Vote 33: Higher Education.

Minister for Education (Mr. R. Burke)

I move:

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 31st day of December, 1975, for grants-in-aid of an tÚda-rás um Ard-Oideachas, certain Higher Education Institutions and Services and the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.

The purpose of this Supplementary Estimate is to enable the Governing Body of the National Institute for Higher Education, Dublin, which has recently been established and which held its first meeting on 19th June, to begin its work by providing it with office accommodation, staff and essential facilities.

I am not asking the House to provide more than a token sum of £10 in this respect. The total sum which may be necessary in addition to the token Estimate will be found within the provision which has already been made in Vote 33 for Higher Education. All the subheads in this vote are, however, grants-in-aid, and it is necessary to have the agreement of the House before money can be made available under a new grant-in-aid subhead. What is now proposed is that a subhead, B.3—National Institute for Higher Education, Dublin— Current Expenditure—be opened in this Vote with a provision of £50,000, and that a subhead B.1—National Institute for Higher Education. Lim-erick—Current Expenditure—be reduced by a corresponding sum taking account of the token provision.

The National Institute for Higher Education, Dublin, and the National Institute for Higher Education, Limerick, will, as I have said on other occasions in discussing the Government's decision of 13th December, 1974, be the crowning institutions in what is known as the integrated sector of higher education. The governing bodies of the two institutions have been established and have held their first meetings. Each has elected a chairman and nominated ten of its members to serve on the reconstituted National Council for Educational Awards. I met both governing bodies together on the occasion of their first meeting and I have recently, as part of the continuing consultation and exchange of views, which I have been having with higher education interests, had a meeting with a deputation from the governing body of NIHE, Dublin, whose chairman and members are most anxious to begin their work.

In my address to the new governing bodies on 19th June, I stressed the central role which the institutes are to play in higher education. That role, as envisaged by the Government is such that the governing bodies must work in close liaison with each other and with other education institutions within the system. Indeed, this was one of the reasons why I thought it desirable that it be arranged that the two bodies should meet together at the very beginning of their work.

I have referred to the need for close liaison between the two NIHEs and between the NIHEs and other educational institutions. In that connection I have in mind especially the regional technical colleges. I emphasise this need for close liaison —and this involves careful planning and co-ordination of activities, not simply polite exchange of views and expression of good will—so that the students may derive the maximum benefit possible from the system which we are providing.

It is not that we are pursuing rationalisation for the sake of rationalisation. We are, of course, committed to endeavouring to ensure that we obtain the best return educationally, and without any dilution of quality in that education, from the considerable resources which we must expend on the provision of higher education. The students of the regional technical colleges, for example, will, as I said in my address to the governing bodies of the NIHEs, and I quote:

... expect and rightly demand that programmes will be so planned and structured that the possibility of transfer at appropriate levels between regional technical colleges and between regional technical colleges and NIHEs, will be a reality and a smooth process once a student has attained the appropriate standard at a particular level and has the motivation and capacity to move to a higher level.

To this end the governing bodies of the NIHEs must ensure that where students of a regional technical college have to transfer from their home college to pursue courses at a higher level in a NIHE, the necessary places, programmes of study and facilities will be available to them. The regional technical colleges have been given a strong representation on the NIHE governing bodies and in turn, these governing bodies, by whom two-thirds of the members of the reconstituted NCEA have already been nominated from among their members, have included among their nominees six principals of regional technical colleges.

We have no desire to see developed a rigid separation of institutions with consequential duplication of courses. One of the basic purposes of the Government's plan is to make possible in the interest of students mobility and transfer between all educational institutions. The whole purpose of this plan would be defeated if the NIHE, Dublin, one of the central institutions in the sector and the NIHE, Limerick, were to develop independently of each other and without regard to the needs of the regional technical colleges. I feel sure that with the regional technical colleges strongly represented on the governing bodies of the NIHEs and in the reconstituted NCEA we will see the end of fragmentation and unco-ordinated effort.

The change to a situation where institutions will be inter-related and their activities co-ordinated, while retaining that measure of freedom and flexibility which will enable each institution to make its full and vital contribution to our overall educational provision, without sacrificing its own individual identity or being deprived of the opportunity to make its own unique contribution to that provision, is not being left to chance. The NCEA will be reconstituted to, and I quote the words used in the Government's decision:

plan and co-ordinate courses and to validate and award non-degree third-level qualifications in the NIHEs, Dublin and Limerick, and in the regional technical colleges.

