Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 3 Dec 1997

Vol. 152 No. 17

Scientific and Technological Education (Investment) Fund Bill, 1997: Second Stage.

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

Is mór an onóir dom bheith anseo inniú chun an Bille seo a léamh. Is é seo mo chéad uair mar Aire Oideachais agus Eolaíochta bheith as comhair an tSeanaid agus is é mo chéad uair bheith os comhair an Oireachtais le Bille.

This Government is committed to developing our education system to address the principal challenges that face us at the turn of the millennium. In this, we have two main priorities. Firstly, we want to bring into the benefits of education, groups who have previously been excluded. This must involve both extending provision and creating new types of provision. I have already been able to announce a number of initiatives in this area and will be in a position to announce further ones in the months to come.

Our second priority is to develop our education system so that it can keep pace with the changing modern world. We must enhance the place of education as a driving force in the economic life of our country. Crucial to this is the need to put right any perceived barriers to economic development arising out of skills shortages, particularly in the technological sector. At the heart of this Bill is a plan to deal comprehensively with this issue. Soon after my appointment I met with representatives of the IDA and the major technological companies operating in Ireland as well as other State agencies and representatives of the teaching unions. I also met with the heads of the Irish universities, the colleges of technology and the regional technical colleges. Following these meetings I announced a programme to increase graduate and technician output from our institutions in order to meet emerging skills needs in the high technology sector. This involved an immediate capital investment of £5 million in creating extra places in third level colleges for 1997. At the time I launched this programme I said further consideration would be given to more capital investment in the context of the 1998 Estimates. We are now in a position to fulfil this promise.

It was in this skills initiative that the Scientific and Technological Education (Investment) Fund had its genesis. Three key objectives underpin the investment fund. First, we want to renew and modernise the infrastructure of third level institutions, particularly in the technological sector, and guarantee they will continue to produce high quality graduates. Second, we want to develop new areas of activities in our institutions, especially where emerging skills needs have already been identified and, finally, we want to invest in promoting the innovation which will be so crucial to maintaining and expanding our recent growth. Underlying all of this will be an investment in developing the technology and skills base of our first and second level schools.

The need for major investment in the scientific and technological area became more apparent as I considered how the regional technical colleges and institutes of technology had been virtually starved of capital investment for their infrastructure; how the institutions of higher education had a dire need of a capital injection for the purchase of equipment; how research and development in the institutions had been operating on a shoestring for many years; the fact that, while plans for major developments in computer education in first and second level schools were announced, no money had been spent to progress these plans; the fact that the training for the hotel and tourism industry was being hindered because of a lack of proper facilities in the colleges, and the fact that apprenticeship training and post-leaving certificate programmes had had virtually no capital investment for a very long time, if ever.

When all of these factors are put together they add up to a very significant need in the technological, scientific and vocational sectors of education. What we are putting in place with this legislation represents a dramatic response to those needs.

This is not a very long or elaborate Bill. However, in terms of what it contains, it is a Bill of the utmost importance. I would like now for the benefit of the House to detail the main provisions of the Bill together with the background and rationale for the provisions.

In regard to the title of the Bill, Senators will note that it refers to an investment fund. There is, indeed, provision in the Bill for an account for the purposes of receiving private donations and this account will be known as the "investment account". However, in the context of what is involved in this Bill the word "investment" in the title refers to the Government's commitment to invest in technological, scientific and vocational education and this investment represents a vote of confidence in this sector of education to deliver the human resource needs of a technology oriented economy.

This represents the crux of the Bill. By establishing a fund and allowing a flexible procedure for planning, the Bill will give a stable medium-term base for developments. The insecurity which comes from the often fraught Estimates process will not affect this investment. It will allow our development agencies to attract employment and inward investment with confidence and it will allow our institutions to seek to build on the State's funding.

Section 2 of the Bill establishes the fund and outlines the two accounts which will form the fund, namely, an account with the Office of the Paymaster General and a private donations investment account. It is opportune now for me in this context to acknowledge very significant private investment by individuals and companies in third level capital projects. These have been for the most part in the university sector and great gratitude is due to the benefactors for their very generous contribution. Credit is due also to those in the institutions who have sought and secured these contributions.

It is important, of course, that private donations would be kept separate from Exchequer moneys in the fund and that any moneys accruing through investment or otherwise from private donations would be paid into the private investment account. In this way benefactors can be assured that their contributions are clearly earmarked as being outside of Exchequer contributions. The Bill provides for this.

This section also provides that, while the Minister for Finance is responsible for management of the fund, this function may be delegated to the National Treasury Management Agency. It is in fact intended that all balances within the fund, whether provided by the Exchequer or by way of donation, will be managed by the National Treasury Management Agency.

Surplus private sector donations, to be kept in a separate investment account, may be invested in Government securities. The management of this investment account will be delegated to the NTMA. Similarly, any balances arising from moneys provided by the Exchequer to the fund will be managed by the NTMA. In the latter case, this would be done through the cash management system which operates for the Exchequer generally. Under this system, any balances held in departmental or other accounts are effectively pooled together and the aggregate balance is managed by the NTMA in such a fashion as to achieve the maximum overall return.

What matters is that additional money is added to the State's investment, not the manner in which that money is added. Whether that is achieved through contributing to the investment fund or by way of the institutions themselves, we expect a significant amount to be added to the core allocation. Experience indicates that direct contributions to institutions are more likely and that the ready availability of secure State matching finance will allow institutions to increase significantly the level of these contributions.

Section 3 is, perhaps, the "meat" of the Bill. It provides for payment into the fund, out of moneys voted by the Oireachtas, of £250 million over the three years 1998, 1999 and 2000. The sum of £100 million will be paid in 1998.

This provision represents a radical departure from previous capital provision for my Department. Although the money will be voted in the Estimates for the Department in the normal way, its provision in a special fund will facilitate a rolling programme of capital investment over a number of years which is difficult to achieve in the normal year by year capital provision. The establishment of the fund and the specific provisions relating to the £250 million in section 3 gives effect to the Government's commitment to capital investment in education in a way never before outlined. Although it is not stated in the Bill, I assure the House that payments into the fund will be additional to the normal year on year capital Estimates for my Department. As a result, the total capital provision for my Department next year will be in excess of £220 million. The corresponding Estimate for 1997 was £94.8 million, although the outturn for that year was higher than the Estimate.

Section 4 of the Bill outlines the purposes for which payments may be made from the fund. The provisions in section 4 cover in a generic way the seven broad areas which will benefit from the fund. Although it is not stated in the Bill, I wish to outline the indicative sums it is proposed to invest in each of these areas.

It has been recognised that continued investment in human capital and in the production of a highly skilled labour force has been a major factor in Ireland's high rate of economic growth in recent years. In particular, the availability of a skilled labour force has formed a crucial part of the IDA's success in attracting significant foreign inward investment, including many leading multinational manufacturers. An interdepartmental group chaired by Professor Frances Ruane estimated that an additional output of 1,000 software graduates and 750 engineering technicians is required annually to meet emerging skills shortages in this sector alone. An extra annual intake of this magnitude would require the creation of about 7,000 new third level places.

The steering committee set up to advise on the most cost effective means of providing the additional places, chaired by the Higher Education Authority, consulted widely with industry and third level colleges. In its report, submitted in June 1997, the committee recommended that a dedicated capital provision be allocated to fund the necessary capital projects. Last July the Government approved an immediate capital investment of £5 million for 1997. Provision of £60 million in the technology investment fund will ensure the proposed expansion programme can proceed effectively and within the necessary time-frame. It is worth recalling that Lindsay initially proposed a £50 million fund.

Skills shortages have also been emerging in activities relating to tourism and catering. This development has become a matter of great concern to the Government, given the growing significance of tourism to the economy. The benefits, both in terms of contribution to GNP and employment creation, have been considerable. More than £1 billion accrues to the Exchequer each year from spending associated with tourism, while a recent survey by CERT indicates that in excess of 188,000 persons are employed in the sector.

The rapidity of the growth in employment has led to skills shortages, particularly in catering areas where demand for employees far outstrips supply. The present capacity of the education system to respond to the problem was constrained by the infrastructural inadequacies of colleges, many of which were established more than 25 years ago at a time when tourism played a much less significant role in the economy.

Efforts to increase the output of qualified workers from the education system and expansion of existing facilities at various regional technical colleges, the Dublin Institute of Technology and the Tourism College in Killybegs have been ongoing, but at too modest a level to address the extent of the demand problems. The scale of the expansion necessary to meet the growing demand requires significant capital investment. It is for this reason and because of the importance of the industry in terms of employment, that I propose that an additional £20 million be set aside from the technology investment fund to support appropriate capital developments in the colleges.

There is strong evidence to show that there is a direct relationship between investment in good education and training programmes and economic development. This is particularly the case for apprenticeships and post-leaving certificate vocational training programmes.

Under PESP it was agreed that the statutory apprenticeship scheme would be improved to meet in a more effective way the need for highly skilled craftspersons. The main objective was to ensure a satisfactory balance between supply of, and the demand for, apprentices.

A new apprenticeship training model has been developed comprising of four on-the-job training modules and three off-the-job training modules. The aim was to increase the number of apprentices enrolling each year in designated trades from 2,500 to 3,500. The current level of economic prosperity has resulted in increased enrolment of apprentices beyond the 3,500 which was planned for. However, there is still a shortfall of training places for apprentices in a number of designated trades — for example, the electrical, plumbing, carpentry and joinery trades. The investment fund will cater for a real need to increase the capacity of the regional technical colleges, Dublin Institute of Technology and WIT workshops and related facilities to meet the demand for an increased number of training places for apprentices in the traditional designated trades.

The training given to students on PLC programmes has enabled them to acquire relevant and marketable skills. This has been widely commented upon by industrialists and others in the business sector. Through the knowledge, competencies and expertise gained from these programmes, PLC graduates can contribute to economic development and meet, through their specific skills, many of the needs of modern enterprises.

Capital investment is required for infrastructural developments in the PLC sector. Many post-leaving certificate centres need to have their physical facilities upgraded and expanded to prepare their students more effectively in both traditional and developing areas of science, commerce and technology. I propose an investment of about £20 million from the fund for the purposes of capital infrastructure in the PLC and apprenticeship areas.

The addition of a network of regional technical colleges in the early 1970s was an integral part of a major reform of the education system. Apart from constituting a response to pressures of growing third level enrolments, the creation of a network took place in the context of industrial policies which promoted the development of manufacturing industries in regions of traditionally high emigration. By equipping the local population with the necessary technical skills, industry could be attracted to the region and consequent employment creation would offer graduates new opportunities at home. In addition, the colleges would assist in supporting greater regional equality of participation in education.

From the outset these colleges, including Dublin Institute of Technology, have sought to anticipate the range and level of education and training provision required by industry and sought by students. They now provide a wide range of programmes. In the last ten years, numbers enrolled in these colleges have more than doubled, with enrolments rising from 20,000 to 45,000. Significant capital investment is required to bring the facilities up to standard, particularly in the regional technical college sector, which will ensure their continuing relevance to the needs of the economy.

About £80 million will be allocated to the technological sector from the fund, which represents a huge capital investment. This investment will ensure that the colleges will have the capacity to contribute to the provision of skilled labour and will ensure that their facilities will be of a sufficient standard to allow them to maintain their important contribution to economic growth through education, training, research and development.

I hope the institutions in the technological sector will use the opportunity the fund provides to pioneer innovative proposals for developing their infrastructure. This should especially be the case in the area of seeking to make and secure a fund raising contribution. The projects which will be supported under this element of the fund will take some time to consider. It is crucial to ensure value for the taxpayers' investment when making such decisions.

