Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Aug 1961

Vol. 54 No. 17

Local Authorities (Education Scholarships) (Amendment) Bill, 1961— Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Professor O'Brien

The point I was making is that I agree with Senator Stanford that scholarships should be adequate to enable students to live in comfort and that their attention should not be distracted by having to earn supplemental incomes during that period when they should be studying or possibly resting. I shall not delay the House on this Bill for the reason that the whole question of the admission of students to universities, will, I take it, be discussed by the Commission on Higher Education. This is a very important body which is sitting now and it will report on every aspect of higher education.

Therefore, I look on this as a purely interim measure. I do not see any point in having a long debate on it because the issues which could be raised in that debate are very far-reaching. They would take a great deal of time to discuss but I take it for granted these are issues which will be discussed by the Commission on Higher Education. I shall not do more than raise one or two points of general interest now, in the hope that they might attract the attention of the Commission, and thank the Minister for taking a step in the right direction.

As everybody has stated today on every Bill before the House, this country is faced with a period of growing competition. The changes taking place in regard to the external situation make it very necessary indeed for all our costs of production in industry and agriculture to be lowered so that we can compete both at home and abroad. Therefore, everybody is agreed, I think, that the best possible technical, professional and commercial efficiency should be obtained. Our people must be able to compete with other people. That requires that they be on a high level technically and scientifically in relation to agriculture, industry and commerce. This involves education. Education is regarded by everybody today as the central long period of investment in every country.

It is generally recognised, I think, that the basis of international trade is that every country should develop its natural advantages, whatever they may be, and explore the advantages with which Providence has endowed the country. I do not think it is conceited of us in this House to say that one of our natural advantages is a great deal of native talent. I do not think we are really being conceited on congratulating ourselves on being, on the whole, a clever nation. That is the reputation we have in the world. Whereas we are lacking in natural resources of other kinds, we have been very well endowed with intelligence. It is our duty in the international task of developing our natural resources to develop the intelligence of our people to the highest possible point.

That requires education. On that, I would like to add my voice to that of Senator Stanford. By education I think primarily of the humanities. I entirely agree with that. There must be scientific and technical education, but education directed purely into scientific and technical spheres is not the type of education that brings out the best qualities in any nation. I am entirely in agreement with Senator Stanford, that a classical and mathematical education are the types of education that lay the foundation of other types of education by training the mind. The people who proceed to those types of education are the people who will be not only the most cultivated citizens but the most useful and the most adaptable to new ideas and processes.

As has been said already in this debate, the total amount available for education in this country is limited. Our Budget is already high every year. We cannot go on increasing expenditure, unfortunately. Therefore the amount of money available for education of all types in this country is rather limited. Therefore it becomes a very important matter indeed to ensure that whatever is spent on education is spent in the best possible way. The problem really is to try to utilise to the best advantage the talent of this country within the rather narrow financial resources available in the Budget. We must try to ensure that as much talent as possible is put to good effect or, putting it another way, that as little talent as possible is wasted.

This raises an extremely difficult problem which I have no intention of dwelling on this evening. I am not qualified to do so. It is one of the most difficult problems I suppose in politics and it is one which I hope will be dealt with satisfactorily by the Commission on Higher Education. The problem is how is the capacity to benefit by education to be found out. How is it to be spotted? How is selection to be made? What is the best way of sorting people who are capable of benefiting from education from the people who are not? That is an extremely difficult question.

In this country, the amount for higher education is admittedly inadequate. Taking all groups in the population, taking the population as a whole, the percentage of people getting higher education—and by that I mean particularly university education—is a great deal less than the average in Europe today and in other advanced countries. The proportion of the lower income group is quite abnormally low. I cannot give a figure but I have seen a figure recently prepared for the Commission on Higher Education showing that the percentage of the children from the lower income group in this country receiving university education is very low. Indeed, it is very much lower than in England, Scotland or Northern Ireland. That, of course, is not a satisfactory state of affairs. The percentage of the population as a whole getting education is low and the percentage of the lower income group is abnormally low.

