Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 31 Mar 1960

Vol. 180 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 43—Universities and Colleges (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

"That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, for Grants to Universities and Colleges, including certain Grants-in-Aid."— (Minister for Education.)

Mr. McQuillan

I want to make one final reference to the situation regarding the possibilities of integrating at some future stage Trinity College and the National University. My comment arises as a result of a statement published on to-day's paper attributed to the Home Secretary in the House of Commons yesterday where, in a message to the Six County Government, he stated: "Your Border is our Border and your soil is our soil." If the speeches made in this House are correctly understood, it would appear that many Deputies who oppose the integration of these two Universities, even in 20, 30 or 40 years' time, believe that the Border around the Six Counties should be extended to include Trinity College as well. I am sure Deputies reject and repudiate any such audacious claim on the part of Mr. Butler.

We should also reject and repudiate the suggestion that Trinity College should now be regarded as outside the scope of Irish nationalism and Irish life. That institution produced great patriots and great Irishmen in the past, irrespective of whatever mentality governed it. I feel that, whether a decision is taken now or in the near future to integrate these two Universities, it will still produce its quota of great Irishmen for the benefit of the country as a whole.

I suggested last night it was my duty and the duty of every back-bencher to speak in this debate, if only for the purpose of arousing public interest in what I would describe as a fait accompli. There is a dangerous apathy outside the House, a feeling of “I-could-not-care-less” as far as this measure is concerned. That is a sad commentary on the public outlook and it bodes ill for the country. But even worse is the subdued atmosphere among Deputies themselves. When you meet them in the corridors, and discuss this matter with them they suggest “What is the use of talking about it? It is all over. The decision has been taken.”

I shall not repeat myself on that aspect of the matter except to say the Universities should be the home of democracy. They should teach how precious democracy is. That should be their aim. Instead of that, from the example given by the authorities of the National University, it would appear that they have nothing but contempt for this democratic institution here when they presumed seven or eight years ago to go ahead with this scheme without the sanction of the people. The proposals and plans outlined in the red Booklet produced by the University authorities are more like some obscure imagining of ancient Greek scholars than the product of modern alert minds. In my opinion, the Minister acted first and then decided to think afterwards. He should have given full consideration to the problem he mentioned in the course of his long and detailed speech as reported at Column 932 of the Official Debates, dealing with the five medical schools and the engineering schools. He said:

We could probably therefore do better and less expensively with a lesser number of medical and civil engineering schools, but the question would be which College or Colleges would be prepared to give up its school.

He asked that question at the same time as he is giving authority to University College, Dublin, to remove itself, bag and baggage—every Faculty concerned—out to Belfield.

Would it not be commonsense to decide now how many medical schools we need, how many engineering schools we need, and where we are to place them? Having decided that on a rational basis, we could then decide whether or not University College, Dublin, needed the wide expanse at Belfield. That would be the action of a Minister who had freedom of action but I believe the Minister is being used. I have the greatest personal respect for the Minister but he is being used as a rubber stamp in this instance.

At the same column in the Official Debates, the Minister is reported as referring to the position existing amongst architects. He said that there is a certain amount of emigration amongst architects, of whom 25 or more are produced annually, about 20 from University College, Dublin, and five from Bolton Street College of Technology. There is an admission that we have the University and Bolton Street producing architects and at the same time, we have the position that the Minister himself admits that there is a link between the vocational school system and the Universities.

He referred to the fact that this was brought home to him as a result of what he described as a consultation held last November in Paris by O.E.E.C. The excellent group of experts there pointed out to the Irish educational representatives that there was no opportunity in Ireland for the gifted technical student to obtain his University degree in the particular subject in which he was interested and the Irish Government were asked to remedy that position.

Is it not the position to-day that a great proportion of our youth who are getting anything more than a primary education are getting it in our technical schools? However, they will still be prevented from getting the opportunity of taking out their degrees, even if we give this money to U.C.D. to move out to Belfield. There is no suggestion that provision will then be made for them as a result of the extra space available. Only a few months ago, a motion was moved in this House calling on the Government to extend the school-leaving age so that our young people might get an opportunity of technical training, of an extended course in primary schools, or of a secondary education even in a limited way. The Government accepted the principle of that and the Taoiseach himself came into this House and said they were in agreement with the proposal to provide further education for the youth but that they were up against big difficulties. I agree the difficulties are big and I do not suggest they can be solved overnight, but I think they should be first conquered as a priority measure, rather than that we should do what we are doing here to-day. We are surmounting many difficulties in this field of education but we are ignoring the foundations.

I should like to comment on the position with regard to University College, Galway. I made a brief reference last night to the desirability of stopping the trek to Dublin by enlarging and improving the constituent Colleges in Cork and Galway. I understand that the Minister received a deputation yesterday from certain interests in Galway city and county in connection with an appeal for the Faculty of Agriculture in U.C.G. This is the second deputation the Minister has received within the past three weeks and I think these deputations have not considered their cases properly before approaching the Minister.

I believe that U.C.G. is at the disposal of all Connacht, portion of the southern counties and over as far as the midlands, and if any deputation is to be received by the Minister, it should be representative of all the counties of Connacht, and perhaps some of the Munster counties, so that the widest and strongest possible case will be made. I take a very dim view of a few people setting themselves up in Galway city and county as the representatives of that entire province. It is only in their own minds that they are so representative.

There is very strong criticism with regard to some of these people who will not consult the proper authorities and public bodies in the other counties concerned, but, in spite of all that, I support strongly the proposal to make a complete Faculty of Agriculture available in Galway. At a time when agriculture is looked upon as our primary industry, such a proposal should receive the greatest possible consideration from the Government. We are lacking in graduates in horticulture, agriculture and various aspects of farming and the opportunity is ripe for the Minister to take action. In my opinion, this subject should have been part of the examination prior to the decision which is the subject of this debate.

Before I conclude, I should like to pay a tribute to Tuairim for the very excellent booklet they produced and for the first-class help they gave Deputies in making available the fund of information which they took so much pains to gather. It is an excellent production and one that should have helped Deputies on all sides of the House because it is non-political. Although the people who are identified with Tuairim have no association whatever with me and possibly look the other way politically, it does not take away from the fact that they have performed an excellent service for the community. I join with other Deputies in condemning those who have suggested that the people who performed that service were nosey-parkers, busybodies sticking their noses into something that did not concern them. Of course it concerns them. They are the younger generation in this State.