Given the speed of technological change, it is recognised internationally that it is essential to replace and update equipment on an ongoing basis. Graduates and postgraduates undertaking training and research require resources relevant to the needs of industry. Such resources are fundamental to the success of the education system's contribution to economic growth. In the context of the emphasis on high technology skills, it is crucial that every effort is made to provide colleges with the most appropriate equipment available. In view of the importance of having leading edge technology in the colleges and having regard to the recommendation of the Science, Technology and Innovation Advisory Council — STIAC — that additional funds are required urgently, it has been decided to allocate £30 million from the technology investment fund to support a comprehensive programme of equipment renewal.

It is crucial for companies to continue to improve their existing products and production methods in order to survive and prosper. Industry must continually seek to develop new products to meet changing patterns of demand and the increasingly high expectations of consumers familiar with technological change. Most companies which do not enhance existing products or develop new ones will fail to maintain their place in the competitive market.

In Ireland research and development in third level institutions has been recognised as vital to the development of a pool of expertise capable of providing support to industry. Investment in modern, state of the art technology and research facilities is critical to the creation of such a skilled pool of researchers who have the knowledge and capacity to co-operate with industry in developing new products and enhancing existing methods of production. The availability of research and development resources will ensure that companies based in Ireland can continue to compete successfully in the global market. In addition, by providing opportunities for post-graduate research, the education system can develop the skills of individuals which can then be brought directly into employment in industry.

The allocation of £15 million from the technology investment fund will enable the provision of substantial new research facilities especially geared towards promoting the transfer of advanced technology into production. In the 1998 Estimates, the Government has provided an additional £5 million for current spending on research and development. Added to the capital spending in the fund, this represents an extremely significant move to promote this vital aspect of our education system.

In the Programme for Government we committed ourselves to promoting computer literacy throughout the school system. This objective is not based on an abstract futuristic idea of where education is going; it is informed by the essentials of educational development which have always been central to our system. The development of an information and communications technologies infrastructure in our schools will enable their use to deliver more effectively the curriculum at all levels.

It has often been overlooked by people commenting on the development of computer literacy in schools that this technology can make an immense contribution to developing basic skills in children and, in particular, numeracy, literacy and second language skills. This has been recognised by many educationalists and I want, in particular, to acknowledge the teacher skills development programmes run by the INTO.

To date Ireland has been in the third division in using technology in schools. Last Friday I launched a major initiative to bring us into the premier league. The Schools IT 2000 programme will ensure that within three years there are a minimum of 60,000 multi-media computers in schools and that at least 20,000 teachers will have received ICT training. As a first element, every school will be connected to the Internet by the end of next June. This is one of the most ambitious programmes in Europe and across the globe to transform primary and second level schools in terms of ICT. This will have a major impact on Irish education and will help to place our system at the cutting edge of international innovation in education.

Schools IT 2000 is a minimum £50 million package. The allocation of funding in the investment technology fund of £25 million will be the mechanism for funding its capital elements. This year we have allocated £3 million for teacher training and for the establishment of the national centre for technology. Up to £15 million will be allocated over three years.

I have already acknowledged publicly the generous initiative by Telecom Éireann in support of information technology in our schools. The initiative, Telecom Éireann Information Age Schools, will involve at least £10 million being spent over the next three years and is the largest ever investment in Irish schools by any body outside the Department of Education and Science. The initiative will complement Schools IT 2000. Telecom Éireann has set a powerful example for others to follow. We will ask other public utility and private sector companies to join with us in a national drive to leave a lasting legacy to the children currently in our schools and to future generations.

Section 6 outlines the consultative process which may be engaged in by my Department with other Departments. This provision gives an indication of the extent to which an investment of this magnitude crosses departmental boundaries and responsibilities. In the skills area in particular, consultation and monitoring is necessary if we are to keep abreast of emerging needs and react positively and quickly to meet new challenges. For that reason arrangements are being put in place to promote dialogue between Government, business and the education institutions in relation to the education and training needs of the economy, to develop and facilitate the forecasting of skill requirements and to provide mechanisms for the speedy implementation of decisions.

A widely representative business-education partnership forum, co-chaired by the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, and myself, will be established. An expert group will advise on future skill needs and forecasting techniques. A high level implementation group will be established comprising the chairman of the expert group, secretaries general of appropriate Departments, the chief executive of Forfás and the chairman of the Higher Education Authority. This group will progress recommendations and monitor progress on implementation. This structure will ensure an ongoing commitment to monitoring and meeting the skill needs of industry and forge an important and enduring link between Government, business and education for the economic benefit of the country.

Section 7 provides for private donations to the fund. It lays down that donations may be made to the fund but that they may have conditions attached, provided the conditions are consistent with the purposes of the fund. I referred earlier to the importance of private donations to third level capital development. While they will be welcome, I am not expecting that direct donations to the fund will form the principal means for augmenting the State's investment. Experience would indicate that direct partnerships with institutions will be more common. The fund will provide an essential platform for institutions to attract this type of support. I will do all I can to help them with this. Section 8 provides for an annual report on the operation of the fund.

These are the main provisions of this important Bill. I have spent some time outlining to the House the areas for investment because each area is important to the development of a vibrant technological ethos within the education system which, in turn, will contribute to both the vocational needs of the students and the skill requirements of industry. In our Programme for Government we made a specific promise to grow and improve "access to employment through a major drive aimed at raising the skills profile of people, through education." With the initiatives of which this fund forms the central pillar, we will have comprehensively delivered on this promise.

It has been suggested by some that we should not put this amount of money into this area while other aspects of education badly need funding. However, if we want to have the money to invest in other areas of education, we cannot afford not to make an investment such as this. If we were to lose the opportunity to grow our economy because of a failure to invest in strategic areas, everyone would suffer. There would be less money for social services, for disadvantaged schools and to tackle serious problems like early school leaving.

I and my Department are proud of this investment fund. It is for far-sighted investments such as this that this Government will be remembered. It represents an innovative, comprehensive and historic initiative which will make a major contribution to our future. I commend the provisions of this Bill to the House.

I regret I must leave the House shortly to attend a Cabinet meeting on a minor matter which is taking place today. I apologise to Senator Jackman in particular but I will be back later.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I want to acknowledge the Minister for Education on his first visit to the House.

Like you, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, I welcome the Minister to the House and bid him farewell with the same breath, but I know we will be welcoming him back again. In saying that, it would be mealy-mouthed of me, even though I am in Opposition, not to welcome the £250 million which he has announced for science and education here, including the additional private funding in section 7.

One of my concerns in regard to that section is that, traditionally, private investment almost always went to the universities. There was a certain prestige in investment in universities. Perhaps it was the fact that one would get one's name over the door or on a plaque. The question I must ask was not fully answered by the Minister in this speech. If the funds are invested by private individuals or corporations in this investment fund, will there be a framework for their distribution; and what will it be? The Bill says very little in this regard and the Minister acknowledged that. This begs the question: what will be the criteria for the distribution of such funds? It would be remiss of us not to mention this and I ask the Minister to give us an outline of a framework when he comes back to the House so that we will know and acknowledge that each section is being treated equitably, that each group, whether primary, secondary and tertiary levels — the regional colleges, the Dublin Institute of Technology or, indeed, the universities — will receive adequate funding based on their needs and their ability to respond to those needs.

One of the aspects which concerns all of us in Ireland as we ride this wonderful, striped tiger is that at some stage it will not run anymore. That Celtic tiger, this economic boom, is based to a great degree on the fact that through great policies we have introduced companies from abroad over the years. In the main these have been hi-tech companies from the US, particularly Boston, which have given extraordinarily good employment to our young people of a nature which is highly technical and demands highly qualified staff, not just assembly but software programming, etc. Of course those companies were attracted to Ireland by the skill levels of our young people, but they were also attracted by the large grants and tax concessions which were available here. We can already see that these might be eroded, if not curtailed, to such a degree in the future that we will be competing to attract and retain these firms not just with Europe but with the Far East, where labour costs are lower. We must ensure we retain those firms. To do that we must enhance our technical skills and produce people with greater technical knowledge. I am delighted that Ireland's standards in this regard are to the fore, but to ensure that those standards are maintained it is up to us to see to it that adequate funding is given to all sectors in education to produce those young people.

Senators would agree that to compete in the global market it is essential that we have a vision of the role of science and technology and that we put into place strategies which would ensure the implementation of such a vision. Recent reports reveal frightening evidence about the number of students taking science subjects at present. This phenomena is not unique to Ireland. It is evident in Great Britain and Northern Ireland also. This is possibly the result of students feeling that the subjects are not related to them in so far as when they leave the colleges they cannot see jobs arising from them or that the introduction of science at second level is a little late. In other words, what I am suggesting that the curriculum should be modified in such a way as to encourage science subjects at primary level so that students will not experience such a dramatic change at second level.

To give some idea of the rates of change, in 1992 there were 11,000 students taking physics at second level. In 1997 the number had dropped to nearly 9,000. In 1992 there were 7,500 students taking chemistry and now the number has dropped to 6,997. While the number studying biology has increased, those figures must be a matter of concern. A programme must be put in place to ensure students at an early level can see the advantages of taking science subjects.

Anybody at the launch of former Deputy Nealon's book last night would know that both Houses are blessed with the number of people who have a background in education. It seems a substantial number of Members are either teachers or lecturers, so there are other people who will speak on their own areas.

I took the opportunity of discussing briefly with my colleague, Senator O'Toole, how this funding could be of assistance to the primary level and I am sure we will find out later in the debate his exact feelings about this. When I made this suggestion to him my legs were rapidly cut from under me, but I was only putting it forward to see if it would run at all. I suggested that many of the colleges have equipment which is out of date, does not work as quickly as more modern equipment and cannot be updated. This equipment is often thrown out, which is a waste of technology and resources, and there must be a way of distributing that equipment into areas where use can be made of it. I know Senator O'Toole will say "Don't throw me the scraps from the table".

No. We will give the third level the stuff we are finished with at primary level when we have finished the creative work for which we need it.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Coogan without interruption.

I suggested that Senator O'Toole would rise to the bait on this issue. However, what I mean is that some of this equipment can be used at other levels, and I am not just suggesting that it would be at primary or second level. There are other areas, such as that of those who are marginalised and have no access to such equipment. It might be possible to distribute that equipment to them rather than wasting the resources.

Regarding the tertiary level, my area of some expertise would be in the regional colleges and, while I always try to avoid being provincial about issues like this, there are two regional colleges west of the River Shannon of which the Minister will be aware, Galway Regional Technical College, which has a campus at Castlebar, and Sligo Regional Technical College, which do excellent work. Their status should be increased to institutes of technology. The Minister would agree that there is no cost to the Department involved in such a measure but it would enhance the reputation of the colleges. It would also make them more attractive. One must consider the number of students who are leaving Sligo and western areas to attend other colleges which have institute of technology status. They do so purely on the basis that when they graduate their chance of getting a job is much greater than if they had graduated from a regional technical college, even though the quality of education is probably exactly the same. I know some of the colleges are applying for institute of technology status and I would ask the Minister that this be given to them.

There has been phenomenal growth in the numbers attending regional colleges over the years. These colleges were constructed as if from Lego sets which were bolted together and, in my experience, they are inadequate for lecturing and have inadequate library facilities, etc. In 1985-6 there were 11,000 attending the colleges. In 1995-6 there were 27,000, an increase of approximately 150 per cent, while the amount of investment during the same period did not keep pace with that. Therefore, during that period there was an excess number of students in classrooms which were inadequate and badly designed.

For example, the building capacity of Athlone Regional Technical College was for 1,000 students but the enrolment is 2,700 students; the building capacity of Tralee Regional Technical College was for 800 students but it has 2,200 enrolled. Funding should be directed to preventing overcrowded classrooms. It is only through the good will of the lecturers and their union that many classes are being taken. In 1986 the college space per student in Athlone Regional Technical College was 26.6 square metres and in 1996 it was 6.8 square metres; in Tralee Regional Technical College it was 17 square metres in 1986 and 5.4 square metres in 1996. These are extraordinary figures. Library facilities are extremely overcrowded — 0.46 square metres per student in Athlone Regional Technical College and 0.24 square metres in Carlow Regional Technical College. This effectively deprives students of the opportunity to study in the library because if they do go there, it is often overcrowded and they are unable to study due to noise. I will not dwell on this matter because others will mention it also.