We are now getting into some of the most debatable and difficult questions in politics. One could discuss at great length, if one had the knowledge and the time, the very difficult question as to whether ability is evenly spread among the different income groups. What reason have we to believe that the percentage of able children is the same in the lower income group as in the higher income group?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I doubt if that is relevant to the Bill.

Professor O'Brien

I shall not pursue the matter any further. Whatever is the answer to that debatable question, I think we will all agree that in the lower income group in this country there is a great deal of potential ability which is now going to waste. There must be many children in the lower income group who could benefit by higher education if they could get it. The problem is to choose the children who will benefit most from our scarce educational resources. From my long experience in the educational world, I would say that the mere capacity to pass examinations at an early age is not in itself a conclusive test. Many children mature late. I am quite certain that a large number of talented children are excluded from university education. From my experience in University College Dublin, I would say that some of the very best students mature late. If their entrance to a university depended upon their ability to pass examinations as children, they would never have got to the university and the country would have lost a lot as a result.

There is another question which bears directly on this problem of allocating our scarce educational resources among the largest possible number of people. Should all the children who can afford to pay and who pass a simple test such as matriculation be entitled to have university education? It is always taken for granted that they should. If the amount of ability in the country is very large in relation to the amount of money available for higher education, is it right that children, by the mere accident of having rich parents, should be able to occupy what might be scarce places in universities which could be more advantageously occupied by the children from other families who come up by way of scholarships?

In other words, the issues that the Minister has raised in this problem are really very much bigger than the mere content of the Bill. What should be the basis of higher education — the capacity to pay, the capacity to benefit or, as one speaker said, the capacity to benefit the country? It does not always follow that the person who benefits himself more by university education is the person who benefits the country most. That, again, raises the whole question of the emigration of educated people—that vast question which will also be discussed by the Commission on Higher Education.

This Bill, which is quite small in itself, opens up an enormous field of discussion on the highest possible level which we are saved from discussing this evening as these are matters which will come before the Commission on Higher Education. I hope that the Commission will go into the matter thoroughly. It is, perhaps, the most important question in this or any other country to-day. That brings me back to the Bill. We are all agreed that scholarships, however selected, should be numerous. We are all agreed that they should not be too much limited either by means or residential tests. We are all agreed that they should be adequate in amount. These are three things upon which we are all agreed. This Bill accepts these three principles. For that reason I welcome it. At the same time I want to make it clear that in my opinion, although it is a step in the right direction, it is a very small step, but the Minister deserves our congratulations.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Is mór an ní an Bille seo agus na téarmaí atá ann a bheith ar fáil ar deireadh. Molaim an tAire gurb é a chúram an rud seo a chur le chéile agus an Bille a thabhairt os comhair an Tí.

Tá i gcoitinne bunoideachas coiteann laistigh de chumas gach athar agus máthar in Éirinn. Is oideachas thairis an bunoideachas atá i gceist sa Bhille seo. Tá beagán eagla orm, ón méid cainte atá cloiste againn ó thriúr a raibh baint acu le hollúnacht ollscoile, gur ar oideachas ollscoile a dhíríodar a gcuid spéise agus a gcuid cainte ar fad ach tá grád eile oideachais atá díreach chomh maith leis agus é i bhfad níos riachtanaí don phobal i gcoitinne ná an t-oideachas ollscoile, dá fheabhas é.

Tá mé ag smaoineamh anois ar chlann daoine ar fud na tíre nach bhfuil ar a gcumas a gclann a chur go dtí an mheánscoil nó ina dhiaidh sin go dtí on ollscoil. Is chun an bearna sin a líonadh atá an Bille seo againn. Anois deirtear nach leor an Bille seo chun an bearna sin a líonadh go sásúil agus cothrom a thabhairt do gach éinne in Éirinn. Is mó an rud cuid de rud. Tá cuid fhónta sa Bhille seo. Molaim an Bille dá chionn sin ach is eagal liom ón gcaint atá cloiste againn go dtí seo go bhfuil luí ar fad beagnach ar oideachas ollscoile. Ach tá spéis an-mhór agamsa in oideachas an ghnáth-phobail, go bhfaighidís oideachas níos fearr, níos airde, ná bunoideachas, agus níl aon chéim chuige san ach meánoideachas. Chun é sin a chur ar fáil níos coitianta, ba cheart níos mó spéise a chur i leathnú caíonna ar fud na tíre go bhfaigheadh i bhfad níos mó daoine buntáistí an mheánoideachais.

