response was disgraceful in that it referred to the Government's great plans in terms of the White Paper on Education, the NCEA and other proposals but did not deal with the real issues involved in this debate.
The Bill proposes that the Minister should underwrite the examinership of the college. She attacked the Bill and compared it to other legislation. Fianna Fáil has always acknowledged that some of its Private Members' legislation is not perfect but I assure the Minister this Bill is very focused. It proposes that the Minister should make provision for the regulation of private educational institutions, a licence should be required for the operation of a private college and financial security should be provided for the owners. It also proposes the introduction of powers of inspection, an effective monitoring system and a financial bonding system and makes provision for a private students' protection fund.
The Minister has not regulated the private colleges sector. On that basis alone, she is responsible and must be held accountable. Students have borrowed large sums to further their education so that they can secure jobs. Some students have already lined up jobs with potential employers. Instead of attacking the Fianna Fáil Bill the Minister should give answers to the issues of concern to these 500 students who find themselves in a very difficult position. Time is running out and if the Minister does not take immediate action and underwrite the examinership of this college many of these students will end up on the dole. If this happens the Minister will be responsible. I condemn the Minister for her nonsensical approach to the Bill and ask her to make a genuine response to the needs of these students.
I wish to share my time with Deputy McGrath.
That is agreed.
The Opposition once again has not done its homework. If it operated in the educational environment it would be in danger of failing its final exam.
It depends on who corrects it.
The people will carry out the invigilation in the joint general-presidential election which will be held either in the next few months or in November. When Deputy Martin was in Government he congratulated the Minister, Deputy Bhreathnach, on introducing free third level education in the face of strong opposition but when he found himself on the Opposition benches he lambasted her. This is the level of serious interest displayed by the Opposition in third level education.
He read the Fianna Fáil booklet on how to behave in Opposition.
The Deputies will know all about it after the general election.
The Deputy should not be so sure about that; she is aware of the saying about the one who laughs last.
As often happens, when Fianna Fáil Deputies need a Bill for Private Members' Business they rummage through the Library until they find one which might address a problem. In this case, as the Minister correctly stated last night, the Bill before us is almost a mirror image of the Transport (Tour Operators and Travel Agents) Act, 1982. Fianna Fáil is using that legislation as the basis for this Bill.
What is the Deputy's solution?
I express my sympathy for and solidarity with the students of the Advanced Technology College——
We want action, not sympathy.
——who have been put in a disastrous position by the owners of the college. The steps the Minister is taking will help secure their futures and set out parameters for the regulation of private education.
Before becoming a Member of this House I worked as a teacher and saw at first hand the stress imposed on students by the examination process. After the enormous stress of the leaving certificate, many students did not want to go through that struggle again. People who qualify for college, however, usually find that in addition to embarking on an interesting educational course and achieving their qualifications, they have an opportunity to avail of all the facilities college offers.
An important point the Opposition has ignored is that these students were in the middle of an academic year. Most colleges are currently processing applications for the 1997-8 academic year, but these students have been left high and dry in the middle of a term. It is the Government's task to address that problem. Obviously, it will be difficult at this stage to arrange transfers to other centres of education.
As the Minister pointed out yesterday, an application to have an examiner appointed to the ATC is currently before the courts. An examinership is clearly the appropriate legal response to this problem, but speed is of the essence. Those involved should proceed with urgency to ensure the students can return to their studies as soon as possible.
What will the Deputy do about it?
It is difficult not to be party political, even about a sensitive issue such as this, when the major Opposition party is clearly doing so for narrow political purposes.
What is the Deputy doing?
Unlike Deputy Kitt The Labour Party does not have any hang up about third level education. A Labour Minister, Deputy Bhreathnach, provided the first financial assistance, through tax relief in the Finance Acts of 1995 and 1996, for people studying in that sector.
The Labour Party wants to infiltrate education to promote itself.
That is hardly surprising because the party opposite held the education portfolio for 47 years.
We did not have to endure the world on our backs, like the boys in The Labour Party.
Deputy Kitt lamented the fact that no action has been taken, but why did Fianna Fáil not regulate private colleges in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s?
What about the 500 students who are on the streets?
What is the reason for these last minute tears over another collapse in this sector? The Minister has taken steps, through the NCEA, the NCVA and Teastas to put in place a national certification programme. She is the first Minister to do so. She also indicated in the White Paper and in the proposed education Bill how a widespread system of regulation might be introduced. Under the Finance Acts of 1995 and 1996, basic controls were introduced to regulate the third level private education sector. The Minister deserves much credit for the progress she has made in that area and for providing a basic framework.
I welcome the publication last January of the first Teastas report which recommended a universal set of national qualification standards across the third level sector. The formulation of minimum standards to be applied across the board is crucial if the private sector is to develop in the future. Some Deputies made the point in yesterday's debate that the private sector will expand because the State sector does not have the capacity to meet the demand. Most teachers know the majority of students want to go on to third level education, either in the public or private sector. Despite the additional third level places provided by the Minister, Deputy Bhreathnach, in the public sector, this demand for private sector third level places is a reality. It is important that the private sector is not seen as a yellow pack alternative to publicly funded education. That can be assured through rigorous and transparent enforcement of academic standards along the lines upon which the Minister has now embarked.
