Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 5 Dec 1957

Vol. 48 No. 12

Scholarship Exchange (Ireland and the United States of America) Bill, 1957—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Education (Mr. J. Lynch)

This Bill is intended to implement the agreement signed on 16th March, 1957, between this country and the United States of America. That agreement provided that a sum of £500,000 out of the American Counterpart Fund of £6,000,000 should be set aside to promote mutual understanding between the countries by wider exchange of knowledge and through educational contracts. I must say, as was said by the Minister for External Affairs in the Dáil, that the Government and the people of Ireland are very much indebted to the Government and people of the United States of America for this generous contribution and we hope that, through it, the closer contact that will be made between the peoples of the two countries, particularly in the educational field, will tend to strengthen the ties that exist between the two countries.

The Bill provides for the setting up of this special fund to be administered by a board known as An Bord Scoláireachtaí Cómalairte. The board will consist of seven persons, four to be Irish citizens nominated by the Minister for External Affairs, and three, citizens of the United States of America, to be nominated by the chief of the American Diplomatic Mission in this country. The chairman of the board will be one of those members nominated by the Minister for External Affairs; in other words, an Irish citizen.

The functions of the board will be as set out in Section 5, to provide for the financing of studies, research, instruction, teaching, lecturing and other educational activities of Irish citizens in America and of American citizens in this country.

The scheme will be operated in cooperation with the United States Board of Foreign Scholarships. In addition, the board will be required to set forth its estimated budget for one year commencing on 1st April of each year and will also be expected to set out its proposed programme for that period. The Minister may then, if he thinks proper, approve of that programme and budget for the ensuing year.

The board will be required, before 30th June of each year, to present its annual report to the Minister, which will be laid on the Table of each House of the Oireachtas. The board will meet at least once a quarter and Section 10 contains provisions for the absence of the chairman and the appointment of a deputy chairman for any particular meeting, and provisions in relation to the quorum. Any member of the board may be required to resign, by the Minister or by the Chief of the Diplomatic Mission of the United States, according as that particular member is nominated by one or the other. Membership of the board will last for two years, subject to that membership ending on 31st December of the second year next after the appointment of that member to the board; but he will be eligible for reappointment on the termination of his period of appointment.

The board will be required to invest so much of the fund as is over and above their normal requirements, in securities to be approved by the Minister for External Affairs. The board will also be in a position to reticula ceive gifts of money, endowments or otherwise, to add to its finances. The board is intended to be a permanent board, but naturally provisions have to be included in the Bill for its winding up.

The provisions of the Bill were very carefully considered between the two Governments before it appeared in draft and I would ask the House to accept the Bill in its entirety, as it appears before the House. In doing so, we can confidently expect that the exchange of persons of high academic standing between the two countries will strengthen the friendship and understanding which already exists. I am sure that Irish students of all branches of learning—arts, economics, agriculture and industry—will benefit greatly by the provisions of the Bill and by the moneys provided in the fund. The citizens of the United States will also benefit greatly by their coming to this country and learning what higher knowledge we have to offer; and by so doing, they will come to understand the Irish mentality and the Irish economy better. That will still further promote the friendly associations to which I have referred and which everyone knows exist at present.

Finally, I should like to express our very great thanks to the United States Government and people for their hospitality, as is evidenced by the provisions of the Bill.

Professor Stanford

Very briefly, I should like to associate the constitutency which I represent, the University of Dublin, with the Minister's expression of gratitude to the Government of the United States for financing this Bill. It is a very generous measure, indeed. It shows— and this is reassuring for persons like myself—a respect for learning and a respect for teaching. Recently, in the United States, there has been some censure of the people called "eggheads", the intellectuals of the country. We "eggheads" have been mildly perturbed by that. The practical measures of this Bill are a very clear and definite reply to all such foolish suspicions of the intellectual. The intellectual is not the be-all and end-all of any State or any country, but he has his part to play. I feel that in helping to build up the morale of intellectuals and educationists by a practical measure of this kind, the United States is doing something very worth while, indeed.