Tá ceist nó dhó eile agam im aigne: an oideachas ollscoile amháin atá i gceist? Tá nithe ann, coláistí ann agus oiriúnachas ann chun talmhaíochta, cun eolas a fháil ar úsáid a bhaint as an talamh in Éirinn agus slí bheatha a bhaint as ar bhealach níos tuisceanaí, níos fearr agus níos saibhre ná mar a dhéantar faoi láthair. Tá coláistí talmhaíochta ann agus an mbeidh baint ag na scoláireachtaí le daoine a chur go dtí coláistí den sórt sin? Tá coláistí againn chun teagasc tís agus a leithéid sin a thabhairt. An dtiocfaidh an saghas sin oideachais laistigh de théarmaí an Bhille? Tá seirbhís mhór eile a mbíonn oiliúint trí nó ceithre bliana ann: banaltracht. Tá cóireanna ann chun daoine a oiliúint san ealaín san. An mbeidh na scoláireachtaí le fáil chun buntáistí a fháil as na coláistí banaltrachta?

Tá ceardoideachas i gcoitinne ar fud na tíre á leathnú. Tá a lán daoine ag dul chuig na scoileanna sin agus is céim níos airde an ceardoideachas ná an bunoideachas. An mbeidh baint ag na scoláireachtaí leo sin? Tá na ceisteanna san im aigne agus b'áil liom go dtabharfadh na scoláireachtaí caoi do na daoine i gcoitinne buntáiste a bhaint as na coláistí ina múintear na ceirdeanna agus na healaíona atá luaite agam.

Arís, adeirim, tá bunoideachas nó meánoideachas tábhachtach. Do níos mó den phobal tá sé chomh tábhachtach díreach is atá oideachas ollscoile don bheagán a n-éiríonn leo dul ann, mar ní théann níos mó ná cúig nó ocht fén gcéad den phobal ar an ollscoil agus ba cheart go mbeadh meánoideachas le fáil ag 25 fén gcéad nó 40 fén gcéad den ghnáth-phobal chun daoine níos tuisceanaí, níos éifeachtaí, níos cumasaí a thabhairt dúinn, níos mó daoine agus muinín acu astu féin agus as a gcuid eolais i measc an ghnáth-phobail ná mar atá anois. Dá mb'fhéidir meánoideachas a leathnú don ghnáth-phobal bheadh tairbhe mór sa treo sin.

Tá, ar ndóigh, éileamh ag an phobal air. Tá meánoideachas ag leathnú ar fud na tíre. Tá sé le fáil ag scoláirí lae anois in áiteacha nach raibh sé le fáil iontu deich mbliain ó shin agus nach raibh cuimhne air fiche bliain ó shin. Theastódh scoileanna dá leithéid sin ó dhaoine nach mbeadh an gustal acu féin agus a dteastódh uathu a gclann a oiliúint chomh maith le clann na gcomharsan a mbeadh gustal acu chun díol as.

Bhí trácht againn ar ollscoil agus tábhacht thar barr na hollscoile, ach caithfimid a chinntiú inár n-aigne gur chun leas an phobail, leas na tíre, a rachaidh pé cabhair a thabharfaidh an pobal trí na chánacha don saghas sin oideachais. Ba cheart dúinn scarúint leis an smaoineamh gur ar son an duine ataimíd. Is ar mhaithe leis an bpobal ataimid, leis an tír, le heolas, le hoilteacht, le doimhne agus muinín an phobail, íseal nó uasal, bocht nó saibhir, astu féin chun gur féidir cumas carachtar daingean a fhás iontu.