What about the 500 students? The Deputy has hardly mentioned them, other than offering them sympathy.
I outlined the steps being taken——
Backward steps.
——to ensure, through the courts system and the work of the Minister, they can continue their courses.
That is a cop-out.
The Minister will not even talk to them.
The Bill before us is deeply flawed. Little consideration has been given to the problems faced by the tourism and transport industries, the legislation from which this Bill was lifted.
This Bill has nothing to do with transport.
Deputy Martin wailed this morning over the government's attack on the Church's handling of education.
The Deputy obviously did not read the paper.
We are working hand in hand with parents, staff and the trustees, and progress has been made. Fianna Fáil is demanding that every privately run school in the State be licensed. There has never been a more vicious attack on the private education institutions.
We are talking about private third level institutions.
Fianna Fáil has achieved the direct opposite of what it intended. I welcome the steps taken by the Minister and I hope these students will be in a position to complete their education as soon as possible.
I thank the Opposition for providing us with an opportunity to discuss the regulation of private education. I compliment Deputy Martin on bringing forward the Bill, which is opportune. I am aware of the difficulties involved in bringing forward a Bill to regulate private education. It is no mean achievement to produce a Bill of such complexity and bring it before the House. Unfortunately, many of the difficulties in private education are not addressed in the Bill, which contains a number of fundamental flaws. For that reason, the Government cannot accept the Bill.
I am extremely sad for the 500 students who attended the Advanced College of Technology which has closed in mid-term. That is a tremendous blow to them and I understand also the difficulty it poses for their parents. Many parents have made sacrifices to send their children to this college. The fees were not cheap and, having put two children through third level education, I realise how expensive that can be. I can understand the tremendous difficulties those parents face. Even if they have all the money in the world and can afford to lose that amount of money, the blow to the students and to their parents of being cut off in midstream is enormous. The realisation that their college has gone up in smoke and that the work they have put in up to now may well be wasted is a terrible experience for any young person.
I am confident the combination of court action and the action being taken by the Minister for Education will result in something being done. This has been referred to the examiner and the courts. Initially the courts have 21 days to come to a decision, and that can be extended. Because the students have referred it to the courts, we have to await the outcome. That is generally a swift operation and I hope within a relatively short time we will know how things are to proceed.
The broader issue of private educational institutions has to be looked at. We have had private institutions in this State for decades, and we have failed to live up to our responsibility as legislators not only to provide regulation in the academic sense in those colleges but also to provide basic consumer protection for the young people and their parents who use those institutions.
Not too long ago a private company operating in Cork Airport ran a training course for pilots. The students, mainly young men, paid enormous fees to train and expected they would come through and get good jobs as pilots. Regrettably that company folded up. Deputy Coughlan will recall that happened while Fianna Fáil was in Government and, to the best of my recollection, no rescue package was put together. At that stage the signals should have been heeded. It involves the same principle. A private training course was set up. Students paid their money into it, and the company running the course went bust.
That is why it was in the programme for Government.
That is correct. I have no difficulty with that. It is in the programme for Government. It should be regulated. In fairness, that programme has been in operation just over two years. I hope most, if not all, of the material in the programme for Government will be covered. However, there are some items that may not be covered. The Education Bill currently under discussion is a major work, and I am confident it will be completed. I am confident also, having taken part in the debate initiated by Fianna Fáil, this process of regulating the private colleges can be more quickly progressed. Parents who have a child or children in second level education are aware of the opportunities and the courses in colleges and universities and want to do the best they can for their children. If their child's expectations are not fulfilled when the leaving certificate results come out and the various offers are made by the universities and colleges, parents may turn to a college about which they have seen a glossy brochure without being too aware whether it is a private college. Often they pay out money without being sure of the outcome because they want what is best for their children. In most cases what they get is worthwhile but in some cases it is not. I can think of courses for which students pay substantial sums of money to become, for example, trainee nurses. They feel if they do a pre-nursing course they are almost certain to be accepted in one of the nursing colleges, but that is not the case and, unfortunately, some naive parents pay out money which may be wasted.
We have the opportunity now, and there is an onus on us, to produce legislation to regularise colleges. We must control private education not just by introducing a bonding system as suggested in the Bill, but also by regulating for the academic standards of those colleges. It is crucial that the consumer should get what he or she wants and that there should be protection and standards relating to it. How many of those private colleges have courses where the degrees are awarded not by Irish universities but by British universities? Why do they bypass the fine universities we have here and go to universities outside the State? Is that necessary, and should it be allowed?
There is no choice.
Is it the best way forward? Do we need to regularise it and impose the standards we think should be in place? It is important that we should do so.
I am conscious that I am sharing time with Deputy Eric Byrne, so I will leave it at that.
I thank my colleague for those extra minutes.
This is a very important issue. I thank Fianna Fáil for giving us the opportunity to discuss it. It is important that I articulate my sense of sadness for the parents and students who were so sadly let down by what was a private unbonded educational institution.
What is wrong with it being private?
On the one hand we have vulnerable young people and their parents striving to do the best they can for their children. On the other we have private business people seeing an opening in the market and treating it as one would treat the development of a corner grocery shop which can be opened as a business enterprise and closed the next morning. That is not good enough, and that is what is wrong.