Technology is changing the way we live, the way we work and how we learn. Being an island is no longer as relevant as it used to be, even to those on the periphery of this island. We have electronically shortened the distance between ourselves and our European neighbours and brought the Orient and the United States to our doorstep. We are no longer as constrained by such factors as time, distance or location. However, if this is true for us it is also true for other countries who equally recognise the need for not just participation in the global economy but also the critical part played by information technology in creating jobs and job opportunities. Ireland must not lag behind this new revolution, which is as important as the agricultural revolution of prehistoric times and the more recent industrial revolution. This revolution is gaining pace and it is critical that we keep up with it.

The Bangemann report made to the European Commission in 1994 noted: "the first countries to enter the information society will reap the greatest rewards . they will set the agenda that others must follow." In this regard I commend the information society steering committee's recommendation to lift the level of awareness in Irish society of ICTs, that is, information and communications technologies. It also outlines the benefits to Irish society of this knowledge and encourages the use of ICTs in enterprise education, the public sector and in the home.

It is critical that our education system produces sufficient numbers of skilled people for the growing industries in hardware, software and services. We must encourage young people to be ready to take on these jobs in the expanding teleservices, electronics and software industries. It is expected that within the next three to four years 20,000 new jobs will be created in those areas. One major area of growth is in telecommunications services, where it is expected that up to 10,000 new jobs will become available inside three years. However, computer skills alone will not be enough to ensure employment in those areas; a foreign language will probably be necessary also. Ireland can develop this area and while the rest of the world is asleep we can take advantage of these job opportunities.

It is wonderful to note that Ireland is a European software capital — we are the fifth largest producer of software in the world and second only to the USA in exporting software. Half of the world's top independent software houses have operations here. Given these facts it is critical that a programme is put into place to alert the young people of Ireland to those opportunities and to ensure that the skills they develop will be aimed in those directions.

One fact of great concern to everybody involved in education is the downward trend in the numbers of students taking science subjects, a phenomenon to be found everywhere. I am not sure how this can be redressed unless career guidance counsellors point out the opportunities to students at an early stage. In my schooldays we learnt Latin and Greek but anyone taking those subjects now would be regarded as either a fruitcake or an intellectual and it is possible that science subjects could go the same way. It was once thought in the US that anyone studying computer technology was what is termed a "geek"— I do not know the exact meaning of that word but it implies that one wears glasses, can only speak in technological language, does not go out on dates or talk to anyone of the opposite sex. However, these attitudes are changing and people studying IT are now seen to have the ability to talk to girls.

I am sorry my colleague Senator Norris is not here to tidy up the Senator's comment.

I have had the opportunity of discussing this with him and his views are as clear cut as those of Senator O'Toole.

It behoves everyone in both Houses to ensure a return from an investment of this substantial nature, although one cannot be certain about such a return until the employment figures are available. Dr. Ian Hughes, a physics lecturer in Queen's University, Belfast, wrote an article in The Irish Scientist Year Book for 1997 which is worthy of discussion in this House as it concerns how one measures a return on investment and ensuring research is done. Dr. Hughes states:

All sides in the current debate on science and technology policy in the Republic of Ireland identify encouraging innovation as a central concern. The Irish Research Scientists' Association identifies a lack of government funding for university research as the main barrier to increased innovation. Recent experience in UK universities however suggests that investment in people, rather than investment in research, should be the central issue. [It is extraordinary how views have changed on this matter. ] The stark contrast in both the level of government funding of university research, and of the infrastructure in place to manage research in the UK and Ireland, is well known. Seven UK research councils, responsible for everything from particle physics to medicine, disburse around £1.4 billion in research grants annually. In comparison, Forbairt's total research budget is £1.5 million. Put another way, the total research funding for all university Physics departments in the Republic of Ireland is only around 12 per cent of the research funding for the Department of Physics in Queen's University alone.

Furthermore, grants from the UK Research Councils make up only one third of the total research funding to higher education within the UK. Funding from the European Union and charities such as the Wellcome Trust make an equal contribution, as does grants funding from industry and the public sector. With around £4.5 billion in research funding available to universities within the UK annually, academics in the North are clearly better off financially than their colleagues in the Republic.

I will give this article to the Minister as it is worth perusing.

Also of great concern to anyone involved in education are those people who are marginalised by information technology, to whom it is the same as quantum physics. It bears no relationship to them and, unfortunately, they will not get an opportunity to avail of it. The Minister spoke about the lack of skills in tourism; I know of one company which established itself in an area of high unemployment and decided to work with CERT to employ local people and give them the skills to work in the industry. Over 50 people began the course but only ten people are still on it, the other 40 having dropped out. It is extraordinary to have a drop out rate of 80 per cent. We should examine why these people are marginalised and how information technology can help them.

I congratulate Dr. Thornhill from the Department of Education on his new position on the HEA. I commend him on his great work in modernising the Department.

If the Minister wants these funds to be used adequately it must be based on mutual trust. Such trust will be difficult to find if he does not adhere to agreements. I am referring to the delay in payments to teachers at TUI level: the agreement under the Programme for Competitiveness and Work is not being adhered to. If the Minister wishes to guarantee the co-operation of teachers at that level he must ensure the agreements which are already in place are adhered to and maintained.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I compliment the Senator on his well researched speech.

The Senator was very informative — I feel I have nothing to add as he covered so much ground.

I welcome the Minister of State and wish him well in his new portfolio. I congratulate the Minister for Education on his very fine initiative to create this new fund which will address the future needs of our education system. It will develop a technological emphasis in our system and give students skills which will prepare them to fit into the industrial world.

The fund is a framework for financing the development of scientific and technological education. For a long time we were slow to recognise the importance of science and technology and their role in society. We emphasised literary and artistic success while undervaluing the talents of our scientists and technologists. I am glad the Minister is addressing this imbalance. If we are to reach our full capacity we must make our education system more rounded and take every opportunity to appreciate the role played by science and technology in national development.

As we move towards the next millennium we must ensure there is a firm skills base for scientists and technologists. We are facing major challenges in our education system with a constantly changing curriculum and new modules at primary and secondary level. We must bear that in mind when addressing the skills needs of our economy.

This Government decision will keep Ireland at the forefront of job creation in an increasingly competitive market place. This investment will protect and promote job creation in international companies also. It will modernise our society, give us access to employment and raise our skills profile. It will also produce high quality graduates, which is the essence of the matter.

I congratulate the Minister on putting this fund on a statutory footing, which will allow for greater certainty in future planning in this area. I welcome the fact that the money will be managed by a national management agency and that donations will come from non-Government sources also. This money will be in addition to the annual capital allocation and will not replace ongoing investment.

As the previous speaker said, it is necessary to promote consultation between the Government, business and the education system so that we know the skill needs at any given time. We must create a partnership which will develop strategies for national manpower forecasting and prioritise areas for the allocation of money, subject to evaluation processes. I welcome this new forum, which will examine how such decisions are implemented and will ensure we get value for money. I am glad it will have representatives from the education field, trade unions, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Higher Education Authority and many other agencies.

We must identify the skill needs of each sector, forecast future trends, advise on the promotion of education and continuous training and improve awareness among job seekers of where they are likely to find jobs and how to acquire the necessary qualifications. We must promote a partnership between the business world and the education and training sector to ensure we are working in harmony rather than in isolation, as happened in the past.

The Minister referred to seven broad areas to which this funding will be allocated. He said that £60 million will be allocated to computer software. This will create additional places in technical colleges and universities and will ensure third level institutions have the necessary buildings and equipment to offer world class courses. This is welcome, because the problem with the third level points system is one of supply and demand — young people would be under less pressure to obtain high points if there were more college places.

The Minister has also allocated £21 million to the hotel and tourism industry. Ireland has lagged behind many other European countries in terms of catering training and the lack of proper infrastructure in our hotels.

In the Programme for Government the Minister clearly stated his concern for post leaving certificate courses and the apprenticeship sector. He announced a major investment of £21 million in telesales training in the PLC sector. There is a huge shortage of apprenticeships in a number of areas such as electrical work, carpentry, plumbing and joinery. We all know how difficult it is to get a plumber. We should consider developing a training school for apprentices. This would ensure there were always people available to deal with the emergencies which occur in everyone's life. This investment fund will cater for the need to increase the capacity of the regional technical colleges, the Dublin Institute of Technology and related colleges to meet the increasing demand for apprenticeship training places.

The teleservices courses, which are a national initiative, provide training skills in that industry. There will be huge job creation in that area over the next three years. It is forecast that telesales jobs will increase from the current level of 400 jobs to 10,000 jobs in three years time. I welcome the emphasis on this area. These courses are aimed at school leavers and those preparing to return to work. The key element will be an overseas placement of six months in which students will be given job training and work experience in their chosen language. This is a new departure for the PLC sector and a new student support scheme is being introduced. It will promote fluency in European languages and information technology skills and an understanding of foreign cultures.

We must ensure that the quality of our third level graduates, whether from regional technical colleges or universities, is protected and promoted. The investment fund will help to transform the technological aspects of our education system. It will ensure that our third level institutions have the buildings and equipment necessary to offer first class courses across a full range of disciplines. This can be done through improvements in the certificate, diploma and degree courses. I welcome the investment of £80 million for this sector. I also welcome the provision of another £30 million for a major renewal programme.

We all recognise the necessity for research and development. It makes a major contribution to the economic and social development of society, including our increasingly successful industrial performance. It is important that universities and regional colleges develop a strategic policy on research so that institutions can take an active part in identifying research needs and encouraging staff to address them. The aim of such a strategy is not to hurt the freedom of academic research, but to enhance it by providing a framework broader than that imposed by purely commercial considerations. I welcome the allocation of £15 million to meet the capital needs in promoting research in technology development.

There is a need to update equipment in our colleges and to improve the tiny allowance paid to postgraduate research workers. The quality of postgraduate research compares favourably with the best available in other countries and many of our postgraduates are the brightest and best of our young people. We must encourage them to stay in Ireland so that we can make use of their abilities for the good of the country. The Minister needs to look at this.

The technology needs of schools are to be addressed, where many are bewildered by accelerating advances. I welcome this. The Programme for Government contains a commitment that every schoolchild will be given the opportunity to develop computer literacy and numeracy. I welcome the decision by the Minister to provide primary and secondary schools with over 60,000 multimedia computers over the next three years as part of a drive to bring the education system into the information age. A start has already been made. The recent commitment of £10 million by Telecom Éireann, which will ensure that every school is connected to the Internet within the next two years, is to be welcomed.

Given the changes to the curricula and the shift in emphasis towards technological subjects, it is necessary to look at the structures within primary and second level schooling. Hitherto, computer skills have been taught in isolation. I therefore welcome the necessity for an integrated approach. Computers should be used in the teaching of every subject, including mathematics, art and history. They should be used as part of the education system and not as a separate skill.

We need to demystify information technology. It is a matter of concern that many teachers have no knowledge of computers. They come from different backgrounds in terms of in-service courses and are ill at ease in dealing with computer equipment. Imparting competence to teachers in this area is an important module of investment in our education system.

Information technology in secondary schools has not been able to provide the range of practical subjects available to vocational schools. While vocational schools have become knowledgeable about the use of computers, including utilising them for keeping school records and compiling timetables, many secondary schools are deficient in that regard. I welcome the intention to ensure that they become more familiar with the use of computers. It will ease administrative and managerial work.

Several computer technology programmes will now be made available at junior certificate and leaving certificate vocational and applied levels. The leaving certificate applied programme has become technology oriented. Given these developments, those providing in-service courses for teachers should tutor them in information technology. As a teacher who is anything but computer literate, I have attended these courses and have found them stressful, primarily because the tutors do not have the necessary communicative skills in information technology. They provide training in isolation and have failed to introduce an integrated approach. Future in-service courses should not take place over two or three days, but over a week. They should also ensure that teachers in the classroom can call on expert advice as they need it.