Ní maith liom tagairt a dhéanamh don ghearán a bhí ag mo chara, an Seanadóir laistiar díom, ach tá leigheas ag Coláiste na Tríonóide ar an rud atá ina chúis ghearáin acu. Níl le déanamh acu ach dearmad a dhéanamh ar na cuspóirí lenar cuireadh an coláiste sin ar bun agus beidh an scéal leigheasta gan aon mhoill.

Mr. O'Quigley

I do not know whether Senator Ó Siochfhradha would advise the governing authority of Trinity College in the way he has advised them to amend their charter because doing so would necessitate another Indemnity Bill in this House. I thought the advice which the Senator would give would be different. However, I should not like to encourage breaches of charter as it offends members on that side of the House to the very soul.

The Minister in dealing with this Bill provided a marked, perhaps a pleasant, contrast to the Minister for Transport and Power when he was speaking about the Shannon Free Airport Development Company earlier in the evening. The Minister for Transport and Power had a surfeit of figures of all kinds.

Mr. Carter

That is not related to the Bill at all. The Senator is out of order, completely, as all lawyers usually are most of the time. They make a mess of things.

Mr. O'Quigley

Senator Carter evidently does not believe in a democratic process. This is an Assembly in which we are entitled to speak and it is the purpose of the Assembly to speak.

Mr. Carter

To the point.

Mr. O'Quigley

Senators are required, not as we have been asked, just to say: "agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed," but to read a Bill and make suggestions on it and I intend to do that so long as I am in this House.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator is indulging in a custom that has grown up in the House of lecturing the House. He is not the person who started it.

Professor Hayes

Go on with the scholarships.

Mr. Carter

Go back as Senator Hayes advised you. He could give you a lead in that regard.

Mr. O'Quigley

The Minister should have given the House some of the kind of figures the Minister for Transport and Power gave us, sound statistics. The only statistic we have got from him is the sum of £180,000 spent by local authorities on scholarships at the present time. It is hoped that by the expenditure of about £90,000 more, we will get £100,000 from the State and that the ultimate expenditure on scholarships will be about £300,000.

Dr. Hillery

I did not give these figures; I am sorry.

Professor Hayes

£300,000, plus the local expenditure.

Mr. O'Quigley

The Minister gave the figure of £240,000 which I make up as £150,000 and £90,000.

Dr. Hillery

£240,000 and £300,000 comes to more than £300,000.

Mr. O'Quigley

The total from the State is £300,000.

Dr. Hillery

From the State, but the total altogether is not what the Senator says.

Mr. O'Quigley

I understand the State in its fourth year will be contributing about £300,000.

Dr. Hillery

And the local authorities will be contributing, too.

Mr. O'Quigley

A somewhat similar sum. These are the only figures I can see but I should like to have them related to the number of scholarships which it is anticipated that sum of £300,000 will provide in four years' time. How many scholarships for universities and for post-primary education will that sum of £300,000 represent in four years' time and how will that match up with the number of children leaving primary and secondary schools and technical schools and going to the university? Unless we have some figures along those lines, it is quite impossible to make an assessment of what impact this Bill will have on the educational life of this country. One thing is clear, that if the figures were impressive, we would have had them. I do not say that it is any fault of the Minister, that he cannot bring in impressive figures. Evidently, he has been limited in the amount of money his Department can make available. It seems to me to be tinkering with education to patch on to a Scholarship Act of 1944 and an old University Act of 1908 a scheme designed to meet the needs of 1961 and the European Economic Community and all the rest for the future.

This does not seem to indicate any concern on the part of the Government for the education of our youth. It is an extraordinary thing that we can provide £400,000, and presumably will provide more, for the running expenses of the Shannon Free Airport Development Company. We can provide millions of pounds for aeroplanes and millions of pounds for turf development and millions of pounds for the Electricity Supply Board. These, we are told, are all capital projects, but the only capital which the poor child has is his brains and we are not going to provide anything for the vast majority of these children who have a form of capital which they cannot exploit. The sum of £300,000 represents a few barley loaves and fishes amongst the great multitude of needy children.

