I found Senator Mrs. Dowdall telling us that this matter should be further inquired into and that other Colleges should be supported. I am an advocate of support for university education generally and I always have been and I have frequently made speeches in this House in support of it but the whole tenor of the debate seemed to me—I am sorry if my knowledge of English is defective—to convey that people did not like the fact that Dublin was a capital city and had two universities. That is just too bad but it is not my fault and it is not the fault of the people who govern U.C.D. or the people who teach there.
Let me come back to the Minister. The Minister said there were not two alternative sites. That is absolutely true and I should like to convince the Seanad of that. No alternative to the Belfield site has ever been proposed by anybody or considered by anybody except the President of U.C.D., the engineers and architects of U.C.D. Nobody else has ever put up a plan. This notion, a general, vague idea that we could have compulsory power to acquire space around U.C.D. and build a skyscraper or a series of skyscrapers, is not a plan. It is merely a vague notion and at the very outset comes up against the obstacle that not only one Government but two Governments of different complexion would not consider at all the giving of compulsory powers. As far as I am concerned as a politician, it seems to me they were quite right. The only people who ever succeeded in making a plan for Earlsfort Terrace were the people of U.C.D. and there again the Minister is right. Nobody wanted to leave Earlsfort Terrace.
I have not got all my papers and I am not sure of the dates but in the forties a committee was appointed at U.C.D. to make a case to the Minister for Finance for increased financial assistance, particularly for increased salaries for the staff. That was appointed during the presidency of Dr. Arthur Conway, and the present President of University College was a member. I was a member myself. The Engineering Professors were members. It was presided over by the Registrar of University College who was then Professor J.J. Nolan, Professor of Experimental Physics. We submitted a proposal to the Government, a proposal which was pretty well accepted and on the basis of which not only University College, Dublin, but University College, Cork and University College, Galway, got considerably increased grants. Having been successful in that particular direction, we were then asked to go ahead with a plan for the future development of the College, which we did. We made out schedules of what we considered the numbers would be. We entirely underestimated what the increase would be. That Committee did nothing at all about the siting of the College. Subsequently the President, Dr. Conway, and the Professor of Architecture, Professor Downes, and the Professor of Engineering, Professor Purcell, and some others, made a sketch plan of what would happen if we took over Iveagh Gardens. That was the only time that anybody got down to thinking of what would happen if the College were extended on the Earlsfort Terrace site.
Two things happened about that. First, the student members increased enormously, much more than we had estimated. Secondly, the Government built a restaurant in the Earlsfort Terrace grounds, adjacent to the Department of External Affairs. That was something new on the site. It became clear to us that one could not go ahead on the Earlsfort Terrace site and we are, therefore, in the position of people who are more or less driven out of that site by the facts and the circumstances. There was no plotting, no secrecy, and no planning to do that.
It has been suggested that there was indecent haste in this matter and that it was never discussed objectively in public. That is demonstrably not so. Two presidents—the present President and his predecessor—and a great number of Governing Bodies decided on the move to Belfield. Let me say that the governing body consists of 34 members, of whom four are representative of the Government, ten are representative of local bodies, eight from the General Council of County Councils, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, and a representative of the Dublin Country Council. Lords Mayor have been of various complexion— Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour, Jew and Gentile, Catholic and Protestant. The suggestion is made that, in some way or other, somebody in University College was so extraordinarily clever that the wool was pulled over the eyes of all these county councillors and the varying and different representatives of different Governments. That suggestion is just foolish. No one did any such thing.
As well as convincing these different Governing Bodies, the move to Belfield and the buying of the land for the Belfield project, was agreed to by several successive Governments, not always of the same political complexion. It was agreed to by several Ministers for Finance and by several Ministers for Education. There was no hole-and-corner secrecy about it. We here are people of some political experience and anyone who has ever tried to get anything from a Minister for Finance, whatever his name was or whatever his Party happened to be, knows it is not an easy job. It is not an easy job, but various Ministers for Finance at various times and in various Parties have agreed to this particular project.
In November, 1951, the Governing Body resolved that it would be in the best interests of the College to move to the site at Belfield. Later—I forget the precise date—the Minister for Finance, Mr. Aiken, I think, moved a Vote in the Dáil for £180,000 to pay for land at Belfield. Surely that was public discussion. I do not know whether Senator Ryan would call it objective discussion, but, whatever discussion in the Dáil is, it is certainly the best we can do. The Dáil is the best public forum we have. We cannot do any more. The project was discussed and made absolutely clear. It was stated by the Minister, I think, that the Government were buying the land but they were not committed to the whole project. There was no secrecy.