Is it because they are private the Government will not bail them out?
Here we have people attempting to achieve an educational standard that will stand to them when they seek employment in the very competitive employment market.
What are you doing for them?
It is quite outrageous that Deputy Ahern should suggest that all is well in private education.
That is why we are introducing legislation.
I am recording my sadness for the students who have suddenly found their educational careers interrupted because a business person could not guarantee continuity of educational training. It is unique that an educational institution should collapse, as this one did. My heart goes out to the parents of the young students involved——
What will the Deputy do for them?
——particularly since they are the people, in the main, who financed the fees, some of which were very high. I understand that some students had to pay up to £3,000. The Minister will be aware of the concerns of those people because I contacted her about constituents of mine who were enrolled in the college that collapsed. We must be careful not to allow businessmen to view the provision of a service as vital as education as though it were an investment, as in the case of a shop, and to collapse the business because of incompetence or lack of funds.
We must address this tragedy — I am sure the Minister intends to do so — to ensure it does not happen in the future. Constituents of mine attended the Advanced Technology College and many attend for example, the Portobello College and the massive complex on the south Circular Road, Griffith College. I am not suggesting those colleges are vulnerable, but they are private and in light of what happened with the Advanced Technology College, the same could happen with them. As a State, we have no influence over the financial arrangements made by those colleges.
That is what we are trying to achieve.
I welcome the opportunity to debate education in the private third level sector, a sector with which everybody is familiar, which is growing rapidly and is likely to grow further as the scramble for third level places intensifies. Regulation is essential if students at these colleges are to be guaranteed proper education provision, academic continuity and financial security in the event of the colleges encountering financial difficulties. Unfortunately, in drafting this Bill Fianna Fáil saw fit to concentrate solely on the financial aspects, presumably mindful of the recent difficulties encountered by the students attending the Advanced Technology College. There are pitfalls involved in drafting legislation, as Fianna Fáil did on this occasion, with one eye on the latest headlines or, as is reflected in this Private Members' Bill, in an attempt to grab headlines.
The Deputy would not know how to do that.
Students enrolling in private colleges must be protected in the event of an institution running into financial difficulties. We are not simply dealing with providers of goods and services whose customers can be protected by a simple bond, as in the case of a person who books a flight to Tenerife. In this context, the White Paper on Education recognises clearly the complexities involved. It proposes controlled regulations which would guarantee the academic integrity and quality of courses and qualifications offered, which is of vital importance. There is no point in private colleges mushrooming numerically, sucking in more and more students unless the students have adequate recognised certificates or degrees on leaving the college. The White Paper recognised the importance of prescribing institutional norms in regard to, for instance, staff qualifications, support services, teaching and research balance, entry standards and the balance of course provision. It pointed out that it is important to protect the financial investment of students and their parents.
Those three planks must underpin legislation governing private colleges. The Fianna Fáil Bill, unfortunately, relies on only one plank, completely ignoring educational standards. The Bill stipulates that the Minister shall refuse a licence to a private college if she is not satisfied that "the financial, business and organisational resources of the person and any financial arrangements made by him, or to be made by him, are adequate for discharging the actual and potential obligations in respect of the activities in which he is engaged". It is important that private colleges should be solvent and able to offer security to students, but it is equally important, and perhaps more so, that they should offer a proper academic service and that students graduating from such colleges should not find themselves at an educational disadvantage when entering the labour market.
There is nothing as dishonest as offering young people, who failed in their first choice of institution, seductive courses with glossy brochures, extracting their funds and even if the institution is financially sound, at the end of their course presenting them with a certificate or document which is surpassed by those of students from colleges with recognised teaching standards, degree courses and certificates. Those students leave college in the full expectation that they have achieved their ultimate goal, a proper education, but are disappointed when they seek a job in the competitive market to find that their qualification is not up to standard.
Private colleges are plugging a gap which the State is unable to fill. The demand for third level courses, particularly in technical fields, is growing rapidly and many students find their only option is to go to the UK or to attend a private college. The private college sector is market-led and those scrambling to enter the market range from excellent institutions with high academic standards to fly-by-night enterprises which see an opportunity for the quick buck. In the absence of proper regulation, the worst colleges will be weeded out only by a natural process of attrition, leaving their students high and dry not only academically but financially. Although a number of private commercial colleges have been designated under the National Council for Education Awards Act, 1979, many others have chosen to have their courses validated by educational agencies outside the State. There are no arrangements to ensure consistency and rigour in appraising the quality of such courses.
The first step towards proper regulation has been undertaken with the establishment of Teastas, the National Certification Authority. There is a commitment in the White Paper to provide appropriate legislative underpinning for the procedures to be implemented by Teastas. In regard to financial bonding and consumer protection, I understand the Department has already entered discussions with Teastas in this regard and the more reputable private colleges have given considerable thought to this matter. The framework set out in the White Paper, once implemented, will provide comprehensive safeguards for students and their parents, which is their entitlement.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Andrews and Coughlan.