This Bill does nothing and will not have a significant impact on the number of children who will be able to get secondary, technical or university education. When this scheme is in full operation, it will make a very small difference and we are given no figures to indicate what its effect will be. A fundamental defect in the Bill is that when the Minister was about the business of giving State aid for scholarships, he did not start off with a completely new scheme. It is no defence of the Bill to say that the old scheme has worked well because the hypothesis is incorrect. The old scheme was a rickety scheme that worked badly, unjustly and ineffectively to help the poorer sections. However bad the machinery under the Local Authorities (Educational Scholarships) Acts of 1944 may be, there can be no question that the Minister and his Department bear full responsibility for the type of scheme evolved by local authorities.

Apparently in this Bill it is not proposed to make any change in the machinery for devising schemes or ensuring any kind of uniformity. Since 1944, the Minister for Education has had available to him, under the Local Authorities (Educational Scholarships) Act, all the machinery and power necessary to make any change he considered proper in the scholarship schemes submitted by local authorities. Under Section 2 of the Act, he can approve of a scheme, modify or alter any scheme submitted to him in such manner as he thinks proper, or approve of the scheme modified or amended, or refuse to approve of any scheme. The Minister for Education, and previous Ministers for Education, have been shoving the blame over to local authorities when the ultimate and final responsibility for the form that scheme takes rests squarely upon the shoulders of the Minister for Education.

The Minister and his Department will not be unaware of the representations which have been made by a large section of the community about the unsatisfactory way in which scholarship schemes have been devised and administered over the past ten or 15 years. The Minister will be aware of the representations made to his Department by the Irish Conference of Professional and Services Associations who are the people representing the classes among the poorest in the community who have always been on the fringe and outside scholarship schemes devised by local authorities because of the means test and sometimes because of the residence qualification, which is being somewhat improved in this Bill.

The means test as operated by some local authorities has had the effect—I know it was the case when I was going to school—that children whose parents might not have had more that £400 a year, although there might have been ten children in the family, could not get a scholarship. On the other hand, the children of a publican with a £10 or £15 valuation, perhaps in receipt of £1,000, or £1,200 or maybe £1,300, could get scholarships. That is what I regard as being grossly unfair. When applying the means test, it should be modified in order to provide that not alone will the income of the parents be taken into account, but an allowance will be made for every child in the family of a father of a scholarship applicant, say, over the third child, on the same lines as allowed for income tax purposes. Whether that has been changed since then——

Mr. Carter

Socialise it altogether as you are at it. Make it a completely State effort.

Mr. O'Quigley

Whether that has been changed since my time at school, I do not know, but it is certainly within the capacity of the Minister to make such a change under the powers given to him by the 1944 Act. I do not intend to refer to the inadequacy of the scholarships. It is perfectly clear from the sums provided that the Minister and some of the officials in his Department do not appear to appreciate the needs of people attending a university. One would imagine that in the Department of Education, they ought to know something about the demands on students attending universities, but evidently some people have forgotten them or blinded themselves to them when it comes to approving of these schemes submitted by local authorities.

A point has been raised by Senator Stanford in relation to the attitude of some local authorities towards the granting of scholarships to Trinity College. Senator Stanford is right to raise that point, for this is a problem which ought to be faced up to. Making Irish compulsory in the matriculation examination for entrance to Trinity College would not solve the problem, because there are still local authorities, perhaps relying on what they have always done, who would continue to do it and would not depart from precedent. It seems to me that there ought to be some via media by which children whose Faith will permit them and whose ecclesiastical authorities will not prohibit them from attending Trinity College should, if they are able to win scholarships, be entitled to enter Trinity College.

Professor Hayes

That is the case.

Mr. O'Quigley

If that be the case——

Professor Stanford

I do not think it is the case.

Professor Hayes

I think it is.