As has been suggested elsewhere, there is a fresh wind blowing in more places than in Africa. I hope it blows much stronger than the wind blowing here and that it will blow many cobwebs out of the minds of people inside and outside this House. I would prefer that it should blow the cobwebs from their minds than that the breeze would become so strong that it would blow these people out of existence.

The discussion here has been on a non-Party basis and I cannot understand why a decision is not left to a free vote of the House. I appeal finally to the Minister that the decision on this matter, which will affect every future generation, should be left to the consciences of each individual Deputy, that the Whips should be left off and that Deputies should express their belief as to the correct solution for this problem. I would ask the Minister to consider that plea and, even at this late stage, allow a free vote.

Mr. G. Boland

I should like to have my few words on this matter, just as other Deputies have had theirs. Up to the time that Deputy MacCarthy spoke I was quite satisfied that there was need for extra accommodation in University College, Dublin, but I do think that the suggestion that he made, that students in the various Faculties should be allowed to do their first year course in secondary schools, should be considered. I do not know the amount of accommodation that would make available but I imagine that it would be a great deal. The Commission, that we are told is to be set up, might very well consider that suggestion and it might possibly solve the question of accommodation.

Until I heard Deputy MacCarthy, I had been going on the assumption that a change was necessary. I cannot see any case for it whatever. I have read all the documents. I have read the report of the Commission. I have read the case made by the U.C.D. authorities. I have read the Tuairim Report. The case made against moving in the Tuairim Report is almost unanswerable. If the University authorities wished, they could easily build sufficient accommodation to provide for their immediate needs. There is plenty of space available now that was not available when they were reporting. Even if Harcourt Street Station were not available they could easily get other places. I cannot understand what objection there is to compulsory acquisition for a purpose like that. I cannot see it.

The first consideration ought to be the interests of the students. That is being entirely neglected in all this matter. A central city location is certainly the most suitable. Whatever about people living in the Donnybrook area for whom the Belfield site might be all right, the big majority of students come from other parts of the city. I have lived on the North side for years. If my family had to go from the North side to Belfield, I do not know how many miles from the present college the journey would involve, but I imagine it would be five or six miles.

Mr. Dillon

Two.

Mr. Corish

Two or three.

Mr. G. Boland

It is more than two or three.

Mr. Dillon

Two miles.

Mr. G. Boland

I doubt it. Even if it is only two miles, it means more bus fares, more time spent in travelling, more expense generally, which would bear more and more heavily on the less well-off people. I can see no case whatever for it.

I am wondering what has become of the plan that was suggested by the Government when I was a member of it. I wonder were we driven away from our plans by the rotten propaganda of the Coalition when they spread the idea that we had decided to pull down half the city and build Government buildings around here, although they knew very well, and had a document to prove, that we had dropped that idea and had decided instead to shift Government Buildings out to the Phoenix Park, to a virgin site there owned by the Government and give back to the University the College that belongs to them, that is, the College of Science, which was built for the College of Science, and let this building that we are in go back to the Museum. That was the Government plan and they ought to go ahead with it and let whatever extra University building is required be built around here to facilitate the students.

I believe it would impose great hardship on students to have to travel out to Belfield. One of the effects— it might not be a bad one—would be that Trinity College would be availed of to a greater extent. It is in a very central situation. Many persons will say: "I am not going to send my child from Howth out to Stillorgan. There is a place half-way, in the middle of the city. I shall send him there."

I shall not make a long speech. I never do. I recommend the idea put forward by some Deputies that this new Commission which the Minister is about to set up should reexamine the whole case and particularly take notice of the suggestion made by Deputy MacCarthy, to see if it would be necessary to provide extra accommodation at all. I have the feeling that others have, that this whole thing has been settled, that it is a fait accompli and that all we are being asked to do is to rubber stamp it. That is my feeling, that some hugger-mugger has been going on. It is a disgraceful thing if that is the case. I do hope that the whole question now will be put before this new Commission and that the terms of reference will embrace the whole question of higher education, not merely the question of accommodation.

Even on the question of accommodation the situation has completely changed from the time that the Commission sat because Harcourt Street Station, with its 4½ acres, is now available. Apart from that, the case made by the Tuairim group for building on Iveagh Gardens is unanswerable.

Mr. Carew

I intend to be brief. I understand the Taoiseach's reasons for desiring that this Estimate and other business be completed today. I am not standing up here to criticise in any way how Dublin, Cork or Galway run their Universities. It is very gratifying that there is increased demand for University education. It is for the Dublin people to settle the question as to whether or not it is necessary to go out to Belfield or to allow the College to remain in Earlsfort Terrace.

From my knowledge of Limerick students in Dublin, it would appear that the overcrowding in Earlsfort Terrace is a serious matter and that the accommodation for students in the city of Dublin is not alone becoming a matter of difficulty but is very expensive. If the proposal to build a new College means that there will be accommodation for students near that College, it does appear to be very much in the economic interests of students. I wish the project well and I congratulate the Minister on the full statement he has made on the position. He has given us facts and figures which are gratifying in one way but not so gratifying in other ways. However, it is information which we as public representatives are very glad to have.

Cork University has been mentioned in the debate. They are doing useful work from the point of view of agriculture and in many other ways. As regards Galway, we in Limerick are very proud to have the University there for our students. It is somewhat nearer than the University in Dublin. I am not criticising the manner in which the Universities in Dublin, Galway and Cork manage their business. We have admiration for all of them. Limerick students have been attending all three Universities and many of them have also attended Trinity College.

While we appreciate all that good work, we are disappointed that some reference was not made either in the Report of the Commission or in the Minister's statement to the provision of a University College in Limerick, the third City in the State. I know replies have been given in the Dáil to statements made by Deputy O'Malley on behalf of Limerick but we should like some concrete statement to the effect that some effort will be made in that direction. I know the Minister would be anxious to help Limerick and that the Clare County Council and the people of Clare would welcome the provision of such a College for Limerick. There are very close ties between Limerick and Clare, the Minister's constituency. The Minister is doing very useful work, and I have every confidence in him as Minister for Education.