This planning and co-ordinating function is calculated to ensure that no institution within the integrated sector of higher education, be it large or small, will be tempted to chart its own course of development independently of other institutions.

The NIHE Limerick has been successfully established. The chairman and members of the newly established governing body of the NIHE, Dublin, are most anxious and eager to undertake the challenging task of making the NIHE Dublin a reality. This Supplementary Estimate is being introduced to enable them to undertake that task.

Mr. Wilson

First of all, I welcome this Supplementary Estimate. The Minister said it is necessary to get the governing body of the NIHE in Dublin under way. My welcome is qualified by the method of financing the governing body, however. I regret that the finances are to be provided by transferring some of the money allotted under subheads B1 and B2 of the Estimate: it is a matter of switching money from Limerick to Dublin and I very much regret that the Minister could not have seen his way to provide new and extra money for the governing body of the NIHE, Dublin. It is a question of robbing Peter in Limerick to pay Paul in Dublin and it seems to argue that Limerick had been getting too much money. I should like to ask the Minister, and I will give way to him now if he can answer me immediately, were the NIHE governing body in Limerick consulted about this transfer, and, if so, did they agree to it?

Mr. R. Burke

In view of the Deputy's approach to the method of financing, I would prefer to wait and reply to the whole debate.

Mr. Wilson

One aspect of it which is important is that it may give the idea that moneys voted for institutions outside Dublin are not quite so sacrosanct as money voted for Dublin. This would be an unfortunate idea to get around. Dublin people who were involved in third level non-university education had been complaining that the expenditure on the regional technical colleges had impoverished the Dublin colleges. This looks very much as if the Minister is making a raid on Limerick to provide Dublin with some money.

The Minister spoke about co-ordination of activities and close liaison, and this kind of bear's hug, this close liaison between Dublin and Limerick might not be the kind of thing Limerick would appreciate if it means taking money out of their pockets there. The Minister referred in general terms to Government proposals on third level education in Dublin and whether the House would welcome this £50,000 Supplementary Estimate if it were quite sure what kind of institution this governing body will be governing. In the proposals/decisions of 16th December last, the relevant paragraph referring to the Dublin NIHE stated:

The National Institute of Higher Education, Dublin, can be a recognised college of either of the Dublin universities with the capacity to evolve into a constituent college of one or other of the Dublin universities and become an autonomous degree-awarding institution.

Will the governing body for which this money is being provided be the governing body of a recognised college of the University of Dublin or of the new university which will replace UCD or will it in fact be the governing body of an autonomous degree-awarding institution? Already, the University of Dublin has agreed to confer degrees, and an arrangement has been made to this effect, on graduates of certain departments in the Bolton Street and Kevin Street colleges which will form the basis of the new institute with the College of Commerce, Rathmines, and the domestic science school.

It is as well to reiterate what the Fianna Fáil policy with regard to the third level institution was. It was clearly and specifically stated that the NCEA, which took a slight hammering and has now been reconstituted, was to be as far as Fianna Fáil were concerned the certificate-, diploma-and degree-awarding council and that in this there was a comprehensiveness which did not exist in the sphere of the degree-awarding body that has been established in Britain for this purpose. We thought that there was a greater comprehensive element in this than in the decisions that the Minister and the Government made. We thought that it would be a logical kind of thing and we thought what the Minister has referred to this morning, the close link with the regional technical colleges, would be easier in that kind of context, in the context of the award of certificate, diploma and degree being confined to the National Council for Educational Awards.

I cannot see how introducing the university element into it makes it more comprehensive or more satisfactory. I cannot see how the university degree makes an honest woman out of the Institute of Higher Education by awarding degrees to certain students while the National Council for Educational Awards will be awarding diplomas and certificates to other students. There is disharmony in that kind of arrangement. I thought it as well to state unequivocally that the Fianna Fáil Party were more than anxious that this arrangement whereby the NCEA would deal with the third level non-degree in all its phases was the better one. It is one that has been admired by people outside the country. The idea behind it was praised by people involved in similar fields outside the country.