Carlow-Kilkenny): Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the opportunity to debate this important Bill. Last night the Minister criticised it trenchantly and said it is flawed, simplistic, inadequate and no more than a knee jerk reaction to the current crisis. That is rich coming from a Minister who this evening guillotined a Bill to which 315 amendments were tabled on Committee Stage and more than 140 on Report Stage. She should at least admit that a Bill going through the House has the potential of being amended substantially if it is flawed. The Minister should accept the Bill represents a genuine attempt to deal with the collapse of the Advanced Technology College. She has refused to take the initiative on the matter and has not introduced legislative proposals or indicated a willingness to amend the Bill introduced by Fianna Fáil. Her bland promises to examine the position are not sufficient because she has not indicated when we can expect action.
The collapse of the Advanced Technology College left some 500 students stranded in the middle of courses for which they and their parents had paid sizeable sums of money. In some cases parents borrowed substantial sums of money to enable their children take the courses. I met the group representing the students, parents and staff of the college. I do not believe the Minister has done likewise. It is important she meets that group. The students are devastated by what has happened. I spoke to an extremely distressed mother whose son is only three months away from achieving his City & Guilds qualification for which he had worked long and hard. What will he do now? Is he likely to achieve any benefit from his years of study? The Minister should take account of the awful trauma experienced by these young people. They do not believe she cares.
The collapse of the college has also created considerable uncertainty for students in other private educational institutions. There has been major growth in this sector of the education system in recent years. Those institutions bridge a gap, particularly in the technology field, and new language colleges, which are an important source of foreign earnings, are developing every year. There has been an enormous increase in the number of students taking courses at privately owned colleges and they are entitled to some type of guarantee that they can complete their courses. It is remarkable that a young person going on a continental holiday is entitled to the protection of a bonding system, but the same person attending a course at a private educational institution is not.
The Minister is a great advocate of State control and interference. She brought the Universities Bill before the House which, in its original form, sought to effect drastic reductions in the autonomy traditionally enjoyed by the universities. The object was to increase ministerial and State control and this also applies to the Education Bill which she introduced recently. A new network of regional education boards is to be created, a totally unnecessary layer of bureaucracy for which there is no demand from any section of the education system. That Bill will also undermine the pluralist nature of the system. It attacks the power of patrons to maintain the traditional ethos of their schools and gives the Minister for Education unprecedented control over the running of all schools.
As the Minister obviously believes in State control and interference, it is remarkable that she has shown such little appetite for State involvement in the collapse of the Advanced Technology College. Nobody is asking her to take over the institution or to involve her Department in the running of that college or any other private education establishment. She is simply being asked to put in place an appropriate regulatory framework for private colleges.
There is a world of difference between the travel trade and education. Nonetheless, if it were possible for the then Government to put in place a bonding system for holidaymakers, surely it should be possible for the Minister for Education to devise a similar system for educational institutions. The bonding system for the travel trade has worked well and something similar is required in the education field, even if the needs are not the same.
We know from students that getting their money back is not their primary concern. They want a chance to complete their courses in the same establishment or somewhere similar and to go on to secure the relevant qualification. Surely a bonding system could be designed to satisfy those requirements. It is unique that 85 per cent of students who qualify from the Advanced Technology College get jobs immediately after qualifying. That should be admired.
I wish the Minister would signal more clearly whether the creation of a system is really her objective. If so, she should indicate when we might reasonably expect the system to be put in place. It is a sham to claim the framework for it is set out in the White Paper because obviously it was not examined properly. I hope my ears were deceiving me when I heard Deputy Byrne say he had some advance knowledge of difficulties in the Advanced Technology College. If that is the case and he brought it to the Minister's attention she is culpable in this matter and must find a solution for the students.
I have pleasure supporting the Bill. While it might be a reaction to what has happened, is it not better to have reaction and legislation rather than inaction?
Like previous speakers who support this legislation, I met parents of the students in my clinic in the Port View Hotel, Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire, last Saturday week. Since then I have received calls in my constituency from Blackrock and Ballybrack. I met the students outside the House when they stormed, in a quiet and civilised manner, the barricades of hope which are alleged to exist in here, but that hope evaporated like a puff of smoke.
It is tragic that the Minister will not meet the Merrion Square 500. It is understandable why young people have such a poor perception of Leinster House and politicians. When the students ask me what I can do to resolve the matter, I have to tell them that in Opposition I can do little more than highlight the position. That is what we are doing this evening and what we have done during the past few weeks. I explain to them that we are engaging in a futile and rhetorical exercise and that the Opposition cannot deliver on this matter. The only people who can deliver are those in power, the Fine Gael Party, Democratic Left, and the Labour Party. It was nauseating to listen to Deputy Eric Byrne. I thought Democratic Left represented the worker, the disenfranchised, people below the poverty line and those in situations similar to that experienced by the students at the Advanced Technology College.
An opportunity arises with every disaster and the same applies to the collapse of the Advanced Technology College, the closure of which has been a nightmare for students and their parents. As examination time approaches, hundreds of students find themselves high and dry, unsure of what the future holds and whether they will be able to complete their courses. Thousands of pounds in fees have gone down the drain. The owners of the college have behaved in a reckless, cavalier fashion, perpetrating a serious deception on the students.