Given that children will be involved in information technology, it will be bound to break down in the classroom on occasion. Lack of confidence by teachers in using the system and the need for repair work must be addressed to ensure that prescribed syllabi are adhered to. It is important to ensure that competent personnel will be within easy reach.

I hope the forum will address the evaluation, prioritisation and allocation of resources to ensure best value for money. It is a historic day that we are able to put this funding on a statutory basis and that we can plan the future of technology within our schools. It is especially welcome that this process will include primary schools as it means that pupils will not have to wait until second level to become involved in information technology.

I congratulate the Minister on this historic initiative. I wish him well with the programme. I call on the Department of Education and Science to take note of my points on how it can be administered in primary and secondary schools to ensure that we will all benefit from this huge investment. This is an historic day for our new education system in this technological era which will bring it forward into the next century.

Earlier this year when addressing this issue I pointed out that for literacy policies to be serious children leaving primary schools should be as adept with the keyboard as with any other equipment. The keyboard should be as familiar to them as a book because computer literacy is as important as any other literacy. In making presentations to Departments and to the technology commission I made the point that every primary school child should have an e-mail address by the turn of the century and that every primary school should have its own website. This would make communication easier and the website would take the place of school magazines. These suggestions were greeted with a certain amount of doubt as to whether they could happen. I welcome this Bill and I congratulate the Minister and his Department on the work done. This is a significant and progressive step which can only be for the good of education. Now that the money has been put in place we must ensure that it is spent properly.

We should begin by examining ourselves. It is important the Members of the Oireachtas are positively disposed towards information and communications technology. I addressed a group of employers and I told them that I do not allow people who work with me to have the "I know nothing about those computer things" attitude. If they feel they know nothing about them they should be looking for early retirement. It is like wanting to use a quill instead of a pen.

Is there something wrong with that?

There is. It is looking backward, not forward. It is harking back to the past, to what people consider the "good old days" when they walked barefoot to school. We are in a new age and must deal with new technology and this entails training the next generation to use the technology. We must also ensure that Members of the Oireachtas will also use the technology.

I appreciate this legislative development but much more is needed. A high level of resources is needed at primary school level if we want to put two or three computers into the 20,000 or so classrooms and equip them with the Internet connection. At an average cost of about £2,000 per classroom an investment of about £40 million would be required to install the hardware alone. In addition, another 10 per cent approximately would be needed for new equipment and maintenance on an annual basis. That gives an idea of the scale involved.

Parallel developments should take place hand in hand with this legislative proposal. Information and communications technology equipment should be zero rated for VAT. The Minister should consider this suggestion closely because it is disgraceful that people who are equipping educational institutions must also pay VAT. At primary level the schools carry out fund raising for equipment, running everything from poker classics to selling rice crispie buns and it is a little rich for them to have to sell another 20 per cent of rice crispie buns to pay the VAT.

IBEC must also take a lead in this regard, something it has not done to date. It is taking a back seat and leaving the State to do all the running. IBEC needs to do more, a point I have made to it. It is important that we show our appreciation of Telecom Éireann's investment of £10 million in the education system. It is a huge investment which it was not obliged to make and it has not been duly thanked for having made it. The INTO has been in contact with Telecom Éireann on this issue for over two years and we think this is a big step forward. Other companies, such as Compustore and IBM, have also take initiatives in the primary sector but much more needs to be done. The majority of industry is not rushing to follow the lead given by Telecom Éireann in particular. Industry will benefit from this development. It is a valid research and development investment for companies. It is wrong to think this is a matter for the communications and technology companies alone. It is relevant to all companies because such investment will bear fruit for all industries. We need to be sure that all industrial sectors are involved.

In addition to seeking zero VAT rating for educational technology equipment being installed in schools, I also seek a provision in the Finance Bill to allow industry to invest in educational technology in a tax efficient manner. Companies should be able to claim a tax break on the capital investment involved. Such an incentive would be good for the country because it would be an investment in the future.

I do not question Senator Coogan's commitment to the ideas he advanced. My point about third level involvement is not a knee-jerk reaction. I am aware that the Department of Education and Science has established close relationships with a US company called Techcorp which recycles computer equipment mainly from third level institutions into other areas of education. It sounds like a good idea but most technology used in industry or in third level education is in dedicated applications, either as spreadsheets or word processors. The equipment used in primary schools must be state of the art because it must facilitate creative work — it will be used as much in the art class as in the science class, as much in languages as in publications. The equipment must be state of the art and flexible. It would make more sense for primary schools to send their cast off equipment to other places requiring confined applications.

In the past a number of companies have, with good intentions, sent old computers to local schools. However, the local schools do not know what to do with them. Senator Ormonde raised the issue of teacher training. Lessons must be learned from what happened in the US and the UK when they went through this phase of development. In those countries computers were sent to schools from warehouses and there was no parallel training for the teachers who were to use the computers. Many of those computers are still sitting in their boxes unused because the teachers have not the confidence or the competence to integrate them into the curriculum. The Schools IT 2000 scheme which is part of the initiative announced by the Minister recognises the importance of training. The Department has earmarked a substantial sum of money for teacher training.

A number of agencies and commercial interests have come out of the woodwork offering to deliver training yet they have no background in the field. In the US and the UK, education technology courses were delivered by technologists or third level people talking down to primary and post primary teachers. It did not work because teachers were offered skills based training which had no basis or relevance in a practical classroom setting. We do not need that. We only need to be able to drive the car, not to know how the engine works. One does not need to lift the bonnet to be a great driver. Similarly, teachers do not need technologists or experts in the third level area talking down to them.

We need the involvement of such experts and academics because they have much to contribute. However, the training and education of teachers in the use of information and communications technology should take place contemporaneously with the installation of computer hardware equipment in schools. I ask the Minister to recall this point at every opportunity. As I put it to teacher groups, if technology is put into schools and children are showing teachers how to use it rather than the other way round during the first week, we have failed. It means the teacher has not developed the necessary confidence. The difference between the younger and older generations is that the younger generation will press a button on a computer to see what happens, but the older generation wonders what would happen if they pressed it. This gap must be bridged and it can only be done through training and by giving people confidence and competence.

Over the last two and a half years the INTO has identified a countrywide network of experienced teachers who use technology in their classrooms every day to enhance their teaching and make the curriculum come to life for their pupils. This happens in small one and two teacher schools in the Acting Chairman's county as much as in large urban schools. It is not an urban based phenomenon. I was greatly pleased recently to walk into an INTO training course and find the principal of a small two teacher school in the west sitting like a 12 year old in Biblical times, surrounded by teachers and principals from some of the largest schools in the country, and explaining how they might use technology in a cross curricular manner.

The talent bank of people put together by the INTO is willing and able to share their knowledge and expertise with colleagues if they are given the resources and flexibility to do so. The INTO has discussed this matter with the Minister and officials from the Department, who are very open and supportive of that approach. Many things are happening in this area. The INTO proposes to implement its plan through magnet schools for information and communications technology. It has launched an initiative where schools, which are at the cutting edge of this area, will join a scheme. They will be identified as models of good practice and teachers from other schools will be able to visit them. They will be part of the training of trainers. Teachers will teach teachers. The INTO is laying out criteria for such schools and is hoping to achieve a specific status. We are confident that we will get the necessary resources either from the private sector or the Department's initiative. We are in discussion with both on this matter. The INTO is now the largest provider of in service education for teachers. We have learned that the most efficient way to train teachers is to have teachers teaching teachers. It works well.

Technology will be put into schools and a design team of teachers who are specialists in this area must be involved. They can outline what they have learned and what teachers will need. They can design a course which can be run for a small number of people on a pilot basis over a week. It can then be tweaked and modified to produce a course which can be made available. Teachers will be convinced of the potential of using information technology in their classrooms if they have seen and heard it in action in a classroom in a neighbouring school. Teachers are extraordinarily practical and, particularly at primary level, open. They are willing to adapt as long as they are convinced that the change will help their work, make the job more efficient and enhance the learning and teaching experience. This means that whatever is provided must be up to date.

People have asked how the project can progress. One proposal is that the information must be updated daily. For example, a teacher on Inisturk is teaching maths to third class. He or she wants to know what developments have taken place in this area and what he or she could use in their class that day. The teacher clicks into a website which is updated daily and finds primary education in the menu and third class maths in the submenu. He or she can then find whatever they want to do in their class that day, such as division. They can locate information provided by other teachers in Achill or Tallaght or even outside Ireland. This is what living technology means and how it will work. It is not remote or distant but central to the entire education process.

This will require further investment and the INTO considers that a virtual school involving teachers without pupils would be needed to update such a website daily. These teachers would gather together the new and best practices in these areas and put them on the web daily so that they are available to teachers in classrooms. They could work on a cross, inter or extra curricular basis. This is the future and it is not difficult to assemble. Everything is now in place to do it.

I was delighted Senator Ormonde raised a point which I was hesitant to mention because it might appear petty and small. Funding must be built into budgets for maintenance and upgrading due to obsoletism or breakdown of equipment. Funds must be allocated for on site technical support. I thought Senator Coogan might have stressed the point earlier about the need to have technologists in addition to practitioners. Teachers can only use the equipment, not fix it.

In the same way as one needs ready access to a mechanic to look after one's car, we need ready access to technicians to ensure that products which are not working are fixed or replaced quickly. There must be a fleet of dedicated technicians who can repair machines on site or, alternatively, offer replacement machines if they must remove equipment from the school. The planning must be in that detail. I appreciate that Senator Ormonde, as a teacher, immediately identified that aspect. I have removed the backs of computers and tried to fix them, but my record is abominable. I have tried three computers in recent years because I thought I knew how to fix them. Such technical support is required.

Every school should also have at least one multimedia laptop computer. This would allow teachers to take them home and work on them. My life is centred on my laptop machine. Everything I say and do is contained in it. There should be one such machine available for every ten teachers so that people can, for example, do preparation work. We should also consider how to get more movement in this area. People involved in technology and teachers who have done training courses should be able to buy computers at a reduced price.

I wish to make a final appeal. Schools throughout the country have made major efforts in this area during the past ten to 15 years, as has the Computer Education Society of Ireland. School communities have spent many years raising funds to put computers in our classrooms. Teachers have attended computer courses at their own expense or endeavoured to learn about computers in their own time. Those schools which, without resources or support, have shown the lead in this area should not lose out. There should not be a computer count in those schools which have pulled themselves up by their bootlaces. Any further equipment or assistance they receive should be treated as additional and they should not lose out. I seek the support of Members on the other side of the House in that regard. The schools to which I refer deserve to be complimented and given further resources.

I am unhappy that only 10 per cent of money allocated in the budget will be earmarked for schools. The primary sector will be fortunate to receive 50 per cent of that allocation. However, I have enough experience to recognise progress. I compliment Senator Coogan on the open, receptive and welcoming way he greeted the Bill. The Senator's action is a sign that Members will respond to legislation on its merits. I am sure that any criticisms I made are marginal. I could have said much more but this is not the time to be critical. As Senator Coogan stated, it is time to see how this issue can be progressed. I congratulate the Minister and his officials, who have worked hard in this area, for bringing forward the Bill. I look forward to working with those officials and the private sector to make this initiative a success.

This is a landmark occasion for Irish education. It is on a par with other red letter days, such as the one on which Donogh O'Malley announced the provision of free education and, by so doing, changed the life prospects of thousands of young people. It is also reminiscent of the day the scheme of grants for third level education was put in place. These measures enabled young people to realise their full potential and to be treated fairly within the education system. I regard today as a day of equal and fundamental importance. Judging from the tone and tenor of previous contributions, today has been greeted with excitement and optimism on all sides of the House.