The argument was made that this would make this link with the universities more socially acceptable, and so on. There was a lot of talk about this which did not make much sense to me because, as is well known to anybody who knows about the work of the institution which will form the base of the new National Institute for Higher Education in Dublin, their achievement has been their own award. They have succeeded in achieving for themselves a prestige that will not be added to by any link with the university.

I am not saying that there should be a strict dichotomy between the two types of education. I am not admitting, as I have said already, that the conferring of degrees on certain students of these institutes by the universities makes for greater prestige or improves the situation in any way. I am a little disappointed that there was no clarification in what the Minister said about this whole business. In the kind of arrangement which has been the policy of this side of the House there can be a greater link between the RTCs and the National Institutes; there can be better vertical mobility right to degree level and there will be no interference whatsoever in horizontal or lateral mobility within the RTCs.

The Minister's gesture to vocational education third level is welcome, as I said, with the qualifications I have made: the regret that Limerick must be robbed to pay Dublin; the regret that there is still an insistence that there are to be two awarding councils, the university and a National Council for Educational Awards dealing with the same institutions; a regret that somehow or other this policy has been pushed over on the Minister whom I know to be a sensible man and who, I know, as everybody else knows, does not agree with that policy at all. This gesture to vocational education, however—I am saying this in all seriousness—will not allay the fears of the committees throughout the country with regard to vocational education relative to the regional technical colleges, relative to the National Institute for Higher Education but, above all, relative to their own staffing at present.

There is a state of alarm in vocational education committees at present with regard to staffing. I have evidence of a shortfall of ten in a staff in my own constituency. I have evidence with regard to a shortfall in Mayo and Kerry. There are other county committees of vocational education in the same plight. This will affect the people who are to be the future students of this national institute for which this money is being provided. I am in near despair on this matter.

Vocational education and the RTCs, as mentioned by the Minister, and the National Institute for Higher Education were getting under way but I am afraid the Minister's policies at the moment are damaging vocational education to an extent which is only becoming apparent from speeches made by chief education officers throughout the country over the last few weeks. I had great hope that the progress which had been initiated would be maintained but I am now seriously afraid that the lean time is upon the committees. It has always been conceded that the vocational education committees, who do the spade work, the ground work, the first level work for the national institutes, has not been fully appreciated. It looks to me as if this situation is being reached again. The Minister will hear a great deal about this between now and the beginning of September.

As far as vocational education is concerned, this Supplementary Estimate is welcome. The £50,000 to get the governing body under way is welcome. I had hoped that the Minister would take the opportunity of bringing in a proper Estimate, not one just to get over the accounting difficulty under Vote 33, but an Estimate which would include enough money to pay the bare minimum of staff for vocational educational committees.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is straying from the details of the Estimate before the House.

Mr. Wilson

I am concluding now. this £50,000 Supplementary Estimate might indicate a wakening up to the serious deficiencies in vocational education in the country. As far as I can see, the progress has been important. We are in a serious position. It is a case of Ichabod, Ichabod as far as vocational education is concerned. I warned the Minister that people will come down on him like a ton of bricks in the very near future if a proper Supplementary Estimate is not brought in here.

Dr. Thornley

This is largely a token Estimate and I think we can accept it fairly rapidly. I have a number of reservations, one of which was enunciated by Deputy J. Lynch. He speaks rather quietly and as far as I could hear he was also dissatisfied with the manner in which this was introduced. I know it is on the Order Paper and I am not questioning the right of the Government to order the sequence of business in the House. The first information I had of this being taken this morning was when I was strolling along Merrion Square and I met the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach who informed me that this was coming up at 10.30 this morning.

This is not the best way to treat serious educational matters. I have not had time time to adequately prepare to contribute to this discussion. If this is open Government, I shudder to think what closed Government would be like. I also share the difficulty of Deputy Wilson that it is rather hard to talk about a Token Estimate for £10 without raising broader issues of principle. At this point the Chair will correctly rule me out of order as he did with Deputy Wilson but it is really difficult to stand up in the House and talk about £10. Having said that, I hasten to add, that I do not intend to indulge in my familiar pastime of bashing the Minister for Education. In this instance I am happy to say that I believe he is correct and I welcome the general trend of his policies and the general trend of his attitudes towards the regional technical colleges.