There is a tradition in this House that Members from the same constituency, regardless of political parties, do not criticise their opposition. I do not want to fall into that trap. The Minister is being less than considerate to these students. She is a modern day Marie Antoinette who told the students not to bother her and that if there was no bread, they should eat cake. The Minister has shown that she is out of touch and that she lacks sensitivity. She has displayed an arrogance, which I did not think existed, by refusing to meet the students.
The Labour Party has always claimed to be a keen advocate of social consensus, which means a willingness to meet those in difficulty or those with proposals, whether trade unionists, employers or interest groups. Fianna Fáil has always agreed to meet groups under the social consensus banner, even in the most difficult times. However, the Minister is showing no respect for this custom. She has rejected all calls in the House to meet the students, their parents or any representative of the 500 students. We are not only talking about 500 students but about 500 families — fathers, mothers and guardians who have contributed to the fees. It is little wonder the profession of politics is held in low regard by young people. Hundreds of young men and women have been tossed out of their classrooms and on to the streets through no fault of their own. Yet the Minister, who is supposed to be in charge of education, has taken no interest in their plight.
Fianna Fáil has offered to help the Minister for Education with this Private Members' Bill which charts a way forward. We do not suggest that the Bill has all the answers but it is a ray of hope in a dark situation. However, the Minister has once again refused to acknowledge that there is a problem.
We must use this opportunity to put a bonding system in place for private colleges. At present, there is a growing and thriving private education sector which has developed a niche and is providing a good quality of education. The principal of the colleges mentioned by Deputy Eric Byrne is a man of the highest integrity. I have no doubts about the financial basis upon which those colleges operate. They give a high standard of education and to include them in this debate is dangerous and unsatisfactory.
The growth in the private sector must be regulated and that is what this Bill seeks to do. There is a necessity to bond private colleges. Bonding is a common feature of most other sectors. If, for example, those students were holiday makers and the travel company to which they had paid money went broke, they would be refunded. People who invested money with a stockbroker would be compensated or if a lawyer ran away with their money, they would be refunded. Even the investment intermediary business has professional indemnity insurance regulations. The education sector must move with the times. Bonding or professional indemnity insurance must become the norm.
The private education sector has been to the forefront in fighting for regulations. After the collapse of Newman College, a group of private colleges recognised the need for regulations and put proposals to the Minister, which however, have not surfaced since. They remain somewhere in the bowels of the Department of Education and the Minister attaches no priority to them.
I call on the Minister to finally recognise her role and duty in this matter. She has an obligation to ensure that the academic careers of these students are salvaged. She should ensure that an examinership is viable and recognise that the private college sector is here to stay and must be regulated.
I am a long serving Member of this House and it is unprecedented that no one has met the parents and guardians of this group of young men and women. Is it too much to ask that someone meets three or four representatives of these 500 students even if it is to tell them that the Minister can do nothing about it and that the Government is helpless to resolve the plight of the college authorities? It would be good manners to do this, so I strongly urge the Minister to meet them.
I welcome the efforts by Fianna Fáil's education spokesman, which have been supported by the Progressive Democrats, to find a solution to this serious problem. Unfortunately, however, this effort is being met with the type of stonewall politics which I thought were anathema to the Labour Party, whatever about Fine Gael and Democratic Left. I thought it was a conscientious, democratic party which understood the people's needs. We are expected to believe that we are riding the Celtic tiger and that the economy has never been better. However, the Government must tackle the social deprivation, into which these students have fallen, with the strongest possible will.
Ba mhaith liom comhgairdeas a ghabhail do mo chomhtheactaí, Micheál Martin, as ucht an mBille seo a chur ós ár gcomhair anocht agus aréir. Molaim an mBille mar sílim gur fadhb é ní amháin sa coláiste faoi mar atáimid ag caint ach sna foreas oidheachas príomháideach eile na tíre.
I commend my colleague, Deputy Martin, for introducing this legislation although I am disappointed at the reaction from some members of the Government. It is unfair and untrue to say this is political expediency or a knee-jerk reaction to the problem. Over the past two years we have had lessons from the Minister for Education on what she has done for education. We received another nauseating history lesson on her never ending record of what she has done for education but nothing has been done about this specific matter for the 500 students, their parents and the teachers of the Advanced Technology College.
The introduction of this Private Members' Bill shows our concerns in regard to the regulation of private education. I take umbrage with the Minister who said yesterday that the Bill was too simplistic. She felt the issues were complex and the framing of appropriate legislation would have to take into consideration constitutional provisions, such as the right to carry on business in a private and commercial capacity, the rights of consumers to protection and the rights of students to quality education. Nobody on this side of the House has a problem with that. The Minister feels that the Bill is flawed and ignores many of the issues outlined but claims that the Government, through the programme for Government and the commitment in the White Paper on Education, is committed to moving forward on these fronts. That might be so but by accepting this Bill we could continue pursuing these goals.
The Minister stated that "the complexity of the issues and the risk of getting it wrong if we rush to legislate is borne out by the Bill in which there is serious confusion as to the intended target of its provisions." I would have to agree with the spokesperson for the Progressive Democrats about the House having only two more hours to discuss the Education Bill. The Minister stated that she introduced the first Education Bill since 1908. That is true but she must accept hundreds of amendments to the Government's fatally flawed Universities Bill, 1996 and I feel that will be repeated with the Education Bill, which is also fatally flawed. I cannot see why she cannot be big enough to accept the basis and principles of this Bill and then work with us on Committee Stage to tease out her concerns.