I understand a sum of £7 million will be expended in connection with University education, and altogether a sum of £10 million, if Cork and Galway are included. For about four or five years now, we in Limerick have been discussing this problem from every angle. I am Mayor of Limerick this year and I am sure previous Mayors have had experience of a committee in relation to colleges and schools, a committee composed of very responsible people, who issued a report asking the Government to give consideration to Limerick. That is why we are disappointed that the Commission in their Report did not mention Limerick.

I do not have to tell anybody here of the grave difficulties involved in Limerick students coming to Dublin. We have excellent schools and colleges in Limerick and excellent students who obtain Leaving Certificates and whose parents are unable to further their education. We know, and it is borne out by the Minister's statement, that 50 per cent. of those who pursue professional careers have to emigrate for a livelihood but a very large percentage of potential professional people could be educated in Limerick instead of having to go to foreign countries without any qualification whatever.

The Minister has stated he intends to set up a commission to inquire into the extension of University education. Commissions are very slow-moving bodies. It has taken some of the commissions set up many years to make their recommendations and then it all ended in a bottle of smoke. I do not doubt the Minister will get the best people to inquire into this question but the word "commission" does not sound well in Limerick. We had the Milk Costings Commission which took six years to report and ended in nothing.

If, as the Minister stated, it will take 20 years to complete the University at Belfield, are we to wait for 20 years to make a start in Limerick, or are we to wait to consider other parts of the country? It is my duty to speak on behalf of Limerick but other Deputies are entitled to make a case for their own areas. It is purely on the economic issue that I am appealing to the Minister now. The parents of many of the boys and girls in Limerick whom I know would like them to have a University education. Some of these students pursue teaching or go into religious Orders or go abroad. If they go abroad with a University degree we know how welcome they are and how valuable and influential they can be. If they go to other countries with a good education, they can hope to rise to the top of the profession they follow. I should like the Minister, in his reply, to give us some idea of what is running through the Department's mind in regard to Limerick. We are not looking for large buildings or expensive equipment. If a start could be made on the provision of a constituent College of the University, we should be grateful.

I do not think the argument is being made that if we started a constituent College in Limerick, it would starve Galway or Cork or interfere very much with them. We all know that in every part of the country people are more and more inclined to give their children University education. It is necessary. What has a professional man to leave if his children do not follow his own profession by getting a good education to arm them for the battle of life? At one time University education was not required in business or industry but it is required today and the men and women who have it will get employment not alone at home but abroad. Our people in Limerick who cannot afford to send their children to Universities elsewhere have that consideration in mind. That is why the committee of which I was chairman was formed and issued that report quite recently.

Another committee composed, not of heads of schools, but of people generally affected by this problem has started and their reports appear in the daily papers and will continue to appear until such time as some statement is made as to what the future holds for Limerick. These people are concerned with the advancement of Limerick children. I was very glad to see, in answer to a question by Deputy Russell yesterday, the Minister's assurance that he will meet that Limerick committee. When he does, I believe he will be convinced that they have a very strong and sound claim. In conclusion, I wish the Minister every success in solving this complex problem.

Mr. Corry

One needs to spend only a short time in this House to realise how far removed opinions here are from the viewpoint of the ordinary people. When I look at this proposal to spend £7 or £8 million which is camouflaged here as a £10 Vote and think of what could be done with that money for the agricultural community and for the ordinary young men who want training for work—not for emigration—I wonder if we are doing the right thing.

I suggest we should first examine the necessity for this move. We have the statement of the Minister that 50 per cent. of those going to the Universities emigrate. I do not object to any young men getting the best possible training before emigrating, but, as the Minister said, our main graduate export appears to be doctors from the five medical schools and civil engineers from the four engineering schools. The National University produces annually 170 doctors and Trinity College, Dublin, about 60. Of the 230, 100 emigrate. Of the civil engineers, 40 from U.C.D. and 15 from the Cork College, about 25 from Galway and 30 from T.C.D., it may be surmised that 50, or over half the total, emigrate. It is for this purpose that £7 million is to be spent and while I am anxious to see any young man who must leave the country do so with the best possible qualifications we can give him, I suggest that the Minister should have a chat with the Minister for Justice and find out how many young men with University education are knocking at the door of the Garda Depot trying to get in to use their University education to see why Mary Moloney has no shoes on her donkey.

Those are the things that should make us realise the situation. There is another group coming in here to muddle us up so that their half-starved comrades outside can get plenty of work in the courts. That is what all this University education is for. If this higher education project is proceeded with, I suggest to the Minister that the education for our people should be of a type that will enable them to earn a livelihood in their own country. That is what is required. Let the Minister enlarge the vocational and technical schools, spend money on them and give an opportunity to the young people so that when we start an industry here, we shall not find that 50 per cent. of the keymen in it are foreigners and that the only thing our people can do is to become hewers of wood and drawers of water for the foreigners who come here.

I was very proud a few months ago when Rushbrooke Dockyard reached the stage when young men were required and when we found our youths so well qualified and with sufficient groundwork training that the dockyard authorities were able to take them out immediately to Holland to be trained as keymen and to come back as keymen in this industry instead of having 40 or 50 Dutchmen coming over to do the job. That is where money is needed. We give a doctor five or six years going to College and University and he gets a degree and then he spends five or six years more going around knocking at the doors of the Appointments Commission. If his degree is high enough in a certain society, he will get a dispensary and about £700 or £800 a year—£15 a week. There are men working in Cork to-day who walked out of the national school and who are earning more than £15 a week as ordinary lorry drivers.

People talk about University education but the question is: what education can we provide for our people that will give them decent employment at home? What training can we give them that will enable them to qualify to take up the posts we are creating in our new industries? That is what we should consider instead of educating young men at the expense of the taxpayers when 50 per cent. of them emigrate. Let us get down to the realism of this. I thank God that I cleared out of school at the age of 13 and any other education I got, I got with Deputy G. Boland in the colleges of the jails of this and other countries. I think the education I got there was a great deal better than the education I would get in a University to-day. I challenge the Minister to bring in the Minister for Justice and let him tell us the number of University graduates who are trying to get jobs as Gardaí and the numbers who are queuing for very small jobs in the country.