Let me explain the way this land was bought. Since the matter has been raised, we might as well have it made quite clear and put on the record. Does any sensible person think that there should have been a public announcement that University College, Dublin, intended to move to Belfield, intended to buy land there, with the Government behind them? Can anybody imagine what the price of land would have been in those circumstances? That was not done, and the people who did not do it were very intelligent. The land was bought and every time a parcel of land was bought—I believe "parcel" is the technical term—the Minister for Finance of the day was acquainted beforehand. The land was bought on behalf of the College by a sub-committee of the Buildings Committee, consisting of two Professors of Engineering and a representative of outside interests on the Governing Body, who, at one time, sat on the front bench of this House, Mr. Michael Hearne. Professor Pierce Purcell, Professor Michael Hogan and Mr. Michael Hearne were the people who negotiated on behalf of the College.
I should like to take this opportunity of saying they did an extremely good job. They got in County Dublin, adjacent to the city, more than 250 acres of land. One would imagine from the discussion here that one would require an aeroplane to go to Belfield. That is not so. It is quite near the city. They bought that 250 acres for less than £250,000. That was an extremely good job. They did that as friends of the College and as people working for the College. Any one of these people, using his own time for his own private purposes. might have made more of his time in financial terms. They deserve great credit. They worked very hard. They were inspired, aided and encouraged all the time by the President of the College and the other authorities of the College. It is only fair to say that they displayed vision, foresight, courage and prudence; and they displayed a very acute regard for getting good value for public money. They did get good value for public money.
The other method, if adopted, would have resulted in heaven's knows what from the point of view of expense. I think it was Senator Mrs. Dowdall described this as a gradiose scheme. The only grandiose scheme ever put up—if it is a scheme at all—is the vague idea that the Government should give compulsory powers to University College, or should exercise compulsory powers, to take away the rights of private citizens living near Earlsfort Terrace by compulsorily acquiring their property. The results from the point of view of the rights of citizens and institutions, and from the point of view of expense and expenditure, would have been enormous. That is the only idea—that vague idea—that could be called a grandiose scheme.
I said last night Senator Ó Donnabháin proposed to acquire all the land from College Green to the canal; I should have said from St. Stephen's Green to the canal. He was going to stand at the top of Grafton Street and look at the spires and towers on the skyscraper of University College. I was very comforted to note he was going to make the students walk but he would provide lifts for the professors. That is the only grandiose scheme ever put forward.
There have been great compliments for a particular pamphlet, but the people who printed that pamphlet studiously avoided getting information in University College about the Belfield scheme. They were told at a very early stage by a member of the staff that they could be introduced to the President, the Registrar, the Secretary or the Professor of Engineering. They did not want it. They were in a state where they did not want to hear about the facts.
Let me take another point. It has been said that buildings could have been got near Earlsfort Terrace. Again, the people in U.C.D. representing the Governing Body are the only people who ever tried to get buildings. We tried to get Mespil House, as Senator O'Donovan said yesterday. We were in a position that we had to get Finance sanction to do that. We were given a particular sum and we were outbid at the auction. We did not buy Mespil House, and perhaps it is a good thing that we did not do so. Similarly, in regard to other buildings round about, the notion that at any time University College, Dublin, could have bought buildings is rather illusory.
The Minister mentioned yesterday evening that the College is now in a desperate condition for space, but it should be remembered that from the very beginning, the College was in a desperate condition for money. We never had any money. We had not money to pay our staff or for anything. As my grandmother use to say: "We had neither money, nor marbles, nor chalk to make a ring." What is the good of talking about buying buildings when we had not money to put the bread in our mouths, so to speak?
Another point has been made that we grabbed students. It is quite untrue to say that we grabbed students or enticed students to come to U.C.D. In fact, the contrary charge could be made against us that we tried to discourage students. What has happened in University College, Dublin, if I may go back to the point about the capital city, is a natural growth. It does not involve inducing, enticing or grabbing students. The College has grown because the city has grown and because the College has done a good job which has brought it fame and attracted students to it. We have high academic standards, particularly high entrance standards for certain Faculties like Engineering, and we have high fees. We increased our fees on one occasion. We got a grant from the Minister for Finance who said, I think, fairly enough: "You should consider your fees." We considered our fees and raised them, but subsequently the number of students increased. Quite recently, when we could get no money from anybody, we increased our fees by 50 per cent. and the number of students again increased. Can anybody maintain that people in that position were enticing students or grabbing them? We made a rule that helps parents and is good for the students, the two-year rule, that when a student fails in two successive years, he will get no more chances.