With the great swell of desire to be involved in third level, further and post leaving certificate education, there is a problem in that there are not enough places. I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Currie, is present because he would appreciate the problems which arose in Northern Ireland. Many colleges and universities were built there and they now rely on southern students to fill the places. That may be the case here in a couple of years and I cannot see why we do not allow the private institutions to deal with this overflow.
If students must pay fees there should be a bonding system, although I know there are tax incentives for some. I agree that validation is necessary. Students of the private institutions should have the ability to progress to other third level colleges, such as the Dublin Institute of Technology or universities, and transfer from a certificate course to a diploma course and on to degree and masters courses, etc. This Bill does not provide for that. It deals specifically with the financial problems and bonding, but we should also provide for validation and allow for progression.
The spokesperson for Democratic Left said that many of these private third level institutions were fly by night colleges. I do not know the specifics with regard to the Advanced Technology College but I know of the great reputation of many of the private colleges and that the Advanced Technology College was validated by City and Guilds. Only for City and Guilds, a highly commendable validating organisation which is recognised by the Department of Education, many of the craft courses, in particular those relating to tourism, catering, word processing, shorthand typing, etc., would not have been validated.
Many of the 500 students of the Advanced Technology College are not from Dublin. A few people rang me from County Donegal because they were very concerned about what would happen to these students whose examinations are only three months away. It is a very serious situation. For this House to leave 500 young people high and dry this year is really a terrible crime, regardless of one's political persuasion. About £150,000 would be needed to get over this crisis. The students should be allowed to complete their studies and there would be more time to allow them to transfer to other colleges or universities. People have paid fees in good faith and they are in a quandary. I am sure the Minister realises it is difficult enough to prepare for examinations as Easter approaches but it is frightening that one will not receive proper instruction to prepare for the examinations. The sum of £150,000 is not a great deal of money as a proportion of the Education budget to overcome this crisis and allow these young people to finish their year of study.
Mention was made of other colleges which collapsed. It is incumbent on us to ensure that this does not happen again. One of the criticisms over the years has been that we allow things to happen, get over one crisis and forget it because there is another crisis on the horizon and we have not really addressed the first. It is important that we introduce regulations and a system of bonding and that the Department of Education assume the role of inspectorate. The courses must be validated.
It has been said that some of the courses are not recognised by the NCEA/NCVA, City and Guilds or some of the other validating bodies and I would have serious concerns about that. Many universities and third level institutions also provide courses which are not validated. It is important that young people and parents ensure that the courses they choose are validated.
The points system is very difficult on students, particularly when they must cram before the leaving certificate. If a student is very young, a private college can be of benefit in that it helps them mature and develop. It is important that people are aware of what they may face, but that does not get away from the fact that there is a crisis. There are 500 young people in limbo. Will the Minister reconsider, meet the parents and students and work with them to ensure the matter is rectified? Will she accept this legislation even if she must amend it and allow progress with a further education Bill so that we can ensure that private third level institutions are bonded and that we will not have to come back here to deal with a similar crisis?
During the debate on this Bill Opposition members made it clear the main impetus for it is the financial difficulties experienced by the Advanced Technology College. Like my colleague, the Minister for Education, and Deputies on all sides of this House, I sympathise with students and parents involved. However, even the Opposition recognised this Bill will have no effect on the plight of the students of that college. There are statutory mechanisms for companies experiencing financial difficulties and these mechanisms are being availed of by the students in question.
The present position in the Advanced Technology College is that the question of appointing an interim examiner will be considered by the High Court tomorrow, followed by a full hearing of the petition for an examiner on 21 March next. If appointed, the examiner will have an opportunity to put together a rescue package which would in turn be adjudicated upon by its creditors, shareholders and the court. The examiner will also be required to form a view as to the manner in which the company conducted its affairs and on whether any question of negligent trading arises. Therefore, the statutory procedures for private commercial colleges facing financial difficulties are already being availed of.
Deputy Lenihan accused the Minister of not developing a positive strategy to deal with private colleges. That is not true. The Government is committed to developing an appropriate regulatory framework for private colleges, as set out in the programme, A Government of Renewal. Much of the work done in developing this framework was outlined earlier. It includes the designation of a number of private colleges under the National Council for Educational Awards Act, 1979; the work of the National Council for Vocational Awards in developing a comprehensive national certification and assessment system for a wide range of vocational programmes; the work on the development of a national qualifications framework being progressed by Teastas, the Irish National Certification Authority, the first report of Teastas published in January 1997 is currently under detailed consideration; and the formulation and publication of codes of standards to which institutions must adhere to be eligible for tax relief.
Our approach to the question of regulating private colleges is clearly set out in the White Paper, Charting Our Education Future, which outlines how new control procedures will be put in place in private commercial colleges offering third level programmes which seek State certification.