As the Minister says, it will foster and promote friendliness and understanding between the two countries. In a way, that is hardly necessary between Ireland and the United States; but it is strange how occasionally misunderstandings arise and, from it, unfriendliness may result. If the best educated people of our country are sent to America and others from America are sent back to us, that is one of the best ways of avoiding these misunderstandings at the higher levels. Although the relations between the two countries are very happy, they have to be safeguarded and this is one of the best ways of safeguarding them. I should also like to congratulate the Government on bringing this Bill in speedily and efficiently.

There is one matter of detail I should like to raise. The success of this Bill will depend entirely on the good working of the board. I do not think it would be fair to ask the Minister now—and he probably would not answer me, anyway—what the constitution of the board will be and what kind of people will be selected; but I would urge on him—and I know he has the matter very much at heart— that unless the board is fairminded, impartial and imbued with the highest ideals of education, this generous gesture may go sour, may fail. I know he will give serious consideration to the fact that this money must be spent on merit alone. There is always the danger of scholarships or awards of this kind being obtained by efficient lobbying. One of the things which is damaging this country to some extent is at times the success of that kind of lobbying. I urge on the Minister with great earnestness that he should see that this board is such as will give these awards only on merit, irrespective of any other consideration.

Naturally, if it were possible for a representative of my own university to be on the board, we would be very pleased. But that may not be possible because all educational institutions must be considered. Above all, we must prevent this Bill being misused; we must prevent inferior minds from profiting from this simply because they have the pull or the push behind them. If he can ensure that, this will be a very fine achievement, indeed, in educational matters between the two countries. I repeat that we are most grateful to the United States, and I congratulate the Minister on this fine Bill.

Professor Quinlan

I, too, feel great pleasure in being associated with the expression of thanks to the United States Government for their very generous gesture. I will go beyond it and express our thanks for what they have done for our students in the past. I had the good fortune to be allowed to work my way through an American university for three years and I experienced nothing but kindness and helpfulness right through. I think we owe a great deal to the American nation for what they are prepared to do for us.

On the present Bill, I should like, first, to point out that the amount involved, £500,000, gives an interest of £30,000 per year. That is a fairly sizable sum, a least in comparison with the amount we will be discussing next week for the agricultural institute, which has only the best part of double that amount.

This is called a Scholarship Bill, but we must not be frightened by the term "scholarship". I read in Section 5 that the aim is to encourage the activity of Irish citizens in schools, universities and institutions of higher learning. I want to emphasise that the word "schools" is used. In other words, it is to provide opportunities of travel and education for all concerned with education. I take it—and I hope I am correct—that the primary teacher in the national school is as much a concern of this as our leading professors.

I take it that there are three categories involved here. First, we have schools mentioned. There are primary, vocational and secondary schools. Personally, I think nothing would do more to revive the spirit of our nation and to bring it abreast of modern ideas than that our teachers should go and work abroad as teachers for a period of at least a year. As an ex-Christian Brothers' boy, I have the highest respect for the religious teachers in our schools, but I feel that both religious and lay teachers would benefit enormously from the opportunity of spending a year abroad in similar institutions, and this would cost only a mere return ticket to the United States. I take it once they get there, that, if possible, they will no longer be a burden on the scholarship scheme. Likewise, a two-way traffic is envisaged here and we will have educators, teachers, from the United States coming to teach in our schools.

That is one arm, the teaching arm. The second arm to which I wish to call attention is the agricultural arm, the advisory services, who are really the adult education teachers of our farming community. I believe they should participate, and participate very much, in this scholarship scheme. I see no difficulty whatsoever, under the Bill as it is drafted, in members of the advisory services participating in the scheme. They can go to institutions of higher learning, as they are called in the United States, because the advisory services there are linked to the universities and, according to the terms of this Bill, any of our advisory services are free to go and function in the American advisory services. Unfortunately, I feel the provisions here do not permit that to be reciprocated, because, as far as the Bill goes, United States citizens can only come here to schools, universities, institutions of higher learning and other suitable institutions. I wonder if we could class work under a county committee of agriculture as a suitable institution? Perhaps when the agricultural institute is set up, work under that institute would qualify in that respect.