I believe Deputy Wilson's fears about the fate of Limerick are unjustified. I believe the Minister is fully concerned with the future of the Limerick institution and is simply seeking to rationalise the work of the Limerick and Dublin institutions. I agree with him in his reference to unnecessary duplication of courses. This must be avoided. We have to face the fact that the State cannot afford endless duplication of courses and I think the Minister is perfectly correct here. Unlike Deputy Wilson, I welcome the liaison that has been built up between the universities and the technical college, for example, the degree awarding liaison between my own college, Trinity College, Dublin, and Bolton Street Technical College.

Deputy Wilson spoke about mobility. I should like to see this developed to a point where the technical colleges are given equal status with the universities. The Minister is faced here with a large number of entrenched vested interests who often represent themselves as expressing the highest educational principles and the most democratic educational principles where, in fact, they are really expressing selfishness, a refusal to accept change and a determination to retain their status, salary and conditions. This is usually put forward under such phrases as "academic autonomy" and Newman's "Idea of a University". What they really boil down to is: "I want the rate of the job with a minimum degree of expenditure of effort on my part." I see the Minister is smiling. I feel he agrees with me.

In relation to mobility, when I went to Trinity College 20 years ago the 2,500 students were taught more or less badly about everything, as they were in other institutions. You had the concept of what was called in Latin the cisterna communis res, that everybody knew everybody else and everybody in Dublin was looking down his nose at the poor relations in the technical colleges. For better or worse this incapsulated, insulated university society has broken down. On the whole, it is for the better. We are faced with two alternatives, one of which is to develop our universities on an enormous Berkeley style level of complexity, which I do not believe is suitable for this country, or else, to accept the kind of mobility which Deputy Wilson spoke about and the lack of duplication of courses about which the Minister spoke.

As a fellow of an ancient university, oddly enough, my primary sympathies go to the regional technical colleges. They have been for many years the poor relation of the tertiary, educational world and the conditions under which students and teachers are compelled to work in them are appalling. The Minister is moving in the right direction. I also believe the fears expressed by Deputy Wilson are justified as far as the regional technical colleges are concerned.

I spoke earlier of entrenched interests. I do not share Deputy Wilson's commitment to the vocational education committees. I know this is a very dangerous thing to say and is calculated to bring political scorn on one's head but the involvement of the county council organisation in tertiary education has often seemed to me, to put it as tactfully as I can, to be other than altruistic. It is better, possibly, if specialists are involved in these fields. I do not know what democracy in that sense has to do with tertiary education.

I agree with Deputy Wilson that instead of introducing this rather hurried token Estimate I would like to have seen the Minister producing a major Supplementary Estimate containing a higher degree of investment in the whole area of regional technical colleges. If the Minister has a defect, it is in his incapacity to extract money from his colleagues in the Cabinet. I wish he were more successful in this and I believe he wishes it himself. If he were, we might find more adventurous policies put forward. With due respect to Deputy Wilson, the fact is that the bucket is pretty well empty at the moment and it is not really realistic to expect the Minister to bring forward the kind of progressive policies which I honestly think—I have changed my mind about this, having had lengthy discussions with him in private—he wishes to introduce if he were permitted to do so.

There are one or two things which worry me. I share Deputy Wilson's concern about the concept of non-degree awarding institutions. It seems to me to maintain a duality in education which I do not quite understand. As I understood it—I may have been incorrect in my years as secretary of the Irish Federation of University Teachers—the original intention of the Higher Education Authority was that the National Council for Education Awards were awarded for qualifications which were comparable to university degree qualifications. It seems to me that this principle has been departed from which I understand has been done against the wishes of the Higher Education Authority. Perhaps the Minister will tell us if this is the case. While I accept the Minister's idea of the association of the National Institute for Higher Education in Dublin and the National Institute for Higher Education in Limerick and that the liaison between the universities and certain students in these institutes is a valuable one, where other students are concerned, a duality is maintained which will cause them still to feel second class educational citizens. This, in my view, is unfortunate.