I am sorry the Minister for Education and Science is not present to receive my warm congratulations for introducing the Bill. It is a source of pride for Members that he chose to introduce this fundamentally important legislation, which has farreaching consequences, in this House. This is the first Bill he has introduced and it marks him as someone who is innovative, has a progressive view of education and is prepared to make the role and function of education in society — which is more important than sterile debate on ownership and control of education structures — of paramount importance. What matters at the end of the day is how and what we teach our young people at this stage in their personal development and in the development of this country.

I warmly congratulate the Minister because, under his stewardship, we are entering an important phase in the development of Irish education. I commend him, the Minister of State and the officials of the Department who, I do not doubt, had a major input in drafting the legislation. This is a day of optimism for everyone who cares about education and young people.

The purpose of the Bill is to establish in law the Scientific and Technological (Investment) Fund. As stated earlier, on the face of it this appears to be a simple Bill dealing with a single issue. It may be simple in that respect but it is not in any other. The intent of the Bill is praiseworthy and its effects will be entirely beneficial to young people and society in general.

I welcome the Bill and I am pleased to contribute to the debate. It is critically important that all our young people should be enabled to become the masters, not the victims, of technological education. When I say "all our young people" I mean precisely that and I may return to this issue later.

It is important that young people come to terms with technological education for a number of reasons, not merely in respect of mastering the skills envisaged in the Bill — these will be the skills of survival in the next century — but because of the sense of personal development and self-confidence they will obtain by being exposed in this very practical way to the world of information technology from their earliest days in primary school. This will have an enormous effect in boosting young people's self-confidence and their capacity to master technology. Unlike many older people, they will not feel sidelined. From the outset, young people will be aware that the technology exists for their use and benefit. They will be so well versed in the use and principles of this technology that the development of their minds will take place on a par with that of the technology itself.

We seem to be caught in a headlong rush of technological development and heaven knows where it will lead. One of my great regrets is that I am not yet convinced I will be able to return in another guise to see what our schools and country will be like in the year 2020.

I would be happy to return as a fly on the wall to see how schools will support themselves. I began my education in the era of "talk and chalk" and spent a number of years administering that meagre principle in a number of schools. I would love to return in 30 years to see what the classrooms will be like, but I have not succeeded in negotiating a deal in that regard.

It is critically important that our education system receive this transfusion if Ireland is to compete successfully with other countries. As Senator O'Toole stated, it is vital that young people would master the skills necessary and develop an aptitude and sense of ease with computers and technology. This will enable them to develop with and relate to technology.

During my time in the Lower House I never ceased to be appalled by the fact that there was a serious shortage of skills among Irish people. It was obscene, in places with high unemployment such as the city I represent, to see so many young people desperately seeking employment who, because of their lack of skills, were not in a position to apply for jobs as they became available. It pained me that, with the improvements in the science of forecasting matters such as these, we were not able to predict more accurately where the job opportunities for young people would be and have these skills made available to young people so that they could compete successfully for the jobs. I hope the measure initiated here today will rectify that problem. One is tempted to ask whether teachers were teaching young people everything except what they really needed to know. The Bill, which attempts to address this phenomenon in a practical way, must be welcomed.

Recently I read a statement by Professor Allen, the Director of the new Institute of Technology Management in UCD, in which he said that all the technology in the world is of no benefit at the end of the day if we do not know how to manage it. He also said, "If we do not know how to manage it properly, it is not going to pay off for us at the end of the day." The skills of technology management are a logical follow-on from that envisaged in this Bill and I ask the Minister to make these skills available in all third level institutions. This is big business in the Far East and in countries with which we will be competing in the next ten to 20 years. We should be leaders in the field and not be left behind by the Malasians and others who are making advanced technology management skills part of their education system.

It is of fundamental importance to ensure that the provision of equipment envisaged in this Bill in first, second and third level schools is matched with suitable in-service training for teachers. It is important to invest in training teachers both in the skills of using this equipment and in their attitude and openness to the possibilities of such equipment. Despite the sterling efforts of the INTO outlined here by Senator O'Toole, we do not have a strong tradition of in-service training for teachers. We make a very scant investment in such training. For too long we relied on, and got away with, a good system of training for teachers at primary level and not quite so good a system at second level. Teachers were given initial training only at the age of 21 which had to last until they retired at 65. There is a very shortsighted approach to investment in the workforce, schools and colleges which has to end because the key to our success is the provision of adequate and ongoing in-service training for teachers.

I welcome the input of industry to this fund, part of which will be topped up by donations from private sources. Initially I presume the private sources will be industries that stand to benefit most from the introduction and perfection of this type of education. That is welcome because up to now it has not been a feature of Irish industry to provide proper in-service training for their workforce. This is a feature of some of the new industries now locating in Ireland, particularly American industries. They provide ongoing on-the-job training for their workforce. That is the key to a well motivated and highly skilled workforce. I recall debating in the other House an Apprenticeship Bill which the then Minister for Labour, Deputy O'Rourke, introduced. We had a comprehensive debate on the scarcity of apprenticeships in crafts and trades and the attitude of the construction industry which had turned its back on investment in apprenticeship training. At that time employers failed to invest in young people. These same employers today pay outrageous money to brick-layers and other tradesmen who can set their own wages. That has come about because the construction industry lost the good and caring habit of training young apprentices and passing on their skills. That was a shortsighted attitude. I hope that when this Bill is propagated and held up to industry, it will prompt them to make a more definite input into on-the-job training for their workforce so that we can cultivate the culture of ongoing learning. If young people wish to advance in their jobs, they must be prepared to take on further and ongoing training. That is the era in which we now live. Young people will only be encouraged to adopt that attitude if they see it being practised and propagated by the captains of industry and commerce. This Bill throws down the gauntlet and offers a challenge to industry to make an input into technological on-the-job training.

This Bill envisages a three year programme. It is an important programme which should be monitored carefully on an annual basis. The expending of moneys must be monitored and the programmes evaluated for their relevance and success with young people. There should be a rigorous programme of evaluation on an ongoing and regular basis to ensure the programme meets its objectives on time. I see this as the first step along a very long road.

I hope that when this programme is complete in three years' time, its success will have been such that we would at that stage embark on a second phase. We will not have any option but to do so, as technology by its very nature will run ahead of us and we will, at that stage, be convinced of this programme's success. I had hoped that the Minister would tell us who the unspecified donors were; I wanted to know who were the brave and patriotic people who would contribute to this investment fund. Perhaps he will reveal their identity in his closing speech.

This Bill is a huge milestone in the development of Irish education. I am absolutely thrilled at its introduction and I warmly congratulate the Minister. Having got this Bill off the ground, I hope he will see it as a lever which will enable him to double back and look at those young people who, as matters stand, are not in a position to benefit from this programme. I refer to early school leavers and young people who leave school without being literate in the traditional sense of the word. These young people are being cast out from our education system and have little to look forward to but a lifetime of petty crime and drug abuse. There are hundreds of thousands of such young people in this country today. While I commend the Minister on this Bill, his next priority should be to tackle the problem of these young people. In the system of natural justice, they have as much right to share in the benefits of a good education system as the young people for whom we are making particular provision here today. The Minister is correct in saying it is through the wealth generated by industry and so on that we will be able to put proper remedial programmes in place for the young people who are getting nothing from the £1.4 billion we make in education.

I mentioned that Mr. Donogh O'Malley, whose motto was that every child should be given a chance, lit up my youth with his educational innovations. The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, introduced his first Bill in this House today and I humbly offer him Donogh O'Malley's motto for the duration of his term of office, which I hope will be a long one and which I know will be a good one. The Minister's motto must be to give every child in this country a chance and he must do that in the context of proper educational provision.

I welcome the Minister's announcement on the £250 million technology investment fund. In his speech he said his first priority was to bring groups who had previously been excluded into the benefits of education. Having been involved in education throughout my entire adult working life, it would be churlish of me to criticise the fact that this measure is only being introduced at this stage.

I pay tribute to the people who have initiated educational innovations throughout the past decades with little or no assistance from the Department of Education. In my own school, which is an inner city one, advances in information technology have been made over the past ten years using finance from the trustees of the Presentation Order, who foresaw the necessity to meet the needs of children of the eighties and nineties. They prioritised information technology by providing computer lessons for all students. Even prior to the introduction of transition year, those students were as equipped for the technological age as the Bill before us suggests they should be. I do not want people to get the impression that no Irish students are computer literate; 38 per cent of second level schools are connected to the Internet and have access to E-mail. That is not a bad figure, but it does suggest that quite a lot remains to be done.

This Bill is a milestone for those who felt excluded in the past, not so much because of the amount of investment involved but because it marks a move away from the highly academic nature of our Irish education system, which for so long separated those who went on to third level education from those who did not. The latter group possibly obtained a pass or honours standard leaving certificate and went straight into the workforce. Others went to regional technical colleges and, more recently, some did post-leaving certificate courses. Regional technical colleges and post-leaving certificate courses and colleges have always been viewed as cinderellas in comparison with the universities. Today, we are acknowledging that there is another side to the Irish education system. The people targeted by the Bill will be highly motivated and skilled and it will hopefully afford them the status they deserve.

In relation to funding, I would like to draw attention to the fact that the University of Limerick, formerly the National Institute of Higher Education, under the leadership of Dr. Edward Walsh, moved into the technological age at an earlier stage than other universities, which took far longer to see the potential and need for a highly skilled workforce at graduate level. Statistics show that such graduates are highly employable.

It is interesting that the funding sourced by Dr. Walsh did not come from the business sectors from which it is envisaged funding will come under this Bill. He sourced his funding from American companies and other bodies who could see the value of what he was trying to do. Dr. Walsh spends most of his time in America and during conferring ceremonies he always makes the point that the University of Limerick would not be where it is if it were dependent on the largesse of the Department of Education and the business community within the 26 counties.

Dr. Walsh does not approve of public expenditure.

If one were to visit the University of Limerick, one would see a highly advanced technological university which is meeting the needs of the 21st century not only in these scientific areas but also, of late, in the area of humanities. My former friend from UCC, Dr. Mortell, learned quite a lot from Dr. Walsh and the University of Limerick as to how he should proceed. The NUI universities used the University of Limerick as a prototype fro their own development and Dr. Walsh certainly laid down a technological yardstick for Irish third level institutions.

The Minister referred to the need to develop our education system so that it keeps pace with an ever changing world. We can presume that many children will receive computer-based toys for Christmas. Quite a number of toddlers are already familiar with computers. In the past that kind of education did not continue when children went to school and any knowledge they had was learned at home. In the past there was no technology in the school and their familiarity with it was generated at home. I am glad the primary sector will now be able to avail of the benefits of the finances provided for in this Bill.

Until I became a Senator I was on the board of governors of the Limerick Regional Technical College. The advances within that college coincided with the improvement of the plant. It is now a magnificent building with every facility imaginable. It has a particularly wonderful area devoted to computers. The building work taking place in the college in recent times is unbelievable. When such a college is improved the demand for places is boosted immeasurably. I am glad Limerick Regional Technical College is doing so well and improving its links with the University of Limerick. There should have been such links in the past to provide a career path from the regional technical college to the university if the students so wish.

With regard to early school leavers, the school where I taught was aware that if students could be kept in school to complete the applied leaving certificate, they might be encouraged to stay for the next educational stage, the post-leaving certificate college. I use the example of that school because it is a microcosm of what is taking place generally. Such students were able to continue their education and do well in the leaving certificate applied course, which contains a large element of information technology and computer literacy. Those students would have carried out their project work on computers. They were thus able to move to a higher level of information technology through the post-leaving certificate course, which is available within the school campus. They could choose between high tech or quality child care courses. When we discuss skills shortages it is worth remembering there is a skills shortage in the latter area also. It is not referred to in the Bill but it is worth mentioning.

Schools are now aware that education can be linked with job opportunities and that such a link need not necessarily mean that education is no longer as pure as it was in the past. It is a question of marrying the broad concepts of education with gearing students towards employability, without making jobs the only end product of second level education. Education can also be blended quite well with leaving certificate applied courses and post-leaving certificate courses.