I come then to the third category involved, the universities. Again, I believe that all the universities should share in this. I echo what Senator Stanford has said, and, in furtherance of that, I suggest that our much-neglected college in Maynooth should share equally with the other universities within the country.

If my interpretation is correct, that the scholarship scheme applies to all three main divisions, the schools, the adult education advisory services and the universities, then I believe that the board should be constituted accordingly. While I would welcome adequate representation of the universities on the board, I do not for one moment believe that they should have all the board, or anything like it. There should be at least one representative from the primary teachers, secondary teachers or the vocational teachers, someone to speak for those bodies. Perhaps this is unconstitutional, but, seeing that this matter is so important, I wonder if the Minister for External Affairs could nominate the Taoiseach on the board. If we want the best educational authorities and the men with the most comprehensive and broadest view of education, that would seem to be desirable.

I would also urge that the board should be rather sparing in its grants, sparing to the extent of not discouraging the private enterprise of persons who can go to America without such aid. It is a well-known fact that many of our leading educationists, university members, and so on, especially in the science faculties, can arrange exchanges without very much financial aid. We are reaching the stage when our post-graduate students are being snapped up by English and American universities. We had a case in U.C.C. this past session where one of the lowest placed men in our graduation class in engineering was given a first-class teaching assistantship in an American university. The Americans are satisfied that they get value by having us do some teaching for them and I think that in the case of every applicant, the board should ensure, first of all, that he has made an effort to arrange something for himself. If he is assisted he should, as far as possible, while in the States, pay his own way. Whatever institution he goes to, he can fit in with the teaching staff and thereby pay his way. If we give £1,000 to each man sent out, we can only send 15; if we give only £100 we can obviously send out 150.

The board should try to make the money go as far as possible by combining the two factors, working in the United States and the giving of a limited supplement from here. There should be a definite obligation on those availing of the scholarship to return and work in this country. It is our experience that many of our scholars who go from the universities to work in the United States and who get their post-graduate degrees stay over there. We have no means of bringing them home. They cannot work on the salaries we can offer them. At present, I would say we are losing two out of three of our graduates we are sending to the United States.

I should hate to think that this scholarship exchange would become a means of siphoning our graduates into American life. Those granted help under the scholarship scheme should sign an agreement to return home to work in this country, say, for a minimum period of five years; something like the undertaking teachers sign at present for their training expenses. In default of that, they should return the money spent on them. I think that is only fair.

Finally, I am delighted to see it is the Minister for Education who is presenting this Bill because I have just one small point I can raise, a point which is slightly extraneous to this Bill. It would be a very good idea to promote exchange of students, staff and so on with the American universities but why could we not begin at home and have an exchange between our universities here and the university in Belfast? Maybe that might have some bearing on Senator Stanford's motion on the Order Paper.

We can do a little more. We should make it quite possible for a professor in Galway University to come up and give a week's lectures in Dublin and we might entice the U.C.D. professors to come all the way to Cork. There should be exchange between Belfast and Dublin, and so on. That is the way we can build up fellowship in Ireland. Let us not forget the home problems. Our universities here, in participating in this scheme, might reasonably be expected, on their own initiative, to start their own system of exchange as their contribution to the valuable exchange idea. Again, I welcome this Bill and I hope its benefits will be distributed all over our educational system.

Professor Hayes

Senator Quinlan, on account of his experience of the United States, has made a very valuable contribution to this debate. I notice that he was not able to discuss America without speaking of Cork. I felt while he was appealing to the Minister for Education that it was a case of deep calling to deep. Whether there will be any result, I could not quite say. I agree with Senator Quinlan that the exchanges, if possible, should be on all levels and not on the university teacher level only.