I am glad the Minister said that the governing bodies must work in close liaison with each other and with other educational institutions within the system. It is very important that the universities should be shaken out of their apathy and made to realise that they are not the elder brothers of the regional technical colleges. To that extent, I agree also with the Minister. I agree also when he says that they are not pursuing rationalisation for rationalisation's sake. It is patently obvious that a country of three million people cannot afford endless duplication of courses between universities and technical colleges. If people are not prepared to accept the logic of that argument, I can only put that down to their own innate selfishness rather than to the arguments about academic autonomy and the human's concept of the university which so freely fall from the lips of university professors.

I accept this proposal. I am pleased with it and consider the Minister's attitude to the regional technical colleges is correct. He spoke of consultation but also referred to the Government's decision. As a member of the National Coalition, I remain confused as to how it is possible to maintain consultation in the context of a stated decision. In my opinion, the decision with regard to degree awarding is perhaps unfortunate. In other aspects, I welcome this token measure. While, like Deputy Wilson, I feel the Minister should ideally have introduced a scheme more broad and more expensive, I recognise that at present he is not in a position to do so.

Mr. Moore

I support Deputy Wilson's welcome for this Estimate. Like Deputy Wilson I too have reservations. In my view, provincialism should have no place in education. I sympathise with the Limerick NIHE that money was taken from them to give to Dublin. Because of financial restrictions one must make allowances for such a thing happening, but it is a pity it has to happen in education.

The Dublin Vocational Educational Committee are very concerned about the setting up of the NIHE. The Minister has already had one resignation in protest from a college council because of the way matters are progressing. Do the members of the Dublin Vocational Educational Committee feel that their position is being weakened by the founding of the NIHE? Many of the men and women who served on that committee over the years did a wonderful job. It is a pity, at a time when more emphasis should be put on vocational education, that the Minister has not been more forthcoming on the future of third level and second level education in Dublin.

The Minister said he does not pursue rationalisation for rationalisation's sake. Trinity College in a recent statement said that they would confer degrees on certain students from certain colleges. Does the Minister believe that the major merger between UCD and TCD will ever come about? If not, should we drop the whole idea or will he give us some indication when we will see some tangible steps being taken towards this merger? This has been spoken about for so long that people are inclined to forget about it.

While I agree that the setting up of the NIHE in Dublin is a help and I support this allocation, the situation in this city at this moment is so confused that the Minister might take time off from bringing in further innovations to examine the educational system here and see where it overlaps—as happens in the two universities—and spell out what he intends doing in the near future.

While I agree with many of the stands being taken by the Minister, I consider that he is allowing himself to be bogged down by vested interests in many of the institutions. So long as this continues, we will not make any progress towards a better system of education which will benefit every person in the State who has the ability and the ambition to avail of the educational facilities being provided.

As Deputy Thornley said, the talk of £10 for education may not inspire one to the greatest flights of oratory, but it is the principle we are adopting here this morning. As I said earlier, I deplore the fact that the money was taken from Limerick to the benefit of Dublin. I realise that because of financial difficulties at present the Government must juggle with finance, but the last field in which economies should be made is education.

There is a tremendous need for well trained personnel in every sphere of our economic life. We are too poor to afford a comprehensive system of education. It is on these grounds that I welcome this Estimate.

We were given one-and-a-half hours this morning to discuss this Estimate but got such short notice that we did not have very much time to prepare for the discussion here today. As I said, I welcome this Estimate because it is a further step—a faltering and tiny step—towards broadening education. At a future date I hope to have an opportunity of speaking more fully on it. I suggest that the Minister examine very carefully the position of the vocational education committees all over the country, but particularly in Dublin, where, with the NIHE, Dublin, and the possible merger of the two universities, the vocational education committees as we knew them might be forced out of existence. This would be a great tragedy.

Major de Valera

First of all, I should like to join with Deputy Thornley and Deputy Moore in expressing irritation at the way in which important business can suddenly come before the House without adequate notice to Deputies. Like Deputy Thornley, I did not know this Estimate was on until I walked into the Chamber. This sort of thing makes debate difficult. That is my first point.

My second point is with regard to the Estimate itself. As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts I am, I suppose, sensitive to the fact that the Department of Education have not been, shall I say, the most systematic in their approach to Estimates in the past. I am very glad now to see we are having regular procedures. This Estimate is nothing more, I should imagine, than a token Estimate to put the accounting in order. This is something on which I want to compliment the Minister. This simply means that, if there is to be any further expenditure, it will come from savings somewhere else out of moneys available within the general Vote. Basically there is not a great deal more than that to this Estimate. There is a grant to the NIHE of £50,000 and a saving on subhead B.1 of £49,990. So much for preliminaries.