Deputy Lenihan suggested that consumer protection was not an issue that arises in this Bill. Consumer protection should be an issue in the regulation of private commercial colleges. The approach being adopted by this side of the House is a dual one which will ensure the quality of provision in private colleges seeking State certification and provide for adequate consumer protection. While important in itself, it is not enough to require the protection of students' financial investment. Students' investment is not just a financial one but one of time invested en route to a desired qualification. The Higher Education Colleges Association which represents private colleges recognises that proper academic bonding would reduce the cost of financial bonding. We need to ensure the quality of courses and facilities on offer and the provision of appropriately qualified professional, technical and support staff. This is a complex task and cannot be addressed adequately in this Bill which is confused in the intended targets of its provision and over simplistic in so far as it attempts to apply a framework designed for one industry to education providers, without recognising the additional needs of students. There is an overriding importance of ensuring that the final framework introduced is cost effective and affordable.
There are no quick fix solutions and it is opportunistic of the Opposition to pretend this Bill represents a comprehensive response to students' concerns. Only by working in co-operation with the private colleges to establish a system of approval for institutions seeking State certification, including issues in relation to financial and academic bonding, can genuine protection for students be achieved.
I am disappointed at the tone and content of the Government's response to this private Members' Bill and to the plight of the 500 students who attended the Advanced Technology College. This Bill is not opportunistic and I resent the use of that term. We have tried to use all the mechanisms available in this House to raise the issue of the plight of those students. We have endeavoured to persuade and force the Government to act in this case. It is a scandal and somewhat unbelievable that a Government would be so heartless in addressing the plight of those students.
Last night the Minister for Education tried to give the impression she had met the students, but when pressed by Deputy Lenihan as to whether she had met the group delegated by the student, parent and staff body she had to admit she had not. When we raised this issue last week on a number of occasions on the Order of Business we saw the spectacle of the Tánaiste gesticulating to the Minister for Education about meeting the students, but she nodded her head firmly to indicate no. That is the reality of the Government's response to these students. We pointed out, and the Minister acknowledged as much yesterday, that these students are not rich. Many of them have endured considerable financial hardship to secure their college places and are doing part-time work to pay for their fees.
This Bill is intended to realise a Government objective in its programme, A Government of Renewal, that legislation on the protection of consumer rights would be forthcoming, particularly in regard to the rights of students and staff of third level private colleges. That commitment was given by the Government more than two and a half years ago and has not been implemented. Yesterday evening the Minister gave us a rehash of the provisions in the third level sector and what Teastas and the NCEA are doing. It was a boring and repetitive speech that gave us information we already had.
The core issue in this Bill is the financial bonding of third level institutions. The Minister tried to use a legal argument to attack the Bill, but Deputy Lenihan's response immediately following her speech put paid to that tactic. He demonstrated the Bill is legally sound, has good precedents and is one the Government could accept. Its core principle is that those who pay for a service provided by an institution should have some guarantees and some structures should be put in place whereby, if the provider of a service is no longer in business a fund will guarantee the ongoing provision of that service. The Bill aims to ensure a protection fund and bonding arrangement will be put in place for third level private colleges whereby, if a college collapses the students concerned could complete their courses. That is the fundamental issue. The fundamental objective of most students of the Advanced Technology College is to complete their course. That is all they want. The staff are willing to help the students and facilitate that process.
The students have petitioned the High and Supreme Courts to seek the appointment of an examiner to the college. The Minister referred to this matter yesterday as if it could be resolved by that process. The difficulty will be that the examiner will require money to enable him or her to maintain the college as a going concern and allow students complete their courses. That is the issue and the Government should provide that money. In tandem with this legislation, it should create a new situation in terms of private third level colleges where licences must be issued and financial bonding put in place. In the aftermath of the enactment of the legislation and the securing of bonding arrangements, the Government will have a strong argument for not creating any further precedents in the context of bailing people out.
I understand that a sum of £150,000 could make the difference in enabling these 500 students to complete their courses. Past Governments spent millions of pounds bailing out banks and large insurance corporations. Why is this Administration so reluctant to allow 500 students to complete their courses? Surely the Government can display some humanity in this situation. The Government has a moral obligation because it has been negligent in not regulating this sector. It has not put in place regulations to ensure financial bonding arrangements in private third level colleges. That is the reality.
The State has a certain moral obligation to come to the assistance of the students in question, given that the majority of them attended the Advanced Technology College because of the insufficient number of places available in the State's third level colleges, particularly in the specialist areas of cinematography, film, etc. The demand for places in such areas is enormous and the Dún Laoghaire College of Art and Design is not able to accommodate the numbers who apply for cinematography courses. The number of places on offer is small. Therefore, students are obliged to attend private third level colleges and educational institutions in the United Kingdom. Approximately 6,000 to 7,000 Irish students are attending universities in the UK because they cannot obtain places in Irish universities or regional technical colleges.
Many of the students who attended the ATC would dearly love to attend a State college. They were prevented from doing so because of the combination of an insufficiency of places and the demographic structure which caused an increase in those attending post-primary education and impacted on the numbers applying for third level courses. We must understand the motivation which encouraged students to attend this college. I believe the Government is of the view that the sons and daughters of well heeled, middle class, wealthy people attended this college and it is their tough luck that it collapsed because they can afford the expense involved. Perhaps that is not the view of Deputy Currie's party but I suspect it is the view of the Labour Party. Essentially, we are being told "let them eat cake, they can look after themselves". That is not the case.