Unfortunately, it costs a great deal less for a person in the United States with his salary, to come here than it costs to send somebody from here to the United States. I am speaking from my experience of university life in Dublin. If a professor is asked to go to the United States, even though we pay his full salary, the expense of his journey to the United States, particularly if he travels in the United States, is so great that his salary is very little use to him. The relationship between the two countries in regard to costs is very difficult to manage. As Senator Quinlan has suggested, if people can get work of an educational character in the United States, they should be encouraged to do so and not be dependent entirely on this fund.

I have some knowledge of the science professors who went there recently to investigate matters in regard to atomic energy. They received most extraordinary hospitality and were given the most wonderful facilities. They came back here very much enlightened, but the fact remains, that travelling and other expenses in the United States are very high indeed. It is highly desirable that a person who goes away should, if it could be arranged at all, return, but I have very grave doubts whether any legal means are available which would in fact compel such a person to return.

It seems a pity in regard to science people that the travelling scholarships in the National University, which used to be considered very good prizes, are not in some cases competed for by science graduates who, once they get their honours degree, can get a £500 scholarship at Liverpool, while here they can get only a £300 scholarship. That is the situation in regard to science which will inevitably tend to denude us of our best people, and even of people who are below the level of the very best.

I should like to join in thanking the American Government and people for the provision made in this Bill. I should like to make one allusion with regard to a statement by Senator Stanford in relation to the constitution of the board. He hoped the board would be so constituted that scholarships would not be awarded by lobbying. That is an extraordinary thing to say to a Minister of any Government. I have rather long experience of scholarships in this country as a university teacher, as chairman of the Cultural Relations Committee and as a member of that committee under different Governments, and I have had something to do with the awarding of scholarships. I must say I have not seen any example of a scholarship where there was even a suspicion of its being awarded by lobbying. I do not know what particular thing Senator Stanford is talking about. As everybody knows, I am in profound disagreement with the present Government, but I have not the slightest suspicion they will appoint a board, the members of which, who will include three Americans, when awarding scholarships will be amenable to lobbying. I should like that to go on record.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Níl morán le rá agam ar an ngnó seo ach go bhfuil áthas orm go bhfuil a leithéid á chur ar bhun, go bhfuilimid buíoch don tír a chur ar ár gcumas a leithéid a chur ar bhun agus gur cheart dúinn ár mbuíochas a chur in iúl dóibh. Tá rud eile de dhíth orm. Ba mhaith liom tuille eolas d'fháil ón Aire má tá an t-eolas seo aige. B'fhéidir nach bhfuil. Ba mhaith liom tuille eolais d'fháil ar na rudaí atá le déanamh faoi na téar-maí seo agus ar na deontaisí atá le fáil. Cad é an t-ioncam bliantúil in airgead Éireannach atá le fáil as an airgead atá le teacht? Cad is féidir a dhéanamh maidir le scoláireachtaí a bhronnadh agus cé méid scoláireacht is féidir a thabhairt ón mBord a bheadh ann? Cé mhéid ioncaim bhliantúil a bheadh le fáil as sin.

Ní eile; cad iad na costaisí, na deontaisí, a bheadh le déanamh as an airgead sin? An mbeidh sé ceart dúinn costaisí a thabhairt do na daoine a raghaidh go Americeá agus iad a chothú, nó do choimeád ansin, nó a ndéanfaid na Americeánaigh é sin? Sin an pointe eile agus rud eile; maidir leis na daoine a Brachadh amach uainn, tá a fhios againn an chomhairle a bhí ag an Seanadóir Ó Caoinleáin an mbeadh sé ceart gach uile chostas a thabhairt dóibh? Níl a fhios agam an ró-mhaith an rud é sin. Dob ionann san agus iad do ghríosadh chun dul i gcomhaontú agus fanúint in Americeá. Sin é a thiocfadh as, is dóigh liom.

Ba mhaith linn a fháil amach an mbeidh coinníollacha ann fé mar do thagair an Seanadóir Ó Coinleáin dóibh, is é sin, go mbeadh coiníollacha ar na daoine a cuirfí amach go gcaithfidis filleadh go hÉirinn agus seirbhís do thabhairt anseo. Do bheadh sé deacair é sin do chur ina luí orthu.