This Supplementary Estimate makes provision for two things. It provides a sum of £50,000 under the heading "B.3—National Institute of Higher Education, Dublin—Current Expenditure." Unfortunately I have not got the Book of Estimates with me to find out what exactly subhead B.1 is. I find it hard to see what the savings will be. I know there will be an accounting adjustment but all I can say at this stage is that, not having had notice a proper analysis of this Estimate from a financial point of view is simply not possible.

I shall content myself therefore with referring to the purpose of the Supplementary Estimate which is to provide for certain higher institutions and services, the Dublin Institute of Advanced Studies and the Institute of Higher Education, which is the principal beneficiary. Though it is only a Supplementary Estimate it raises the whole question of the purposes of this particular institute and of the higher educational institutions and services referred to. To refer to their purposes is, therefore, relevant. Having regard to the limited time and that this is merely a Supplementary Estimate, and basically an accounting matter, I think I should be limited and brief but it is necessary nowadays as a Deputy, so to speak, to assert my claim to discussion.

Here we are basically up against the question as to what higher education is and the purposes of these institutions. Everybody is talking about rationalisation but one has to be careful when one talks about rationalisation that forced integration of incompatibles may not cause more confusion than order, and rationalisation, therefore, does not become an illusion. With that general thought I should now like to address a few short remarks to the Minister knowing that the Minister is a man of academic distinction and experience who, possibly instinctively, has a feeling for what is basically involved in education and can discern the spirit and the realities as against the technicalities. He can see the wood without being obsessed with the trees. Knowing this of him, audemus dicere—I presume to say—I hope I can convey in as short a time as possible a few thoughts for consideration because that is all I can hope to do today.

The question is—I hope the Minister will understand the form in which I put it to him—what is higher education? What is its purpose? At the lower levels education is necessarily the bringing of the child and the adolescent towards integration in the community. At the third level we have to ask ourselves the question what is education. Here we have to face the fact that education has two meanings —educere—to lead the individual to higher knowledge and higher skills, to higher professional status, if you like. It is a very modern need because of the complexities of life's need whether it be in law, technology, medicine or anything else. Here one is projected on from the lower level, bringing the individual to full maturity to take his place in society in the role he is to play in the community. In these modern days we are all, as I mentioned in another context, socialists of necessity in the sense that we are all socially interdependent. The paleolithical age is, so to speak, well gone and we have now this concept of education which is a drawing out—I used the Latin word “educere” to express the idea. That is, of course, a very valid purpose and some may argue the primary purpose of education. Education is training.

There is, however, another aspect to education. It is certainly tied up with the first. It is creative. It is a development of the mentality of the individual. I am referring to the concept of learning, knowledge and learning, and the development of the breadth of human knowledge and learning. This concept, this aim and object of higher education, is being lost sight of a little bit now where the emphasis is on training. It was possibly disproportionate in the immediate past but things change. There is the concept of education in the more or less accepted sense of leading on, of training and there is the concept of education as the development of knowledge. It is very important to distinguish between the two. If one makes that distinction and relates it to the rationalisation I was talking about one must consider the position of certain professional bodies, higher centres of training and institutes for the conducting of higher training in the narrower sense of the word "education" and the concept of bodies and institutes for learning such as the universities were in the recent and not so recent past.

Straight away one comes up against something which I think is bedevilling us a little. It may even be developed into a certain form of snobbery. When education becomes a cult like any other cult it can become a phoney thing and with this preoccupation with the word "degree," this idea that everything has to be labelled with a university degree, are we not unconsciously falling into a certain form of snobbery? The idea of degrees all round as a measure of higher education has two very undesirable consequences. It is a phoney thing, it is a form of snobbery and, as well as that, it has the definite logical result so ably expressed by Gilbert in The Gondoliers in that famous song “There lived a King,” when everyone is somebody then no one is anybody. If we go on talking about degrees, in the end BA can mean “B. Anything” and B need not mean bachelor of anything either.