I am glad the Minister is taking a partnership approach whereby the business sector, representatives of the IDA and representatives of the major technological companies will meet the heads of universities and colleges of technology. That is the way forward and we have been seeking such partnership in education for some time. It is interesting to note that since the board of governors of Limerick Regional Technical College was reconstituted, representatives from business, farming organisations and other industries have made a major contribution to the policy of that college. In addition, the liaison officer employed by the college to liaise between business and education has had enormous experience in the business sector. Such a policy must be the way forward. The National Technological Park in the University of Limerick has emerged as a result of combining education with the high tech skills required by graduates for employment in that park.

I wish to refer to the Forfás document "Where the Jobs Are and How to Get Them". There will be many job opportunities in new teleservices, electronics and software businesses. Second level students will be aware, through their career guidance counsellors, of those opportunities and they will be directed to those areas. Only in the electronics area does the document make a reference to the fact that applications are particularly welcome from female candidates. We are inclined to think that positive action is no longer necessary to direct girls towards non-traditional jobs, but it is as necessary now as it was ten years ago. A student of the year from a Limerick college under the vocational education committee system who is female is just one of two females in the University of Limerick undertaking a course in teacher education in engineering. If there are no women teaching engineering, there will be no role models and it will be hard to encourage women into non-traditional industries. Even in the University of Limerick the number of women in non-traditional courses is still low. The Minister should have made an effort to mention that fact, because jobs are no longer available in traditional employment sectors for women. Positive action is still necessary.

The Minister said £25 million will be invested in the Schools IT 2000 programme, while Senator Quill repeatedly referred to the need for in-service training for teachers. There are 15,250 teachers in the ASTI, of which I am still a member, and they teach 80 per cent of second level students. Teacher training is essential for all teachers because information technology can be used to teach geography, English, history and other subjects. Although information technology is mainly relevant to the scientific sector, particularly in this Bill, it is important to remember that it can be applied throughout the curriculum. If it is confined to the scientific sector, it will not be part of the vibrant education policy which must be applied to the humanities.

In-service training for all teachers is essential, but unless there are paid substitute teachers for teachers taking part in in-service training it will not be viable. This is a sore issue in post-primary schools. Teachers cannot simply close schools to participate in in-service training. It would also be unfair to select some teachers for such training and exclude others. They, too, need that training. Where will the finance come from to provide substitute teachers in schools such as mine which has 660 students? How will in-service courses be organised?

There is a major challenge ahead. An international survey carried out by International Data Corporation in 1996 found that Ireland was in the third division in terms of being prepared for the information technology age and ranked 23rd of the 26 countries surveyed. I hope the Minister realises the nature of this challenge. He can be assured of our co-operation in meeting it. However, it is not simply a question of finance but a question of commitment to ensuring that everybody, teachers and students, avails of it.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, who was a classmate and is a fellow Galwegian. I compliment the Minister for Education and Science on this terrific initiative. Only positive results can emerge from this legislation.

Our education system has made a major contribution to the development of this nation. The world is changing at a rapid rate and what is new technology today will be old hat tomorrow. It is essential that our education system not only responds to existing needs but plays a leading part as well. We are facing a major challenge in developing our educational needs. In order to bring those people initially charged with that responsibility up to date, we must show clear leadership and determination in meeting the needs of a rapidly growing knowledge-based economy.

On a number of occasions I have had the opportunity of visiting Silicon Valley. On my last trip there I was amazed to hear employers say they had great difficulty in filling some of the highly skilled jobs on offer. We must ensure that does not happen here. We must match the demand for highly skilled personnel with a motivated workforce. We are poised to take advantage of the success of the economy and other positive developments. Central to all this excitement is the rapidly expanding world of information technology which is developing at breakneck speed.

Confirmed investment in human capital and in the production of a highly skilled labour force has been the key to Ireland's economic growth in recent times. In particular, the availability of a highly skilled workforce has formed a crucial part of our success in attracting inward investment, including many leading manufacturers. It is estimated that 1,000 software engineering graduates and 750 engineering technicians are required annually to meet the emerging skills shortage. In order to do something about this, the Government approved a capital investment of £5 million last July after consulting widely with third level colleges and industry. The provision of £60 million from the Education Technology Investment Fund is designed to ensure that the expansion programme can proceed effectively within the proposed time frame.

Both the Minister and Senator Ormonde touched on the major skills shortage that has been affecting the tourism trade, including catering. This is a matter of great concern considering the growth of this sector in recent years. The benefit both to GNP and employment creation has been considerable when one considers that approximately £1 billion accrues to the Exchequer each year from tourism spending. It behoves us to pay special attention to this area in which, as the Minister indicated, some 188,000 people are currently employed.

The rapid growth of this industry has led to a shortage of skilled workers. The present capacity of our education system to deal with the need for more skilled graduates in this area is questionable. When the regional technical colleges were initially set up this type of demand did not exist and, consequently, we are in a deficit position. The efforts that have been made to date are modest.

Regional technical colleges have played a major part in reforming the education system. From the outset, the regional technical colleges, together with the new and existing universities, have tried to anticipate these needs and level of training required by industry. They now provide an excellent range of subjects from the humanities to new technology. In view of the rapid change in technology we should upate such equipment on an ongoing basis. Resources to provide this are fundamental to the success of the educational system's contribution to continued economic growth.

The major new package of funding which the Bill will ensure will allow us as a nation to play a much greater role in the expansion and utilisation of information technology. It will also help us to create high quality jobs for highly educated and skilled people. With this investment in new technology we can move on to greater employment and greater prosperity. We must never allow a situation to develop where we have to turn away companies who are willing to participate because of our inability to provide them with a suitable workforce.

The Schools IT 2000 Programme deserves special mention as an integral part of the special investment that education technology is bringing about. A number of important themes provide the foundation for the Government's schools programme. At all stages it has drawn on international experience to ensure the proposals include only those aspects which can be shown to meet our stated objectives directly. More importantly, the concept of partnership runs throughout the document. It will involve schools, parents, local communities and third level colleges together with private and public sector organisations.

The Government wants to support innovation by providing a framework for encouraging future development rather than setting up rigid policies. The Government's objectives are to put in place a permanent schools information technology infrastructure at a number of important levels. The plan does not merely involve putting computers into schools but will also help to develop teachers' skills — a point that has been mentioned by a number of speakers — in using new technology to provide support and to implement agreed policies.

The Government has pledged to put in place a comprehensive technology infrastructure in schools. Within the next three years the Minister hopes to have some 60,000 multimedia computers installed in schools. It is also intended that every school will be connected to the Internet and thus be in a position to use the Internet via high quality lines. This will be achieved through a programme called the technology integration initiative. This initiative will operate on two strands. The first will involve the connection of every school to the Internet. It will also involve targeting assistance to disadvantaged schools to ensure all schools can participate.

An Opposition Senator said earlier in the debate that he hoped everyone would start on a level playing pitch. It is intended that this will be the case. Once this is achieved, hopefully we will move towards achieving and maybe surpassing the current minimum targets.

Senator O'Toole said primary and second level schools will be the poor neighbours when it comes to receiving new technology. I hope, however, that special schools will also be considered for some of this technology. Computers have played a major role in schools for the physically handicapped, where they have been of great benefit. I have first hand experience of this in a school I am associated with. Young children who may have impaired hand movements, for example, or other physical disabilities can, with the aid of computers, do their homework without the assistance of their parents, whose help was hitherto required.

Helping teachers to develop the skills necessary to use information technology has been shown throughout the world to be the key to successfully introducing IT to the classroom. If teachers are not on board at the outset, one is fighting a losing battle. This has been recognised by a number of successful courses, including those run by teachers' unions. A minimum of 20,000 teachers will receive information technology training in the next few years. The Government will also ensure that those teachers coming on-stream will have pre-service training before taking up their positions — this plan is to be welcomed. They also intend that they will have access to distance learning programmes.

These objectives will be achieved through the teaching skills initiative. Under this training will be provided on three levels. There will be basic awareness training in the use of information technologies; there will be training in the use of information technologies as an active curriculum tool, and there will be advanced training targeted particularly at teachers participating in developing programmes. The final element of the plan will put in place a permanent support infrastructure which will have a number of elements. It will involve the development of curriculum innovations to enhance the use of information technologies in the classroom; it will establish a national network to advise and support schools in developing their own technology plans, and it will establish a national framework to support the development of multimedia tools and products tailored to the Irish curriculum. This will be achieved through the schools support initiative.

This will have a number of important elements. The ScoilNet project will involve the establishment of an on-line advisory support service for schools based in a regional education centre. A network of advisers will provide local support to teachers and schools alike. Through the school integration project a number of schools will be to the fore in piloting innovative ways of developing further policies. The objective will be to make Ireland the world leader in school based information technology developments.

None of this will happen without effective co-ordination within the Department of Education and Science. An education information and communication technologies unit will act as a focal point for our involvement in this programme. The most important element will be the National Centre for Technology in Education. Informed by policies developed through partnership, the NCTE will be the driving force behind Information Technology 2000. I understand from the Minister that the director and core staff will be appointed next month and that the centre will be operating soon after that. The centre will, in addition, provide support on a regional basis.

Substantial funding will be needed for this programme. There is in place at least £50 million which will allow us to achieve the minimum targets within three years. The Government will invest £40 million in the programme. The capital element of this has already been allocated for payment from the education technology investment Fund. This will be added to by a further £10 million being contributed by Telecom Éireann, which represents the largest ever investment in our schools by anyone outside the Department of Education and Science. Many of the details of Telecom's investment have already been announced and other companies have expressed a willingness to contribute. We can see from all these elements — the fund, Telecom Éireann's involvement, the sponsored Internet link-up and the Schools Information Technology 2000 that this is the most comprehensive and focused educational package that has ever been put together.

I like to listen to the views of my colleagues and Silicon Valley is, inevitably, mentioned in discussions such as this. It is worth saying that Silicon Valley has the highest number of toxic dumps per unit area in the United States. It is a mistake to believe that information technology is a clean industry. It generates a substantial quantity of quite toxic waste material. I do not say this as a criticism, but as a chemical engineer, I have a defensive interest in this question. I hope we move from assembly into the high tech area of fabrication, as is being done by Intel in Leixlip. If we do, however, we will have to take responsibilty for the considerable environmental burden that this will bring.

I am intrigued at the promise of an Internet connection for every school by the end of June 1998. The school attended by two of my daughters still requires girls to bring toilet paper to school because the school cannot afford to supply it and it still requires every family to contribute 50 pence per week to pay for central heating. We would not want to have schools with high tech in one room and no toilets in another. We need to develop on a broad framework. I do not disagree with the principle of technology in education, but access to the Internet is not the place to start. The simplest way to start — and I speak as a user and teacher of information technology — is to ensure that every child who leaves primary school is able to type. The biggest obstacle to using information technology is the inability to find letters and numbers on a keyboard.

The Minister has asserted on numerous occasions that this fund is separate from, and in addition to, the normal capital provision. My recollection from the newspapers is that the funding for capital programmes in the Department of Education and Science Estimate for 1998 — separate from this fund — shows a decrease of, I think, 17 per cent. I accept that the £100 million represents a vast increase, but we are exaggerating the generosity of the Government a little, although this measure is extremely welcome and badly needed.

The idea of this fund is extremely good. As a lecturer in a regional technical college — which the Minister said would be called something else by Christmas which is fast approaching — I agreed when this plan was announced that it was a good thing principally because it represented a recognition of reality. There is a myth that we have a binary system of education in which both sectors have equal status. The philosophy of the Department of Education and Science and of successive Ministers has been that one sector is more important than the other in terms of areas such as support services, access to career advice or security services. The institution in which I work, for example, is not allowed to employ a resident night security person. They have to buy in security from outside. We are not allowed to employ grounds staff. They have to be bought in from outside. In a whole series of areas such as technical and secretarial support there is not equivalent status. There is one important area and one which has to make do. I have hopes that this fund represents a movement towards something like equivalence.