Professor Stanford

Not in the city of Dublin. I am quite certain about that.

Professor Hayes

Dublin is on a different basis but as far as I understand it any person who wins a scholarship and says that for religious reasons he wants to go to Trinity College is not prevented now. There may be exceptions.

Professor Stanford

There are at least two exceptions.

Professor Hayes

The point, I think, is whether anybody has been refused.

Professor Stanford

That I cannot answer.

Professor Hayes

I would suspect not.

Mr. O'Quigley

I agree that the problem in relation to Trinity College is a great deal easier of solution than appears at first sight, but it does seem to me that it ought to be clearly stated for the benefit of the children of parents who wish to have their children attend Trinity College that there is no prohibition of any kind on their doing so. I count it a remarkable thing that in this day and generation Trinity College should labour under the grievance so eloquently and indeed passionately put by Senator Stanford this evening. I hope that perhaps some discussion in public upon this matter will make it less thorny, and that the Trinity College authorities and those who want to send their children to Trinity College will in the very near future have no cause for complaint in relation to the scholarships offered by public authorities.

Senator Carter interjected something about the socialisation of scholarships. The plain fact is that we provide free primary education from State funds and are bound to do so under the Constitution, and the State is committed to endeavouring as far as possible to supplement and give reasonable aid to providing greater educational initiative, also under the Constitution.

Mr. Carter

To supplement—that is far from socialisation. Certainly this is a big step in the right direction.

Mr. O'Quigley

If you talk about this being a big step, I can only say it is a coiscéim choiligh, if you call it a step at all, in the right direction. The plain fact is that the fears expressed by the Minister for Education in the Dáil that the public were not prepared or were rather reluctant, while wanting to improve educational facilities, to provide finances for them, are quite unfounded. I have never yet heard any complaint that we were spending too much money on education or providing too many scholarships or other facilities for the education of our children in the primary, secondary, or technical spheres or even in regard to university education. On the contrary, we do appreciate the value of education, and while we may not be able by means of money to make this an island of saints, we can by this means make it an island of scholars.

Mr. Cole

I wish to say a few words particularly on that part of the Bill dealing with the provision of scholarships not to a university. I wonder is it to be the policy of the Department to increase the number receiving secondary education by this method only. It seems a rather slow and not very hopeful method of doing so. Latterly, there has been in local authorities a tremendous increase in the drive for education and educational facilities of every sort. We have in County Cavan technical schools which ten years ago, or even less, were half empty and now are over-flowing, so that extra rooms have to be added here, there and everywhere. The same demand is there for secondary education. These few extra scholarships this Bill will give to the poorer classes of boys and girls have to be divided up by the local authority. We in my county would divide them up between boys and girls, and then we have to consider also the problem of one- or two-teacher schools and larger schools, because we have found that the one- or two-teacher schools cannot compete for scholarships with larger schools where they have more advantages and perhaps are better taught.

Then we have a division between no means test and a means test. In that respect, I should like to assure Senator O'Quigley that his ideas on means tests when he was at school are out of date and that things have completely changed. In most counties, everything is taken into account—the valuation of land, plus income, if there are both, in the case of parents.

We divide these few scholarships amongst those different classes, and the number available to the boys and girls in a county seems to be pitifully small. It is sometimes very hard when one is striking the rate in a county to induce the county council to add a few pence more to the rates, but if a greater lead were given by the central authority and if it had been supplying four times what the local authority was asked to pay, such a lead would be very welcome.

I would, perhaps, have given these scholarships not on the results of a purely scholarship examination. The Minister should move towards having a general county examination for students in the primary schools and he should give the scholarships on the results of the examination. I think you will have a more uniform result all over the country and that when the students arrive at the secondary schools they will be of the same standard.

I find from masters of secondary schools that pupils arrive from different areas or different counties with quite different standards of education and that it takes them some considerable time to bring one pupil up or hold one pupil back until they get them evened up a bit. Our aim in giving as much general education as we can should not be the complete equivalent of the much-discussed 11-plus examination that they have elsewhere. I feel we might have a general examination at the age of say 13—I think 13 is the age the secondary schools like to have these children coming to them—and give a great number of scholarships on the results of that.