It is at these things one has to look in order to judge. I have seen the situation in my own constituency. If anyone ever had experience, I have had it. There, you have the oil refinery, the sheet metal factory and the dockyard, all crying out for trained technical men. Not half enough of those are turned out by our technical schools sufficiently well trained to fill the vacancies in these places. One is faced, then, with the spectacle of foreigners coming in, trained in primary and technical schools abroad; it is they who are walking in from abroad filling the vacancies that exist. Simultaneously, our University graduate is heading off with his bag on his back in search of a livelihood in some other country.

Our educational system is all wrong, right from the ground floor up. Here we are discussing moving University College to the outskirts of the city of Dublin. I suggest to the Minister that one of his arguments in favour of keeping this project confined to Dublin is wrong. He says that "the sole source of the increasing pressure on University College, Dublin, is that College's own hinterland, that is, Dublin city and the area within 30 miles thereof." He says the population is moving up to Dublin, and that is the reason for this project. Obviously, the real reason is to increase the drift of the population into Dublin. I suggest that he should increase the drift of the population out of Dublin. The sooner people get rid of this "Dublin" idea, the better it will be.

There is plenty of space for expansion in Cork University. It will be quite easy to cater for double the number if we proceed on the lines I have suggested. There is plenty of room for expansion in Cork. There are plenty of these leafy bowers about which Deputy Dillon spoke the other day. If Deputy Dillon wants proof of that, he need only open the Cork Examiner and have a look at the pairs going into the Honan Chapel, as a result of the leafy bowers. They hardly wait to get degrees before taking on these responsibilities.

Mr. T. Lynch

Would it not be better to close the University then?

Mr. Corry

I do not know if that is the purpose for which Deputy Dillon wanted the leafy bowers. Let us look at this issue in a realistic fashion. Let us ask ourselves: What do our people want? What type of education is required to fill the gaps that need to be filled, gaps which are at present filled by foreigners? Let us fill those gaps first. In that direction, there is ample scope for the Minister to use his energies and his ability in extending technical and vocational education to provide the young lad who leaves the national school with some place to which he can go in order to equip himself to take up a position.

If anything would make one realise how far removed we are from the ordinary people it is listening to Deputy G. Boland talking here this morning about all the footwear his family needed travelling here in Dublin to a University. I wonder would Deputy Boland take a ramble down to Roscommon. If he did, he would find plenty of boreens and unfortunate children walking three and four miles to school every day, and it is a very dirty boreen they have to traverse on the way.

General MacEoin

I should like to remind the House that the proposition put forward by the Minister and the Government is for the purpose of getting approval, in principle, of the transfer of University College from Earlsfort Terrace to Belfield. It seems to me we have availed of this Supplementary Estimate to discuss every facet of education—University, secondary, primary and technical, and even the education Deputy Corry got in jails from Deputy G. Boland—but that is not the issue before the House.

I am happy in one sense and slightly perturbed in another because we have a situation in which it is now clear that the Fianna Fáil Party are split from stem to stern on this issue. However, I presume that the discipline, whether of the University or the jail, will prevail and the Deputies on the opposite benches who have spoken so vehemently against the proposal will vote for the proposition, should a vote take place.

To come back to the position as I see it, judging by the speeches made, it is now abundantly clear that we have two choices. We are in the happy position of being able to decide whether we shall remain in Earlsfort Terrace or go out to Belfield. That position is brought about because of the acquisition of Belfield in time. Strange as it may seem, no attack has been made upon the wisdom of purchasing the land at Belfield because, of course, the truth of the matter is that, even if we did not change to Belfield, the Belfield property is a very valuable asset and an excellent investment. It is worth considerably more now than it was when it was bought, and the wisdom of the University authorities and the Government at the time in buying the property is to be commended.

Whether we go out there and have a spread building, as it is called, or whether we go up into the air at Earlsfort Terrace is now a matter for us to decide. We are in the position that we can decide. If we did not have the land at Belfield, then we would have no option but to stay where we are and go up into the air. Having listened to everything to which one could listen, having read the reports, including the Tuairim report, and having listened to the speeches here, I am still not in a position to say which is the wiser course. I believe, however, that a University should not be caged up in the centre of a city. I saw the University at Madrid. It is well out on the northern perimeter. Other Universities I have seen are also well out on the outskirts. It is true that there are a number of Universities inside city areas, but I do not know whether or not such a locale contributes towards work on the part of the students.

One possibility that recommends Belfield to me is that it could be a residential University, with hostels for the students and a unity of control. I do not subscribe to the view expressed by Deputy Corry that the students are educated blackguards. They are the youth. I suggest Belfield lends itself to the establishment of a residential University, and I agree with the assertion that it should not take 20 years to implement that proposal. We should proceed much more rapidly than that. Of course I know the Minister for Finance, and the national purse, have always to be considered but if we can get £10,000,000 for aeroplanes, I do not see any reason why we cannot get £10,000,000 for the National University and speed up the work just as quickly as we speeded up the airlines or any other project.

The House is now faced with the responsibility of coming to a decision in the matter of agreeing in principle with that proposition. This is a formal occasion on which the House can approve or disapprove of the proposal. I think they should approve of it, and if there is a vote of the House, I shall vote for it because I think it is in the best interests of the University and of the education of the youths attending the University. I might add that if I were asked at the moment to select a site for a University, I might select a different site altogether, but not for any of the reasons put forward so far by any speakers. I would adopt that view purely from the defence point of view. I shall not go into that matter now, because I do not think this is the right or the opportune time to do so.

I shall conclude by saying that it appears we have a choice between leaving the University where it is or going out to Belfield. Belfield is suitable in respect of at least 90 per cent. of our requirements, from my point of view. There is a ten per cent. consideration which it would be wise to examine, and it might be no harm, indeed, if the Minister, before proceeding with the plans, referred the matter to his colleague, the Minister for Defence, to have a look at the problem that exists in that regard.