I teach a degree course in engineering which requires the highest level of leaving certificate points of any engineering course in the country; it is higher than any of the universities. We can do our job, but in all the regional technical colleges we do it in extremely straitened circumstances. The physical infrastructure and the provision of support staff in regional technical colleges is abysmal and that results in a public view of the technological sector which does not, in the minds of parents in particular, accord with equivalent status.

Regional technical colleges have been extraordinarily successful. I heard the chief executive of the Irish Trade Board, Mr. Oliver Tattan, say at a university function that regional technical college engineers were far more useful to industry than university engineers. I do not know if that is true but I was more interested in his opinion than most of the university audience because I work in that area. Yet, in spite of that, the degree to which regional technical colleges are involved in the development of policies in the area of science, technology and research is minuscule. Bodies have been set up to advise the Government on policy in this area without representation from the technological or regional technical college sectors. I do not know why people say it is a good thing to have a vibrant technological sector separate from the universities and then rely on the advice of universities to develop science and technology policy, particularly research policy. That is a contradiction.

Duplication between regional technical colleges is actively discouraged. Yet duplication between universities of areas that have been successfully developed by the regional technical colleges seems to be actively tolerated if not encouraged. There is the ridiculous position where the University of Limerick has opened a department of chemical engineering with public funding, yet I work in a similar department which is screaming out for more resources. Although the universities receive public funding in the same way as the regional technical colleges, they seem to have a capacity to operate independent of public policy which, until they are brought into a framework, will frustrate the Minister's intentions.

The extraordinary deference of the Department of Education and Science to the universities never ceases to amaze me. For example, if University College Dublin decides that leaving certificate honours mathematics is not good enough to do engineering and increases the standard for no particular reason other than it does not like leaving certificate honours mathematics any more, the Government will agree. That creates another obstacle for young people who want to get into technological education. Students require a B in honours mathematics to do engineering in UCD, which is unique in the third level sector. That will not produce any better engineers but it creates a pecking order which allows universities to operate with a degree of autonomy which is sometimes used to advance their sense of status.

Universities have created a mystique about degrees. An honours degree is worthwhile but what type of quality assurance programme do we have for pass degrees? Hundreds, if not thousands, of young people get degrees in our universities and other institutions which are only subject to the quality assurance of an external examiner who looks at the best in the class. Quality assurance is not just an issue for the technological sector but it is only mentioned there.

Universities give out diplomas like confetti. They offer various diplomas for different periods of study. Some are important diplomas while others are awarded to people who complete a brief, yet worthwhile, period of adult education. How does that affect the public's perception of the status of a regional technical college diploma after three years of third level education? If we want to create equivalent status, then a university should award a diploma comparable in terms of commitment to a diploma awarded by a regional technical college, otherwise there will be a totally unbalanced public perception of the two sectors of education.

I am not happy with this Bill which promised to change the situation. Section 4 is the essence of the Bill as it deals with capital expenditure for the provision of scientific, technological or vocational education. At the top of the list are the underfunded, undercapitalised universities. I live in a city where the university has not stopped spending money on buildings in the past ten years. I am not concerned about that but the students I teach are painfully aware of the fact that the college in which they work is, in terms of physical infrastructure, light years behind the other institution to which they could have gone had they not chosen to pursue a career in technological education. I become extremely nervous when I see the universities queueing up for further funding. I get even more nervous when the Minister hints that he will look more favourably at programmes where there is matching funding for third level institutions.

Senator Jackman said the President of the University of Limerick, who does not believe in public expenditure although he is a great man to spend public money, spends most of his time in the United States raising funds. If the director of a regional technical college did that the Department of Education and Science would severely criticise him for neglecting his duties at home. One cannot talk about equivalent status when one level of institution is regulated in almost every detail and the other can operate with a degree of autonomy which seems to suggest it will spend money whatever way it wishes. Huge amounts of State funds were found for its core technological services and equally vast sums of money, about which those of us in the technological sector can only dream, were found elsewhere to provide a quality service for its students.

The Minister must meet the commitments made when this fund was announced. I am concerned that a change of Minister or of philosophy could result in a further redirection of funds. The sector of education in which I work always benefits from the presence of a Fianna Fáil Minister. Tragically, those of my colleagues on the Left when in Government, like myself, tend to have a deferential attitude to universities which usually means the regional technical colleges and technological sector suffer.

A move towards the centre of gravity.

Without proper funding for the people who attend third level education, it will not be possible to extend participation. Post-leaving certificate students are awaiting with interest the grants promised by Fianna Fáil before the election. Somebody needs to look at the general cost of going to college.

One of the regrettable things about this Bill is the megalomania of the Department of Finance to control everything. There are 21 references to the Minister for Education and Science and 13 to the Minister for Finance. This is a Bill on education, yet the Minister needs the consent of the Minister for Finance on seven occasions.

I ask the Minister to confirm if the name of Cork Regional Technical College will be changed. He said it would be done before Christmas but Christmas is coming and nothing seems to be happening. I would like to know what is going on.

Senator Brendan Ryan disappoints me, coming as he does from the regional college of technology sector, with which I had the good fortune to be involved over a number of years in the 1980s in my capacity as a politician. I am disappointed that almost his entire contribution was negative towards the Bill. If he was at any time positive, the extent of his positive contribution was summed up in about four or five words. There was a slightly redeeming feature towards the end of Senator Ryan's contribution, when I heard the Minister remark that the Senator had moved towards the centre of gravity in his approach to the Bill.

Having said that, my contribution is not about attacking Senator Ryan or anybody else. I welcome the contributions of other Opposition Senators, because when one is faced with a situation such as this, where a significant public fund is established, it is difficult to exercise the role of Opposition Senator and at the same time be positive. I commend Senators Coogan, Jackman and O'Toole for their positive, balanced and reasonable evaluation of the Bill. Despite their obligation to screen it carefully, they were able to see its significance.

I welcome the fact that this Bill, which heralds a new era in the history of investment in education in Ireland, is being initiated in the Seanad. It is an historic milestone, irrespective of what has been said by those who do not have the same confidence in it. In committing £250 million to technological education over a three year period, this Minister and Government are indisputably demonstrating a vision and understanding of the enormous challenges and opportunities the new technologies present for economic development in Ireland for the foreseeable future. If I were asked to describe how Minister Martin presents himself through this Bill, I would say that he shows vision, willingness to consult from the outset, an innovative style, leadership, commitment but, most of all, delivery, because one of the hallmarks of this Bill is its money up front approach. Maybe that is what is so hurtful in certain quarters. This is not a Minister who sets out to be a rezoner of education, but one who sets out to be a leader in the field of educational research and policy.

The fund, drawing also from the private sector as it undoubtedly and inevitably must, is a powerful statement of confidence in the pivotal role education must embrace in the Ireland of the new millennium. The highly enthusiastic endorsement the decision has received from hi-tech industrialists and educational establishments alike testifies to the boldness and scope of the project. It represents a huge vote of confidence in our children's future, among other things, and reflects a maturity and a coming of age in how we, as a country, plan for the years ahead.

The wide ranging package which this Bill embraces sets out to meet the immediate needs while at the same time laying down a blueprint for future success. The spiralling demand for employees in the hi-tech sector, in teleservices, electronics and software industries, as well as the emergence of skill shortages in activities related to tourism and catering, require huge infrastructural changes. This Bill is targeting resources unambiguously, not philosophising or theorising.

The money up front approach, which, as I said, is one of the great hallmarks of the Bill, reflects a clear determination to facilitate the necessary supply of skills at the earliest possible date. Equally, the decision to act on the longer-term strategy in the same manner, with immediate large investment in technological literacy at primary, second, post-leaving certificate and third levels, along with the launch of a new business and education training partnership forum, will firmly underpin Ireland's place in the new technology revolution well into the next millennium.

Criticism of the relevance of the leaving certificate was raised in a number of major reports on the economy and education in recent years. Culliton, the OECD, the ESRI and the Marino Institute of Education criticise the leaving certificate as being unsuited to the needs of many students. It is now widely accepted that the emphasis on the cognitive is less and less important as technology advances and information increases. Of course, information is doubling every five years. Therefore, we can no longer retain all important information. What future and present young generations need is knowledge of how to access information, evaluate it, interpret it, process it and present or apply it in different ways. This presents new challenges, for example, to the way we teach. I hope that the heart of this Bill is about targeting resources, the wherewithal to take on the new methodologies.

Not alone is it a challenge to the way we teach, but a challenge to what we teach, because we must abandon the emphasis on the didactic style, the great old reliable which has existed from time immemorial, and embrace a learner-centred approach where learning will be more experiential, self-directed, investigative and evaluative.

Perhaps accessing information will become the most fundamentally important skill. Following on that, its evaluation, interpretation and application will be vital to employability. Indeed, in that context the in-service training programmes, to which all previous speakers have referred, must be properly integrative so that the vast potential of what is being done here is realised in classrooms at primary, second, post-leaving certificate and third levels. The greater potential for employment in the future will be in technology related areas, so employability necessitates knowledge of the skills which come with this new revolution. We are not alone in discovering that this is a significant way forward for the future. The Scans report in the US during the Presidency of George Bush also identified new priorities in those related areas.

Clearly the decisions we are making in this Bill imply a large and vital role for technology in education. Computer based learning will become pivotal to success and interfacing with the world wide web — the Internet — will become even more important. This is the philosophy at the core of the Bill and it is underpinned by the money up front approach.

The revolution wrought by CD ROM is a major source of information and its gathering will be of enormous importance. The communication and interpretation of information will be equally important. This inevitably signals the importance of computer skills, audio-visual skills and competence with the various related technologies. Video will become not only vitally important but absolutely imperative in many areas.

This clearly implies that schools must be equipped with the full range of computer facilities — hardware, software and interactive technology. This, of itself, would be of little use without training teachers in the use of the new information technologies. We must face up to the fact that huge resources will be needed for training on an ongoing basis.

I was very taken with the contributions of some Opposition Senators who said that we should start this programme of in-service training for teachers, who will be the people imparting these new techniques in all subjects in schools and colleges. It is vitally important that, as Senator O'Toole, among others, stated, the timing is right to do it. The Minister, some of my colleagues and I recall vividly hearing of schools receiving computer equipment which remained wrapped in cardboard for years because we failed to take an integrated approach. In the ordinary course of events teachers were adaptable, willing, committed and motivated; but they regarded computers as ephemeral, marginal and irrelevant to their work. They were afraid to press a button in case they did not understand what happened. It is vital that training begins when technology is introduced so that roles are not reversed; otherwise young "whiz-kid" children will instruct the teachers and the programme will be undermined. I am delighted that there are such children, but we must achieve the necessary competence and confidence among our excellent pool of teachers.

I am delighted that the Information Technology 2000 programme, launched last week by the Minister, is targeting resources and infrastructure towards the classroom for the development of teacher skills and towards research. Its key objective is the achievement of a natural partnership in this area and it is vital that teachers, parents, industry, public sector, private sector and community organisations form such a partnership. That may sound grandiose, but it means that implementation at the coalface is all the more important, because it is more complicated. Senator Ormonde was right to emphasise the modus operandi for the assessment and constant evaluation of its implementation, as it will ensure its continuing success. What happened in the past, when schools were selected for pilot programmes, should not happen again on a national basis.

I compliment the Minister for putting this funding on a statutory basis. I had the privilege of serving on the governing body of the Dublin Institute of Technology where, despite Senator Ryan's vehemently expressed pessimism, I saw the strong efforts, tremendous motivation and commitment of teachers and researchers to obtain funds to develop technology and research. Senator Costello probably sees this also because he is on the Dublin Institute of Technology governing body at present. Sometimes these actions were illegal as the Vocational Education Act, 1930, did not legally permit or facilitate such work in Dublin Institute of Technology colleges. Nonetheless, the will was there and if this spirit is allied with resources, huge potential will be realised. This sector will be encouraged by the Bill.