Let us be rational. By all means have qualifications but do not get a fix on a label that looks like a university degree or is forced into a university degree. There were and are very honourable degrees in the trades. The degree of apprentice, of journeyman, the degree of master mason, master builder or master carpenter. They are degrees which are every bit as important to the community, every bit as honourable and a damn sight more practical than many of the Bs that are being produced or advocated in our age. I am afraid there is a little bit of cultural snobbery kicking around here. By all means have qualifications but must they all have the same label just because in the past a university degree had a certain aura?

Institutes may be of two types because one must look at higher education from two points of view. There will be institutes working from the professional, proficiency or practical point of view. I will call them degrees, professional or proficiency degrees. I have no objection to the word degree but let us not try to knock it into the form I criticised earlier. We need institutes at nearly all levels from the professional or proficiency point of view. We have them already. The King's Inns, for instance, for the lawyers award the degree of Barrister-at-Law. Nobody has ever thought of that in terms of being an academic degree. The solicitors have their own organisation and the very word "solicitor" is a degree. A primary teacher who is probably the most important man in the whole educational system comes from a training college and the title "qualified primary teacher" is, to my mind, a more important and honourable degree than many of the things we have as appendages coming out of some of the disciplines of our university colleges. The Royal College of Surgeons is a professional college and awards its own degrees. They are fellowships of that college. For the profession of physics or chemistry nowadays there is the university aspect and there is the professional aspect and one becomes a fellow of one or other of the recognised professional institutes. A person may have a university degree in law but he must qualify as a barrister to practice as such. One may have a university degree in medicine but before one is recognised as a medical practitioner one must be registered. There is an important point here. There is a need for these professional institutes. The professions are as honourable and the qualifications are as important. They should carry the same kudos. In practice, they are of more immediate importance to the individual and the community. Will the Minister please interrupt me if he wants to get in?

An Ceann Comhairle

In case there is any misunderstanding, the debate is due to conclude at 12.05 p.m.

Major de Valera

I want to emphasise the role of non-university third level education, to use Deputy Wilson's phrase. It is an important concept and an important function. In the immediate time interval in which we are living it has an important function in higher education. I am not decrying it in any way. I am suggesting that rationalisation means facing reality and cutting out the cod and the snobbery and a recognition, above all things, that a man's dignity and status and importance in the community are not to be measured by a scale of imagined levels of learning but by his profession and his skills and status in that profession from the point of view of humanity as a whole and of the community. Whether a man is a carpenter, or a farmer, or a primary teacher, a secondary teacher or a university teacher, or an officer in an administrative department or anywhere else, the important thing is that in those spheres we have the maximum skill, efficiency and knowledge pertaining to that professional or technical status. That is not to be measured by the right to put on a gown of a certain colour at certain ceremonies. That is the more practically important aspect of education in the immediate time interval in which we are living. I have characterised it by the Latin word from which the word "education" comes.

I should like to say a brief word about university education. Here we have something different, academic degrees. Perhaps I go back to the Newman concept. Perhaps I am a little biased that way myself. Here we are thinking in terms of knowledge, learning, the broadening of the horizons of knowledge, the exercise of the creative faculties of the human intellect and imagination, the probing, the inquiry at a certain remoteness from the compulsions of practical, everyday life. I am afraid what has happened in our universities is that that function has been relegated to what I might call the honours schools. The universities have attempted to supply what more properly belongs to the other categories which, if this concept of working out these institutes is properly organised, can contribute to solving the problem.

The universities have acquired accretions and gone into the training on the professional side overmuch to my mind. There is the human respect aspect of people seeking to have a university degree and feeling inferior if they have not got B. something after their names. The tendency has been for universities to have their ordinary degrees as professional adjuncts and to confine to their honours schools the function of learning. I just mention the thought. The important thing is that academic degrees and the functions of academic institutes, the function of education under the heading "learning" as against the heading "training" have to be regarded carefully. In the longer term it adds to human knowledge and builds for the future. It is serviced to a large extent by people with almost a monastic mentality. They are not monastes by any means but they have a certain remoteness and a certain absorption with things of the mind. The fruit is reaped later and applied by those in the first category I have talked about.