Mr. Manley

By his very long and comprehensive statement in which he meant to be helpful and informative, the Minister has brought a lot of trouble on himself by widening the scope of the debate. The Commission was set up for a specific purpose. I know two of the personnel of that Commission and they are men in whom I have implicit faith, but there is this belief that the Commission, having examined this question and having done their best, realised at the time that there was an alternative to the Belfield site, but that there was a subconscious bias in favour of Belfield.

We all appreciate our national University. Many tributes were paid to it here and some Deputies went into its whole history. That was utterly unnecessary. National University holds a proud place in the hearts of our people, and the fact that the numbers of students have increased so greatly over the years is a tribute to the faith and the belief our people have in that University. I cannot help recalling a late President of Cork University, Rev. Dr. O'Rahilly. He did more to focus attention on the practical side of University life than any other man in this generation. He pioneered the idea of going outside the walls of the University so that the University people would be able to impart education. He was the man who pioneered these courses and they have done more to enhance the reputation of the University in the minds of the people than anything else in recent times.

Nobody grudges any money which is provided for University education but we must be practical and must realise our own limitations. I am not completely convinced from the Report of the Commission and from the Minister's statement that the reconstruction which is considered necessary on the present site is entirely practical because of the cost involved. That cost of reconstruction would be nearly as much as the cost of transferring the University out to the Belfield site. I think we can dispense with that because it is impractical.

I wonder is the Belfield decision the right one in the end. Has every other possibility been explored by the Commission, or was their decision influenced by the fact that this site was available? That is what I should like to know. There is also the question: if the Belfield site is eventually developed and hostels are erected, will they become so numerous and extensive that they will interfere with the constituent colleges of the University? Will the attraction be so great as to draw on the personnel of those who are at present forced to go to the Universities of Cork or Galway? Those are points I have great doubts about, and they are points which should be carefully examined because the possibility is there that if these hostels are erected, they will eventually be detrimental to the smaller constiuent Colleges of the University.

I have often wondered if there is any possibility of changing the Oireachtas from its present site and making the premises here—which would be more extensive than the site of the University—available to the University. Their buildings and structure are sound, but what use could they be turned to if they became available for any general purpose? Again, I shall lose faith completely if it takes 20 years in which to make a complete transfer of the University. I do not think that is feasible and I do not think it will capture the imagination of the Irish people as a practical step.

Deputy MacCarthy last evening made certain very helpful suggestions. I do not know if his proposal is entirely practical, but there is so much emphasis on vocational education today that perhaps the first year course could very well be in the vocational schools. Again, I cannot help wondering whether between the University and the three constituent Colleges, there is that close co-ordination we would expect in our national University. As a matter of fact, we have not that co-ordination at all amongst our systems of education. We have systems competing one against the other, with no effort to co-ordinate for the sake of continuity and suitability. That is a very seriously felt want.

I have no particular bias in favour of any particular college with regard to the National University. I am naturally interested in Cork University. They have a site available there for extensions and, as Deputy MacCarthy says, it is true that they have two unsightly buildings right in the centre of the grounds. If the money is made available right away they could well be replaced by more beautiful buildings more in keeping with the surroundings.

Again, there is this point. The agricultural students have to spend two years in Cork. Why not transfer the whole Agricultural Faculty to Cork in order to relieve the congestion in Dublin?

A good deal has been said here about the project for Limerick. I am not convinced of its necessity. So long as our present colleges are starved for finance, we must be reasonable and practicable. Limerick is not so far away from Galway and East Limerick is as near to Cork as it is to Limerick itself. That kind of propaganda does not weigh with me at all. We have the Colleges there already. Extensions to them are possible. I believe that if the Colleges were allowed to carry out the extensions and if the Government were generous enough to provide the money, it would solve the problem for the specific Colleges mentioned.

I am still dubious with regard to Dublin. The Tuairim report has convinced me. I have not read anything since that changes my mind on the subject. It was unfortunate that the report was not available before the Commission reached its findings as it might have approached the whole question in a different atmosphere.

We are all anxious that the University should be helped as generously as possible. Let us, however, be assured that the most practical approach will be made and that there will be no unnecessary spending of money.

Mr. Booth

As a Trinity man, I feel that some reference will have to be made to the question of co-operation or amalgamation between Trinity and U.C.D. I am very glad the Minister approached the matter as he did. I cannot support Deputy Dr. Browne's remarks in that connection nor can I support the attitude of Deputy McGilligan.

The Minister appeared to strike exactly the right note when he stated, as reported in the Official Debates, Volume 180, column 941, that there is a due place among us for all four Colleges. That is striking exactly the right note. It shows the contribution which is vital for the country simply by reason of the fact that there is not a false unity.

At the same time, I would not and could not agree with Deputy McGilligan that there should be an effort to make a union between people between whom there can be no unity as he is reported as saying, in effect, at Column 1169 of the Official Debates, Volume 180. That seems to be trying to promote disunity and that is far from my wishes in the matter and I think very far from the wishes of most people associated with Trinity College.

I do not believe for a moment that Deputy Dr. Browne was right in saying that there is religious bigotry in the governing bodies of Trinity College and U.C.D. I think the position is quite the reverse. I think that, more and more, the governing bodies are coming to appreciate each other's position better and, as Deputy de Valera said, are always willing to cooperate in the use of equipment and I should hope also, subsequently, in the use of premises.

I deprecate very strongly any effort to divide these two Colleges. There is a different conception of education in the two Colleges. I appreciate very much the way in which the Minister dealt with the matter. Having said that, I should like to deal with the terms of the Commission's report as briefly as I can.

I should accept the Commission's report very much more readily if they had stated categorically that there was only one solution of the accommodation problem in U.C.D. In fact, however, on page 3 of that report, it is stated in effect, that other solutions might have presented themselves if the terms of reference had invited views upon co-ordination within the University or over a wider field. They have made it perfectly clear that other solutions are possible. I believe that is a fact.

I am afraid the Commission, with the greatest goodwill in the world, have misinterpreted the duty which was laid upon them. I do not agree for a moment that they should have been influenced so much by their resistance to compulsory acquisition. Neither do I believe that that is entirely the answer.