Seán Ó Loingsigh

Tá sé indéanta.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Is dócha é. Is é rud atá i gceist agam-sa ná, le cabhair an deontais sin, an t-airgead Meiriceánach sin, an mbeimid ag oiliúint daoine chun a slí bheatha do bhaint amach in áiteanna eile? Tá an rud sin ag titim amach in Éirinn cheana. Tá na daoine ag imeacht mar go gcaithfidh siad imeacht. Más é toradh na scoláireachtaí seo na nithe sin do thitim amach in Éirinn, is sinne a bheas ag riar na scoláireachtaí orthu agus dob ionann san agus daoine d'oiliúint chun dul amach as an dtír dár dtoil féin. Is trua nach féidir linn an rud sin do sheachaint.

B'fhéidir go mbeidh dul as an scéal leis an saghas daoine a toghfar; daoine go mbeidh orthu teacht thar n-ais; daoine go bhfuil a slí beatha sa mbaile agus a thógfaidh páirt i ngnó poiblí na hÉireann de bharr na hoiliúna a fuaireadar taobh amuigh den tír, mar lucht eolaíochta.

Ach tá rud eile ann gur thagair an Seanadoir Ó Coinnleáin dó—agus aontaím ar fad leis—nach é amháin go gcuirfí lucht ollscoile anonn ach go gcuirfí mic léinn de shaghas eile anonn freisin—daoine a thiocfadh thar n-ais chun a gcúrsaí léinn a chríochnú sa bhaile. Is dóigh liom gur cheart aire a thabhairt do san agus gan é fhágaint ar fad ag lucht eolaíochta a bheadh ag críochnú gcuid cúrsaí in eolaíocht.

Ba cheart an gnáth-scoláire óna bunscoileanna, na ceard-scoileanna, go háirithe na ceard-scoileanna agus daoine ó na meán-scoileanna do chur anonn ar sealadacha gairide agus go dtiocfaidís abhaile le pé eolas a gheobhaidís thall agus go bhfanfaidís fada go leor chun a bhfonn agus a ngnó don áit dhúchais do dhul i bhfeidhm orthu.

Ba mhaith liom eolas i dtaobh cé mhéid airgid atá le teacht as an gciste. Cad é a bheadh ag dul i gcoinne an chiste sin maidir le costas taobh amuigh dár muintir féin agus an mbeimid freagarthach as aon chuid de chostas na scoláirí a thiocfaidh anso ó Ameiricá? Conas a riarfar an gnó? An mbeidh baint ag aon Stát-Sheirbhíseach nó Roinn Stáit den Rialtas le riar an ruda?

Dr. O'Donovan

I want to say a few words on a particular matter, but I will not refer to it until I have said what I want to say. I notice that Senator Quinlan talked about working his way through an American university for three years. I regret having to admit that I did not work my way through three American universities in one year, but I was in three American universities in one year. That is exactly the opposite to what happened to Senator Quinlan.

I think the Bill has been exceptionally well put together from the point of view of economising on the money. I notice the Minister is going to provide offices and so on. I think that is a very good idea. Before the Minister mentioned it, I was trying to work out the answer to the question raised by Senator Ó Siochfhradha as to what the income would be. I took it that if the board wanted to preserve the fund, the income would be £30,000 a year. I also rather thought that the fund would have to meet the expenses in each case of the Americans coming here and Irish people going to America, except that there might be other arrangements. I disagree—I think it is implicit in the Bill-with the view that people should go to America on the income from this fund and get only their transport there. It is quite clear from the Bill that the money includes payment for transport, maintenance and other matters. That is the proper system. It may mean fewer people going, but I do not think that in relation to this kind of fund it is desirable that people should work their way through American universities when they go over.

On the whole, I agree with Senator Quinlan's sentiments about this matter. I think I disagree with nearly every suggestion he made about administration. In particular, I do not agree with the narrow views expressed by both Senator Quinlan and Senator Ó Siochfhrada about putting some obligation on people to come back. I think the bulk of the people do come back. That is particularly true of people who go away on fellowships or scholarships of this sort.