I met the group concerned and communicated with a number of students. It is very traumatic for young people to be within an agonising three months of reaching the end of their degree, diploma or certificate courses and, because of the collapse of the company running the college, they are not now in a position to complete those courses. More alarming is the fact that they are not in a position to receive certification, which is essential as a passport to the employment market and the workplace.
My only concern in this debate is that the Oireachtas be seen to make a simple humanitarian response to the plight of the students who attended this college. If our sons and daughters were involved, we would all want action to be taken. That is the yardstick by which this matter should be measured. We should endeavour to understand the human emotions involved and not allow a situation to develop where these students will be obliged to attend another college next year and pay a further £4,000 or £5,000 in fees.
The Government had numerous warning signs about the collapse of the Advanced Technology College. Other institutions have collapsed such as Newman College, Act and an American-owned college in County Cork involved in training airline pilots where students lost thousands of pounds. There are precedents and there is a clear argument that negligence occurred in terms of providing a legislative framework to ensure financial bonding.
Earlier I referred to the lack of places in third level colleges and many of those on offer in the Advanced Technology College involved students studying computer science. Last week, the Ministers for Enterprise and Employment and Education, Deputies Richard Bruton and Bhreathnach, announced a series of panic measures to bring additional graduates on stream as quickly as possible. Approximately 500 graduates with primary degrees have been placed on one-year conversion courses to study computer science. Some of the heads of the universities have indicated they are unhappy about certain aspects of this process, particularly in respect of quality, etc.
Students studying computer science in the Advanced Technology College would have dearly loved to secure a place on a computer science course in any of the universities or regional technical colleges but they could not because the places were not made available during the past two to three years. That represents scandalous neglect and was a strategic mistake. The Oireachtas should take some action in respect of these students.
Does the Deputy have the support of his party colleagues in respect of this Bill?
Yes.
He should look behind him.
I have their absolute support.
Not even the Progressive Democrats support this legislation.
My colleagues will be present to vote in support of the Bill.
We shall see how many of them make an appearance.
This matter is not a party political issue, it involves 500 students. I am not a native of Dublin and there is no election kudos for me in introducing the legislation. I am appalled and angry that the Government and the Minister for Education could callously ignore these students and treat them with contempt.
The Deputy's colleagues do not share his anger.
My colleagues went out of their way to meet the students and discuss ways to resolve this matter without the Government's help.
It is almost unique that the Deputy should speak alone without the support of any of his colleagues.
No, it is not. I enjoy the full confidence of my party on this issue. The degree of anger was such that I was asked to introduce this legislation.
Where is their enthusiasm and anger?
That is what motivated my party to use its Private Members' time to have this matter debated. The Government would not make time available for such a debate. It is a shame that the Minister of State is playing politics. I would like him to make a commitment to the students to rescue them from their plight. It says much about the arrogance of the Government that it believes it can ignore the plight of 500 students.
The Deputy's colleagues are also ignoring it. There are more Members present on this side of the House than on the benches opposite.
That is a tremendous argument. With due respect, the students would prefer effective action from the Government rather than the Mickey Mouse comments and playacting in which the Minister of State is engaging.
The Deputy is engaging in tomfoolery of his own.
I am not. We produced a Bill——
That is what the Deputy is doing.
The Minister of State has no cogent argument to advance or meaningful response to make to the students apart from hurling insults across the floor of the House, using language like tomfoolery and so on. What is required is a simple intervention by the Government, a hands-on approach. Why did not the Minister or her Minister of State meet the students concerned? We live in a democracy and the Government should meet those who elected them. Yet neither the Minister nor her Minister of State had the decency to meet the students concerned or seek to redress their difficulties.
——because we were not engaging in party political tactics.
We would have welcomed such intervention——
The Deputy is merely playing around.
I am not playing around.
Even the Deputy's own party recognises that to be the case.
My party has given time to debate this issue.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 54; Níl, 67.
Tá
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, David.
- Brennan, Matt.
- Brennan, Sémus.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burke, Raphael.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- Doherty, Seán.
- Ellis, John.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Fox, Mildred.
- Foxe, Tom.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Keaveney, Cecilia.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lawlor, Liam.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McDaid, James.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Morley, P.J.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- O'Keeffe, Ned.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Malley, Desmond.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- Power, Seán.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Woods, Michael.
Níl
- Ahearn, Theresa.
- Barry, Peter.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bhamjee, Moosajee.
- Bhreathnach, Niamh.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Bree, Declan.
- Broughan, Thomas.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burke, Liam.
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Donal.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Crowley, Frank.
- Currie, Austin.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Deasy, Austin.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Dukes, Alan.
- Durkan, Bernard.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Gallagher, Pat (Laoighis-Offaly).
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Harte, Paddy.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Higgins, Michael.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McDowell, Derek.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Owen, Nora.
- Pattison, Sémus.
- Penrose, William.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Upton, Pat.
- Walsh, Éamon.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies D. Ahern and Callely; Nil, Deputies J. Higgins and B. Fitzgerald.
Question declared lost.