I am disturbed to find that in recent years no effort appears to have been made to acquire property in the Earlsfort Terrace area. I know that efforts were made previously but that was when the College was very restricted, so far as its overdraft was concerned. I have not been able to find any evidence so far, and I believe none is available, that any effort was made in recent years to acquire other property in the area.

There is a reference in the Tuairim report to the effect that some of the schools in the area might very well be prepared to move out to Belfield or to other places outside the city where they would have playing-fields near them, schools such as Alexandra Schools and College, immediately opposite the U.C.D. buildings, or, for that matter. Wesley College on the South side of St. Stephen's Green. I am not authorised in any way to speak on behalf of either of these two schools but I believe that the possibility of some negotiations with them and with other schools such as Loreto College and the Catholic University School in Leeson Street might have produced some helpful results.

I am disturbed, too, that the Commission, and I am afraid the Minister to that extent appear to have been influenced so much by the comparison between Manchester. Birmingham, Liverpool and Nottingham Universities who wish to move out of the city and virtually into the country area. None of these cities is in any way comparable with Dublin. The present situation of U.C.D. is very close to the cultural complex of a capital city. It is located in an area which is not heavily built-up with industrial plant and equipment. Those features make an entirely different situation altogether.

It was stated very clearly by the Commission that it was essential to maintain the unity of U.C.D. I was greatly impressed by the revelation of Deputy de Valera yesterday of the amount of disunity by which U.C.D. has been hampered over a long number of years.

I think U.C.D. has done an absolutely magnificent job in the face of almost insuperable obstacles. I should hope that the mere distance of half a mile between the College of Science and Earlsfort Terrace would not be too great a burden to bear a little longer. I think that efforts should be made and could still be made to explore the possibility of development on the Earlsfort Terrace site.

The Tuairim report has put in a very good argument about the development of the Iveagh Gardens which deserves much further consideration. It is obvious that there is an open space there in the centre which would give enough light and air for a fairly high building. I am impressed that so many of the Universities in Great Britain are building up to a very considerable height without any great difficulty being experienced in that regard. I think we in this country are rather nervous about building up. Some consideration should have been given to that point by the Commission in their deliberations. Sheffield goes up to 13 storeys; Southampton, 10; Birmingham, 7; Liverpool, 9; and Aberdeen has a 5-storey chemistry block. Even Oxford and Cambridge have gone in for very high buildings. I feel we could do the same here.

I do not agree that St. Stephen's Green would be depreciated in any way by high buildings on the south side. Some of the buildings on the south side of St. Stephen's Green are very far from being architectural gems. The attraction is that you could build up to a very considerable height and have the open space which is already provided free of charge by St. Stephen's Green.

The Minister dealt with that to a certain extent and stated that the advice given to him was that building up tended to be uneconomic. I am not fully in agreement with him there. Granted that the expense of building up is greater than building out, at the same time, the saving in upkeep subsequently would be very considerable.

The Tuairim report itself was widely quoted and, I think, very properly quoted and should be further developed, but I am disturbed that a matter, which is of the greatest urgency, the erection of a new building which is obviously vitally necessary to U.C.D., will not tie in with the overall plan for the development of Belfield.

At column 946 of the Official Debates, the Minister stated:

The intention of the Government, if the Dáil passes the present Supplementary Estimate and thereby agrees in principle to the transfer to Belfield, is to relieve immediate pressure on University College by providing on the Belfield site, in such a way as to interfere as little as may be with potential alterations in the general lay-out, a building that will house the senior sections of the physics and chemistry departments.

I am fully prepared to agree that this is a vital necessity for U.C.D. All the arguments are in favour of that. Here we are considering putting up a building which is to cost at least £250,000 and it is to be provided in such a way as to interfere as little as possible with the potential alterations in the general layout. That seems to me to be a very curious way to approach a project costing £250,000. This should be surely something permanent, something which will fit in with the overall plan but the Minister very wisely stated that it will not be the ideal.

Further, I think the Minister was very courageous in stating that the entire transfer of the College would be limited to a period of, at the very least, 20 years. He was criticised very much for that. I cannot see any way in which that period could be reduced.

Mr. T. Lynch

He was criticised by the Deputy's colleagues and not by this side of the House.

Mr. Booth

I am not directing this to the Opposition for one moment. I am fully prepared to admit that. I think the Minister is perfectly right. This is an enormous project. By the time the Faculties have settled on their precise requirements; by the time that has been passed by the governing body; by the time the specifications have been carefully drawn up and the tenders requested for detailed plans on a competitive basis from architects; by the time these plans have been submitted and adjudicated upon by an expert committee; by the time that has been reported to the governing body; and by the time the governing body has decided upon those plans and asked for a reduction in costs, perhaps, and so on, each block servicing each Faculty will take an enormous length of time to complete.

I am not stating for a moment that there will be any avoidable delay. I do not think there can be. I am nervous that the present disunity in U.C.D. which has suffered and which has soldiered for so long will become vastly worse. When this project starts in Belfield and the physics and chemistry departments are placed there, the students will find that the lectures will go on to 12.30 or 1 p.m. What are they to do then? They must get on the bus or their bicycles and bus or ride the whole way into town to get a meal and then go back to Belfield again.

I should imagine that very shortly an ad hoc arrangement will have to be made for a canteen or some restaurant there. At the same time, there will have to be some ad hoc arrangement about administration of such a big building. I am afraid that these ad hoc arrangements will multiply and that the whole business will become bogged down.

The attraction about building upon the Earlsfort Terrace site is that the tendency will be towards integration rather than the reverse. I am not an expert in these matters but I had experience of some industrial building and I do know all the snags that may arise in regard to the preparation of plans and specifications, the consideration of the tenders and so on. It is a long and wearisome business. I should hope that even at this stage the Minister would try to assure himself that there is no possibility of an alternative to this enormous project at Belfield.