Níl an dara rogha ann. Tá riachtanas fíorthábhachtach le hinfheistiú sa teicneolaíocht nua. Tá costas mór ag baint leis ach caithfear féachaint ar an gcostas mar infheistiú san am atá le teacht. Molaim go dúthrachtach agus go díograsach gur cheart dúinn a bheith flaithiúl agus mórchúiseach agus an t-airgead a chur ar fáil do na scoileanna le crua-ábhar, bogábhar agus traenáil a chur ar fáil a dhéanf freastal ar riachtanais na tíre.

I welcome the Minister and the Bill. I congratulate him on his initiative in providing the vehicle of an investment fund with both State input and potential private donations. The fund of £250 million is highly significant. However, I request clarification on the constitutionality of the proceedings before we move to the next stage. Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution are the relevant provisions and they are categorical. Article 21.1.1 states that "Money Bills shall be initiated in Dáil Éireann only".

I am sure the Minister will address that matter.

It is relevant to the Bill to say why the matter should be addressed. Far be it from me to limit the number of Bills initiated in this House but the constitutional point should be clarified. Article 21 states that Money Bills shall be initiated in Dáil Éireann only and every Money Bill passed by Dáil Éireann shall be sent to the Seanad. Article 22 defines Money Bills as follows:

A Money Bill means a Bill which contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following matters . [including] the imposition for the payment of debt or other financial purposes of charges on public moneys or the variation of any such charges; supply; the appropriation, receipt, custody, issue or audit of accounts of public money.

This Bill certainly involves a charge on public moneys and the appropriation of public money, as there is a specified fund over the next three years dedicated to investment. It therefore comes within the terms of Articles 21 and 22. I request clarification on this point because Article 22 goes on to say:

The Chairman of Dáil Éireann shall certify any Bill which, in his opinion, is a Money Bill to be a Money Bill, and his certificate shall, subject to the subsequent provisions . be final and conclusive.

The Ceann Comhairle should certify whether this is a Money Bill and I ask the Minister to resolve this to our satisfaction before the next Stage.

I applaud the Minister for providing a three year planning programme of capital investment funding with a minimum of £250 million from the public sector and the potential for substantial private donations. It would be good to see an indication of where those donations might come from; but I hope they are forthcoming from the business sector, multinational and indigenous, which benefits inordinately from the high quality of skills, training and education received by our young graduates.

I am also delighted to see a sum of money ringfenced in a planned fashion. A similar procedure is being adopted with local authorities, where motor taxation is to become a dedicated, guaranteed fund for the provision of services. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government should maintain that initiative, which was introduced by his predecessor. Ring fencing the money is a good idea because one then know what will be available in each of the next three years.

The third level sector will feel it has won the lottery. However, some university presidents think they will lose out as the money will largely go to the technological sector, the Dublin Institute of Technology and the regional technical colleges. The Bill is specifically directed at technological education, so that is understandable. However, according a recent newspaper report, only Portugal has less vocational and technological training than Ireland. Some 23 per cent of our school going population receives such training while the relevant figure for Germany is 77 per cent with a similar figure in France. We have a great deal of ground to make up.

While I welcome the Bill, I have some criticisms of it. There is almost no increase in the Estimates for capital funding for first and second level education. Very low priority is given to that sector except for the £50 million allocated for computer education in schools. However, the breakdown of that figure is £25 million for computers and £25 million for teacher training, which is not enough. Much of this money was, in fact, allocated last April by the previous Minister for Education, which further dilutes the amount provided for computer education in schools. Young people have a natural love of technology and should be taught to use computers at school.

There are other hard pressed education sectors which will feel they should have benefited to a greater degree. However, the technological and business sectors will be quite happy with this Bill.

I am chairman of the City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee which has been emphasising for some time the lack of funding for vocational education and training. That sector is not described as a third level sector, although it is doing a great deal of third level work through the post-leaving certificate courses. There are between 17,000 and 18,000 students on PLC courses, many of which lead on to third level diplomas and degrees. The pathway process is the key to education for those at the end of the scale and needs tremendous investment. The Minister has not clarified in this Bill or his remarks the extent to which such courses will benefit from the legislation. Will the vocational education committees, which are not described as being part of the third level sector, receive an injection of capital funding for their technological courses?

Despite the Government's promises in relation to the PLCs, there has been no indication that such students will receive maintenance grants parallel to those received by other third level students. It would cost approximately £15 million to do that but it is a major sector involving between 17,000 and 18,000 people. I will be carefully examining the budget to see if there has been any move in that direction. However, there has been no indication so far that Fianna Fáil is going to deliver on its manifesto in that respect. How will the money in the fund be dispersed? Will these critical areas of vocational training and education benefit?

I know Senator Ormonde is very interested in the area of adult education and literacy from her experiences as a teacher and guidance counsellor in Coláiste Eanna. According to the OECD report there are very high levels of serious adult literacy problems in Ireland. We are almost bottom of the scale, with approximately 25 per cent of our adult population, or 500,000 people, having serious problems with numeracy and literacy. That sector, which has operated up to now on a hand to mouth basis, needs a very fast injection of funds and personnel.

I recently received a letter from the Dublin Adult Learning Centre in Mountjoy Square which gave the stark details of the problems it faces. It stated that the adult literacy and community budget currently stands at £2,315,000. In 1998 it will receive an additional allocation of £70,000, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of our people require adult literacy education. The letter stated this will be divided between approximately 100 adult literacy schemes in 38 vocational education committees. At a time when the economy is booming, that seems to be kick in the teeth to that hard pressed sector of the community which operates on a shoestring and on a largely voluntary basis.

That centre in Mountjoy Square, which is worth £200,000, is owned by the archdiocese of Dublin which is prepared to sell it for less than half its market value. It is a very suitable premises and could be a centre for adult and literacy education. However, the Department of Education has, so far, refused to contribute towards that purchase of about £80,000. I ask the Minister of State to convey to the Minister that the archdiocese is prepared to contribute the benefit of over £100,000 in terms of the sale of that centre.

The Minister must address these issues in terms of priorities and the desired direction of the education system. A recent study indicated that 16 year olds in Ireland were more prone to taking drugs and alcohol than their counterparts in any other European country. Paddy Clancy recently published an excellent comparative study of entry into third level education in 1986 and 1996 which showed no significant progress in access to third level for those in disadvantaged areas. We are providing a fine investment fund at the top of the scale and are involving the business community. However, the Minister should provide similar funds at primary and second level and should encourage business to get involved at that level because that is where the process of good education and training must begin.

I welcome the Bill and the Government's commitment to spend £0.25 billion in the next couple of years on this area. I also welcome the Government's recognition that we must react must faster than before. The Minister has acted decisively to head off a potential crisis. I had intended to spend half my time complimenting the Bill and the other half arguing against some of its flaws. However, I do not have enough time to compliment the Bill, which has already been done in many ways today. I find this is a very curious Bill, especially with regard to finance. I am confused why this means was chosen to implement the spending of £0.25 billion on capital projects in education.

When the education fund was announced on 6 November my first reaction was that it was an imaginative new idea. It appeared to be a way of getting beyond the constraints of annual budgeting and to be taking a long-term view, something we have not experienced in the past. It also appeared to be a way of getting away from funding capital projects through the annual Estimates. Instead of fighting for capital projects, the Government would allocate a global amount each year to go into an investment pot. I was in favour of this because money would then be allocated as needs arose by the Department of Education and Science rather than by the Department of Finance, but subject to the restrictions set out in the legislation. That approach would also allow the Government to allocate money in good years, some of which may be spent in later years when finances were tighter. It represented a useful creative idea and I understood that is what was intended for the legislation.

However, the Bill makes clear that this is not the favoured approach. Perhaps it once was, in which case it may have been nobbled by the Department of Finance. For example, despite the mention of specific amounts, the Bill does not bind the Government to contribute £0.25 billion. Rather it sets a ceiling on what it may contribute but gives no commitment that this limit will be reached. Indeed, it gives no commitment at all over and above the initial £100 million, which doubtless the Minister will provide in today's budget.

However, there is worse. Even when money is allocated to this fund from the Exchequer, it can be clawed back. Section 5, which applies only to private donations, provides that money in the investment fund cannot be used for any purpose other than that prescribed in the Bill. There is no such provision against clawback for the money provided by the Exchequer. Perhaps something can be done about this on Committee Stage.

Far from the Bill providing a way of getting beyond the constraints of annual budgeting which is desirable for capital projects, it now provides for it in an even more restricted form. Not only is no State money guaranteed beyond 1998, but even 1998 money is not safe from clawback. More significantly, the Bill provides that all payments should be authorised by the Minister for Finance. Instead of allocating a global amount to education, which is then spent according to education priorities, every payment will be under the control of the Department of Finance with no freedom of action delegated to the Department of Education and Science, despite the fact that the legislation lays down strict guidelines on how the money in the fund may be spent. At best, this is no different from the existing way of allocating funds. It may even be worse. As far as the State's money is concerned, I see no reason for introducing this mechanism. It confers no benefit.

The fund may have been established to facilitate private donations. If so, the structure outlined in the Bill is inadequate. It appears to fly against the reality of corporate donations. Most prospective donors, whether individual or corporate, want full acknowledgement for their beneficence. They do not want their contributions to become invisible in a big pool. While anonymous donors are very useful — one such donor, whose name is probably widely known, has given by far the biggest private contribution to Irish education over the past decade — most donors want recognition. There is provision for a private donor to attach conditions to a donation. However, there is nothing in the legislation to encourage private donors to give to this fund rather than directly to an educational institution of their choice. Indeed, they would be better to make a direct donation to that institution.

There is an even more important consideration. The nightmare scenario for private donors is to find that their money displaces Government spending. By giving a donation they want to increase the overall funds; they do not want to give the Government any excuse to reduce its own contribution. I understand from experts in philanthropic areas that the principle of additionality is sacred to most donors and that they are much more serious about it than even the EU Commission. Many donors will be very wary about having their money mixed up with State money in one big fund, especially one which places no binding commitment on the State to make any contribution, which allows the State, in its own absolute discretion, to clawback its contribution if money becomes tight in the years ahead and which allows the Department of Finance rather than educational interests hold the purse strings and have the last say on money spent.

If the aim of the Bill is to create a donor friendly environment which will stimulate massive private sector contributions to Irish education then it is misconceived in its present form. Hence the reason for my confusion. I hope the Minister will enlighten me when replying or on Committee Stage.

Why are we considering this legislation? Why cannot the Government allocate the money and spend it in the time honoured way? What good does this Bill do that cannot be done under existing structures? What benefit does it confer that existing legislation does not?

I am in favour of spending the money allocated. Would that it were more. It remains my hope that the crisis in skills, to which so many of us have referred, will prompt a fundamental re-examination of how we plan our education in the future. We have a new, highly energetic Minister who knows the system backwards and is committed to adopting it to future needs. I am impressed with his performance, at the way he has recognised needs and is doing something about them. My concern is that his undoubted knowledge, ability and energy be put to the best use. I am enthusiastic about this Bill. I look forward to having my questions answered and perhaps addressed on Committee Stage.

I support this Bill. It one of the most imaginative legislative responses to education for some time. I agree with Senator Quinn regarding the recognition, incentives and safeguards for donations from private individuals and corporate bodies. The explanatory memorandum refers to the provision of £250 million into an account for the purposes of buying equipment in the years 1998-2000. Will the Minister confirm that this is the intention of the legislation and that the Government will provide that money?

An ideal situation arises when the Government provides money and the incentive to private individuals and corporate bodies, who may have an emotional attachment or other good reasons, to contribute to the education of our young people. However, there is no provision for tax or other incentives which will encourage donors to provide money. Provision for this may be made in other legislation, but there is no such provision in this Bill.

Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended at 4 p.m. and resumed at 6 p.m.
Top
Share