Another point is that possibly scholarships should be given to schools. Take schools with the capacity or schools anxious to increase their capacity for students. Possibly scholarships could be given to them to fill up their schools. We could perhaps agree to keep the basis of the scholarship to the means test and to the actual subjects, if you like, the same as they are at present. I feel it would be another way of inducing schools to keep their capacity and schools with small numbers in them would have room for pupils without any extra expense at all. Some time or other the Minister might be able to give scholarships to schools to let them conduct the examination and bring the pupils into them.

Have any of these county council schemes or local authority schemes ever envisaged that these students could take up scholarships at a technical school?

Professor Hayes

Yes.

Mr. Cole

We may have advanced technical schools in Dublin but we have not got them in the country. Would these primary school pupils be permitted, if they win a scholarship, to take it in Dublin? Would they be allowed to come and stay in Dublin, maybe with friends, and go to the technical school in Dublin instead of going to a secondary school somewhere else in the country? Schools approved under the parent Act include technical schools and agricultural colleges. I hope these scholarships are tenable at these places.

A matter that has come up in my county—it would need a slight amendment of the Universities Act—is that university scholarship winners should be allowed to go to other educational establishments for higher education. In other words, if the winner of one of these scholarships wishes to obtain some technical training—for instance, a manufacturing process—inside or outside the country would he be allowed to take the scholarship there instead of at the university? We had one instance of that. The winner of a scholarship was anxious to enter a factory. The factory were actually willing, I think in this case, to give some assistance towards his training but were not prepared to give it all. I think he was not permitted by the Department to take up that opportunity.

With more factories, and so on, becoming available in this country and providing opportunities for men who are highly skilled, perhaps we could allow scholarships to highly advanced technical schools in England or elsewhere which would have classes dealing solely with these subjects? If we allow those who win scholarships to go there on the hope and the promise—it could not be anything more—that they would come back and take up a position in our factories, and bring back the skill and the higher education they would have gained there, it would be to the benefit of the country.

Professor Quinlan

Perhaps I might make two points for consideration by the Minister between now and the Committee Stage which I understand the Minister is anxious to have tomorrow. I shall carry on tomorrow with the usual Second Reading speech. I want to mention the subdivision of the money, Section 3 (b), one-third. The Bill says it shall not exceed this amount. In other words, the Minister is putting an upper ceiling on the amount of money the county councils may give for university scholarships. There is no lower ceiling. Some county councils may quite justifiably decide that there is need to give more than indicated by the Minister to post-primary education. That is allowed. I would ask the Minister to liberalise this fraction up to one-half and to leave more discretion to the county council. Make it £ for £—that they could go up to a maximum of £ for £ to the university.

There is a big difference between the cost involved in attending the university in a university city and coming from a county like Tipperary or Limerick. On the other hand, practically all centres are within reach of post-primary education. In other words it is comparable to the university city. A ratio that would be suitable for a university city like Cork, where it would be quite reasonable that two-thirds should go to post-primary education and one-third to university education, would not be suitable to county Tipperary, for instance, where post-primary education is on the doorstep and university education has to be taken away from home. I intend to move an amendment on this tomorrow. I would ask the Minister to consider that point.

I now come to the question of the means test. Might I ask if the Minister could incorporate some relief in respect of the number of children in the family similar to what is incorporated in both the income tax code and latterly in the surtax code? That was a departure from practice when it was introduced into the surtax code two years ago. I would suggest to the Minister that there is a big difference between a man earning £1,000 a year with one child and a man with the same salary having seven, eight or ten children. The man with one child could afford to send that child to the university and he certainly should be able to put him through post-primary education, but the other man is in a very different position. It should not be beyond our ability to devise an amendment to deal with that matter.

Dr. Hillery

There is no means test in the Bill at all.

Debate adjourned.

The Seanad adjourned at 10 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Friday, 4th August, 1961.