If the Minister is satisfied that Belfield is genuinely the only alternative, then I think every effort will have to be made to do it in less than 20 years, although I do not think it will be possible. I should still hope that U.C.D. will be reconstituted in the city in a way which will be a credit to the city and of advantage to the economy in regard to public funds. Abandoning the Earlsfort Terrace site and handing it over to the Board of Works for modification will take a tremendous amount of time and money. That seems to be a long and wasteful process. Adapting buildings always works out at double the cost anticipated.

The Earlsfort Terrace site should be preserved for the purposes for which it was designed. May I ask the Minister therefore—I possibly do not need to do so—even if this Supplementary Estimate is passed, not to go too quickly into taking a final decision if he can avoid it and to consider whether buildings may yet be acquired in the Earlsfort Terrace area by negotiation or direct approach?

Mr. O'Donnell

The reason we have the Vote is to build on the site already acquired at Belfield.

Mr. Booth

Yes; at the same time, that leaves Earlsfort Terrace in the air. The property at Belfield is a much more realisable asset than the property at Earlsfort Terrace. In very many ways, it was a very wise purchase. The value of Belfield can only be increasing as time goes on, whereas Earlsfort Terrace is not an asset which is increasing in value and the only way in which you can use it is by very large scale modifications and adaptations. I should hope, therefore, that efforts will be made to build whatever requires to be built immediately on the Iveagh Gardens site in such a way that the immediate needs of the science and chemistry departments of U.C.D. will be met and in such a way that the building can be extended upwards. I hope that whatever decision is taken will be taken with resolution because the present situation of U.C.D. is very critical. Whatever way it goes University College, Dublin, can be made a greater force in the life of the country than it has been up to now. Whatever way the decision may go I feel that I would be failing in my public duty if I gave this project my unconditional approval. I still feel there is an alternative and I hope it will be found. If it is not found and the Belfield project goes ahead may the scheme go on as quickly as possible; those who have responsibility for the designing of it and the approval of the expenditure will have my deepest sympathy. It presents an enormous problem.

Mr. T. Lynch

I did not intend to intervene in the debate but, having heard two speakers from the Government benches, I consider that I should make some comment. The Minister is being discouraged by members of his own Party as far as the expenditure is concerned. I know we are not a rich country and I know that the people complain that they are over-taxed but I say to the Minister that he can take courage in his hands when he comes to the Government and to this House to look for money to build his University at Belfield. I disagree with him in regard to the 20 years; I agree with many of those who say that 20 years should not be the target, that the period could be shortened, and that we should be capable of having the University built in practically half that time.

There has been a great deal of talk about the £6½ million. Votes went through this House covering a period of years, not as long as the period for which the Minister is budgeting, for more than £10,000,000 for arterial drainage. The sum of £3½ million was mentioned a fortnight ago as being allotted to the Moy for drainage. I consider that the building of a University in our capital city is a much more important work and that the Minister should not have, and will not have, any difficulty in getting his money.

We had speeches here this morning, one from a former Fianna Fáil Minister and one from Deputy Corry, which I think were disgraceful. We should grow up in this House. People should not be mocked in this House because they have been to Universities, because they are scholars and enjoy the benefits of higher education. The youth of to-day should not be mocked and told that they will be turned into educated blackguards if they go to the University. I would prefer to see them what Deputy Corry called "educated blackguards" than "yahoos".

I commend the Minister on the introduction of this Bill. When thinking it over, the thought occurred to me that perhaps his brief was too comprehensive, but he brought it in bravely and opened up the whole question for a complete debate. No Deputy or no citizen of this State can say that this matter was not discussed fully and carefully examined by this House, if we except the two speeches which I heard this morning. I feel I must comment on the contribution of a former Fianna Fáil Minister of State and I ask how did this country exist with such Ministers of State? That former Minister spoke about the University this morning. He has been resident in Dublin for practically a lifetime and he did not know how far Belfield was from the city. He said that up to the time that Deputy MacCarthy spoke, he agreed with this project. He skimmed through some of the reports during the night and then he came in here to oppose it. It would appear from his findings, or from the people to whom he spoke during the darkness of the night, that there was a lot of skullduggery in regard to going to Belfield.

I was on the Governing Body of the National University and I can testify that a very short time after they bought Belfield they had an inquiry from very well-known and reputable estate agents in Dublin who were prepared to offer the authorities a substantial profit on Belfield. The authorities who purchased Belfield had great foresight. It is a good thing that a University can be established there and extended if the authorities want to extend it or adjusted if they want to adjust it. The last word I have to say to the Minister is that when he leaves this House his policy should be to see that this project will at least be brought to a conclusion within 10 years. Some of my colleagues have mentioned the desirability of providing opportunities for University education in other centres. I shall similarly plead with the Minister in the near future with the backing of people from my own constituency of Waterford. I am not bringing this matter before the Minister now because the present is not a suitable occasion. I wish the Minister every good luck and every success in this project.

Mr. O'Donnell

Like Deputy Booth, I shall preface my remarks by saying that I shall be brief, but unlike him I shall make brevity the essence of what I have to say. I congratulate the Minister and I urge him not to be dismayed by what Fianna Fáil have said this morning because, so sure as ever the whips crack, they will come in and rally round. Let him not worry in the least. I can assure him that on these benches we are behind him as we are behind all good projects such as this. As an ex-student——

Mr. Moher

The Deputy could change his mind very quickly if the numbers were low.

Mr. O'Donnell

One thing is that we are permitted to change our minds. Deputies opposite are not, they have to keep behind the Whips. As an ex-student of University College, Dublin, I should like to say how proud I am to hear that the Minister and the Governing Body of the College have taken the decision to move to Belfield. When I was there many years ago, longer than I like to remember, I appreciated the overcrowding of the College and I can imagine what it is to-day. Even in those days the students of different Faculties did not know their colleagues in the Faculty. They were scattered throughout the city. The Medical School was in Cecilia Street and the Science School in Government Buildings in Upper Merrion Street. The Agricultural Faculty was in some other part of the city on the North side.

If we are to transfer University College from Earlsfort Terrace to Belfield then we shall have a compact University College with all the Faculties gathered into one unit. I was rather amused to hear Deputy Booth say that there would be difficulty in transporting students to and from the city for their lunch, or from Belfield to their lodging accommodation. In a very short time that élite district of Donnybrook will become the home of the students and they will have no necessity to visit the centre of the city. We are inclined to forget that in the cities of Oxford and Cambridge the Universities there were not built in those towns. The towns grew up about the Universities and that is what will happen in Belfield.