I should say that I agree with Senator Hayes, but I am surprised at Senator Stanford referring to the award of scholarships by lobbying. I have not as much experience perhaps as other people of the award of fellowships or scholarships, but the board that will make the decisions in this case will be composed of independent people who will form their own judgment on the candidates. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule. One has heard of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded by lobbying on occasions, but that is a different matter, involving international questions.

The particular matter I want to refer to is that, in thanking the American Government for making these moneys available, we should particularly mention Senator Fulbright as, without his efforts and the particular influence Senators have in the American governmental system, we might not have this Bill before us to-day. Speaking from recollection, when the proposals for the utilisation of these moneys went back to the United States, Senator Fulbright was either the chairman or a member of the committee and, happily both for his country and other countries, he insisted that some portion of these moneys should be utilised in this fashion. Therefore, it is right and proper that, if any individual is to be given credit for this Bill which we are so happy to have before us, we should recognise that that man is Senator Fulbright.

Mr. Murphy

As Senators well know, I do not represent any university. I rise, however, to join with other speakers in welcoming this further example of American generosity. Speaking as an ordinary Senator, I welcome anything that strengthens international understanding. The reason why I want to intervene in the debate is that, representing Labour here, I want to say that we in the trade union movement have had experience of American generosity, and I should like to record our appreciation of the help and generosity the American Government and the American trade unions have provided to the representatives of trade unions in Ireland who visited the United States.

Professor Quinlan

On a point of explanation, I should like to refer to a matter raised by Senator O'Donovan. I did not advocate that all the money should be restricted to mere travelling allowances. I advocated that the money should be made to go as far as possible—that we should explore every other means of getting help so that we can send out the maximum number.

Mr. O'Callaghan

As a representative of an agricultural association with 60,000 members, I feel it my duty to welcome the Bill and echo the sentiments expressed by the Minister and several other speakers in thanking the American Government. £500,000 for scholarship purposes is something that educational people can appreciate and even people like myself who have no education can appreciate it also.

It was good to learn from Senator Hayes that these scholarships will be awarded on merit. Senator Stanford expressed some doubt about it. I think, however, we can take it that Senator Hayes has more experience and that there will be no lobbying in connection with the granting of these scholarships.

In my opinion, a portion of the money allotted to us should be reserved for agricultural students. Furthermore, I believe there should be some obligation on the people who avail of these scholarships to come back and give some service in the country. Senator O'Donovan expressed some doubt about the wisdom of that, but, nevertheless, it is my view. An agricultural student who came my way as a farm apprentice for a short time is now a student in Cornel University, New York. He is very brilliant. It would be a great calamity if a boy such as he did not come back. I am sure he will have many inducements to stay away, but it would be a serious loss to the country if he and other boys like him did not come back. I would regard it as a great loss if Senator Quinlan and Senator O'Donovan who appear to have been in American universities were not with us.

Seán Ó Loingsigh

B'fhéidir go mba chóir dhom tagairt a dhéanamh, ar dtúis, don méid adúirt an Seanadóir Ó Siochfhradha. Bhí sé ag iarraidh a thuille eolais ar an mBille. Ní féidir liom an t-eolas go léir a thabhairt dó ach is féidir liom a rá go bhfuilimíd ag súil, do réir an teacht isteach bliaintiúil, le breis agus £25,000 sa mbliain —is é sin, do réir ús ar 5%. Ina theannta sin, táimíd ag súil go dtuitfidh an ráta maidir le costas airgid. B'fhéidir go mbeidh an tsuim níos lú ná sin mar beidh caitheachas as sin anois agus arís. Tá baoghal orm go mbeidh sé níos lua ná £25,000 féin, ach sílim go mbeidh sé timpeall an méid sin.