Like Deputy McGilligan I am completely against the amalgamation of the two Universities. Suppose for a second we did agree and that all the other difficulties were ironed out, we would again have overcrowding in Trinity College and would be faced with this problem of farming out certain Faculties to other parts of the city and trying to procure accommodation for them. I believe a very wise decision has been made. I can appreciate the force of the observation of Deputy McGilligan when he says he is jealous that it is the Minister who has the opportunity of moving this token Vote for the purpose of providing moneys for the erection of a University at Belfield.

Minister for Education (Dr. Hillery)

So many points have been raised during the debate that it is not easy to decide which call for a reply, and in what order. I scarcely need to make clear again that the matter involved in the present token Supplementary Estimate is the seeking of approval of Dáil Éireann for the transfer of University College, Dublin, to the Belfield site. While the provision of the new physics and chemistry building is in the nature of an emergency, its siting at Belfield is the first step in that transfer. The issue, as I see it and as the Commission saw it, is not a choice between a site a Belfield and a site at Earlsfort Terrace. It is a question of providing adequately for the needs of University College, Dublin, or of not doing so.

There was some suggestion that there was an element of predetermination in this decision we seek from the Dáil. The only record I can find in my Department or in any Department is a letter sent from my Department to the President of U.C.D. in March, 1953. In the course of that letter the President of the College was told:

I am directed by the Minister for Education to refer to your request of the 9th February, 1953, to the Taoiseach for a capital endowment of £200,000 to meet the purchase price of certain properties in the Stillorgan area already acquired by the College and of such other parcels of land as will be acquired later by the College in that neighbourhood.

The Minister for Education desires me to inform you that the Minister for Finance will be prepared to consider providing in his next Budget for the endowment concerned, but on the condition that it be clearly understood that such provision must not be regarded as committing the Government in any way to any attitude of approval of the College proposals for new buildings or any action in respect thereof.

That was in 1953, and I think the suggestion was made here that the decision had already been made in the period from 1948 to 1951.

If, as appears to be the case, Dáil Éireann will agree to the proposal I have brought here, I would ask all of those who, for one reason or another, opposed the transfer, and who I agree have by their opposition contributed to the clarifying of the problem in all our minds, to give their unstinted goodwill and co-operation to the implementing of the decision in regard to the largest Irish University Institution. In so doing they will be building not alone for to-day but for centuries ahead and co-operating, not in the achievement of an abstraction but in providing a very large part of the expert knowledge of all kinds that we all hope the continued progress of the country will require.

On the question of how long it will take to provide the new buildings, I cannot say I am altogether displeased that my surmise of 20 years has elicited protests. Any over-caution which may have lain in my surmise had at least the merit of bringing out that this House would be impatient of undue delay in the matter. If that impatience results in the project being completed in half the time, nobody would be more pleased than I.

I think my introductory speech covered, from my point of view at any rate, most of the points raised since, and many of the other points which have arisen in the course of this debate are matters which would be submitted to the new Commission that it is proposed to set up. I should say that the Commission except in so far as it will be asked to examine or recommend on, claims for further constituent Colleges, will not be directly concerned with building problems, as the previous Commission has already made it clear beyond any doubt that all three Colleges suffer from lack of sufficient accommodation. Any indirect concern which the new Commission will have with accommodation problems could only be in relation to possible recommendations as regards redistribution of Faculties and courses. In my introductory speech I made clear the principle which would govern any such recommendations as regard redistribution.

I should like that there be no confusion about my attitude to the question of Trinity College. If I may repeat what I said when introducing this Supplementary Estimate:

I believe there is a place and a due place among us for all four Colleges. Each of them, I believe, has its own appropriate part to play and its own contribution to make to the building of the nation.

On the question of the new Commission I am not yet in a position to detail all the problems it may be asked to consider. One of these, however, will undoubtedly be the question of the functions of higher technical schools and of the avoidance of needless duplication of public expenditure on professional courses in Universities and such schools. Another will be the question of a further constituent College of the National University of Ireland. An official announcement of the other problems to be submitted for consideration, will be made in due course. Some Deputies seemed to think that the new Commission will take a very long time and instanced the previous Commission as having spent three and a half years at its labours. In justice to the previous Commission I must again point out that they spent only one and a half years on their deliberations. The question of a breakdown of the cost of the new College buildings was mentioned.

Mr. Dillon

May I interrupt the Minister? I hope we are not to interpret his reference to the terms of reference of the new Commission as indicating an intention to prescribe restricted terms of reference? If there is to be a Commission on higher education I hope the Minister's mind will run towards giving it the widest possible terms of reference.

Dr. Hillery

That is certainly my intention. I mentioned some of the points raised in the debate which would properly be brought before the Commission. With reference to the question of a breakdown of the costs of the new college buildings I would refer Deputies for an answer to that to the detailed analysis of this matter, on the basis of requirements in cubic feet, which was given on pages 36 and 37 of the Report of the Commission on accommodation needs. Other points may have been raised but I believe they were covered in my introductory speech. All in all, I think I have made clear to the Dáil what is involved in this token Vote.

Mr. Coogan

Would the Minister indicate the terms of reference in relation to U.C.G. for this proposed Commission? Would he safeguard the interests of U.C.G. in so far as to ensure that we shall not have the dice loaded against us, as in the past for this Cinderella of our Universities?

Mr. Dillon

The widest terms of reference and no loaded dice.

Dr. Hillery

We had two Galway men on the last Commission.

Mr. Dillon

I take it the Minister assents to that suggestion—the widest terms of reference and no loaded dice?

Mr. Cosgrave

When is it proposed to appoint the Commission?

Dr. Hillery

I have not fixed any time.

Dr. Browne

I wish to be recorded as being opposed to the implications of the Vote, that is, the transfer of the University from the centre of the city.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will be recorded as against the vote.

Vote put and agreed to.

Deputy Dr. Browne recorded as dissenting.

Vote reported and agreed to.