Maidir leis na costaisí a lua an tSeanadóir, an Seabhac, beidh ar an mBord costaisí na nAmericánach a thiocfaidh anseo a dhíol. Ní mic léin amháin a tiocfaidh anseo ach daoine gur féidir leo teagase a thabhairt sa tír seo i ngnéithe éagsúla. Dá bhrí sin, beidh orainn, fé mar atá sé sa Chonnradh, costaisí na ndaoine a thiocfaidh anseo a dhíol as an gCiste.

I think the first point made was that of Senator Stanford when he said, very rightly, that the success of the scheme will depend on the work of the board and that the work of the board will depend on the membership. I am grateful to Senator Hayes for his confidence that the Government will appoint the best possible board it can get. It would be right to appoint a board as representative of one or other institution, but a board whose outlook will be sufficiently broad and which will have the interests not only of education but also of agriculture at heart.

I do not think any board set up for this purpose would be complete without due regard being had for agricultural learning, science and techniques. The Minister for External Affairs made that fact clear when replying to the debate in the Dáil. For my own part, I think the board should have regard for industrial learning as well as for agriculture, the arts and the sciences because I believe there are many techniques in industry, in marketing, salesmanship, packaging and others, in which we can usefully learn a lot from the Americans.

With regard to the suggestion that the amount distributed should be carefully watched and that some regard should be had to the possibility of those who go abroad being in a position to earn something to supplement the grant or awards they get from the board, I think that suggestion is a good one and when the board awards an advance or scholarship to an individual who is in a position to impart knowledge, I do not think he would be precluded from receiving payment in America or the American from receiving payment in Ireland, for any knowledge he could impart. I think it is reasonable and, as Senator Quinlan pointed out, it would preserve the fund to some extent.

With regard to the fears expressed by some Senators that people who would benefit under the scheme might remain abroad and not bring back the benefit of their training or learning to this country, I should point out, and perhaps I should have pointed out at the start, that the visas given to persons receiving these grants or scholarships for the United States of America will be only interim visas, designed to last for the period of their training or teaching. As well as that, there will be provision that a visa will not be granted for their return to America for a certain period. That, of course, is not contained in the Bill, but there is an agreement between the Department of External Affairs and the appropriate Department in the U.S.A. to that effect. I take it that that will safeguard the interests of the country in so far as we hope to receive benefit that will inure to the advantage of the country from these visits of people abroad.

The provisions of Section 5 are sufficiently flexible to enable the fullest and widest possible use being made of the fund and I am sure that the board will, and must, under the terms of the Bill, have regard for all levels of education, all levels of people who require education and, as well as that, every aspect of education, be it art, science, agriculture or industry.

I think some of the Senators were unduly hard on Senator Stanford. I feel that a certain amount of lobbying might be forgiven in this respect. I am not suggesting that lobbying should be done for certain individuals, but lobbying, perhaps, by organisations who feel that a certain type of instruction would benefit the country. For example, if a particular agricultural activity is engaged in in the U.S.A. and a certain organisation feels that if some person were to go to the United States to become expert in it, it would redound to the welfare of this country, I think it would be the duty of that organisation to approach the board and I believe that we can depend on the integrity and the discretion and judgment of the board to have due regard for such suggestions. I do not think there would be anything wrong in that.

Professor Hayes

That would not be lobbying at all, surely. It would be a statement of an opinion of an organisation, quite a different thing. It would be done publicly, presumably. Senator O'Callaghan did it this evening publicly.

Mr. J. Lynch

That is right. In so far as I use the word "lobbying", I refer only to the putting forward of opinions and suggestions of that sort.

Professor Hayes

That is different. That is not lobbying, I suggest to the Minister.

Mr. J. Lynch

I am glad the Seanad has welcomed this Bill, as the Dáil welcomed it. As the House will see, Section 8 provides for the preparation of the budget programme and the ordinary programme of the board to be submitted for the approval of the Minister before 1st April. It would be in our interests that the Bill be passed through the House in all its stages this evening so as to give an opportunity of appointing the board, first of all, and secondly, to enable the board to be convenced and to have a scheme, if possible, prepared before April next, so that we can take advantage of the academic year commencing in 1958.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.