Certain institutions of higher education are mentioned here. I am not quite sure what the function of the NIHE is or whether it is to embrace both. If it is, it will have to keep very clearly in mind the distinction I have made. The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies is also covered by this Estimate. It is definitely in the second category concerned with the advancement of learning. Incidentally, such institutes have developed because the universities were failing in their main function because they were clogged up. The higher institutes were really university functions which were hived off because they were getting clogged up by the accretions of the practicalities in the truly academic range. The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies exemplifies the type of institute that is the antithesis of the professional institutions like the Bar, the King's Inns and the others I mentioned. It is devoted purely to knowledge, science and Celtic studies. It has made a great contribution. The people who were in this institute as senior professors have brought lustre to this country, their names have been well known in the field of learning, nationally and internationally. In the long term it is that type of institute which matters and there is a place for it. It cannot be steamrolled into an integrated so-called rationalisation without doing violence to both sides.

The School of Celtic Studies and the School of Cosmic Physics have had their very distinguished records and personalities. I cannot talk with any particular knowledge of these. With regard to the School of Theoretical Physics I should like to recall the names of Schroedinger and Heitler in particular whose names are known wherever chemistry and physics are spoken of all over the world and will be for all time. We have our own Professor Synge who is equally internationally known for his contribution. Happily he is still with us. I should also like to refer to a man who, though not a native of this country, although a citizen afterwards, did so much to keep Dublin's name alive in the literature of certain branches of theoretical physics, relativity in particular and mechanics, during his time, the late Professor Lanczes. This country owes to Cornelius Lanczes—and I do not in any way detract from what is owed to the others I have mentioned and more— a debt for his books and writings which are so well known and the international notice he gained for this country. These things should be acknowledged and recognised.

We also have our own people. It would be invidious to mention people of the present time but there are young people there, Irishmen trained in that institute—I have one person in mind—who are brilliant, competent and internationally known, the logical intellectual children of the earlier generation in this institute who will carry on and produce further flowering in this regard.

I could go on much longer but let me end by asking the Minister, knowing that he also has the qualifications and breadth of vision personally to appreciate the thoughts we have tried to express in the short time available, to give thought to rationalisation particularly and to recommend to his staff the necessity for distinguishing when you get to the third level between the function of learning which is the function of institutes like the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies on the one hand and the training function of higher education in the professional or technical sense. I hope I have given offence to nobody, if I made what appeared to be scathing references to anything. I would not wish to do so. I merely wished to bring out my point, as one sometimes does in debate. There is a problem here in education; our resources are limited but I believe we have a Minister who, if given half a chance and the resources, could make a very significant contribution to the future of education.

Minister for Education (Mr. R. Burke)

May I thank the Dáil and the Opposition for agreeing at short notice to take this Supplementary Estimate. The sequence of events which led to my request to the Opposition was as follows: having set up the governing body of the National Institute of Higher Education in Dublin some weeks ago, I received a deputation within the last few days from the chairman and two other members of that body who expressed a desire to get ahead with the planning and initiation of the projects which will occupy the governing body and asked me if I could have a Supplementary Estimate introduced. The amount of £50,000 was thought to be a suitable amount, given that we have now effectively only a few months to run in this financial year.

I should have been delighted if it had been possible to consider the provision of new money for these purposes but, first, there is the overall difficulty of providing additional finance of this kind and, secondly, we are dealing with only a few months to the end of the financial year. We need to make a start with this institute in Dublin. In these circumstances it seemed reasonable to utilise the savings which will be made available within the Vote. The position in that regard is that substantial provision was made for the National Institute of Higher Education in Limerick in the current year to provide for greatly increased staff which, in the event, it has been judged would not be warranted in present circumstances in higher education generally. There is no question of robbing Limerick. The provision made there in the 1974 Estimate would have amounted to £480,000 in a full year— that particular year was a short year. The total in the 1975 Estimate was £952,000 and there can be no question but that this relatively small sum can be produced by a transfer from the subhead to the new subhead which is being opened.

As regards the question asked by Deputy Wilson in regard to consultation with Limerick, I think it is fair to draw the attention of the House to the difficulty of doing this. I take it the Deputy was not suggesting that I should consult regarding these financial matters with NIHE Limerick and its governing body before consulting this House. I would be failing in my duty to the Dáil if I were to go to any other person before coming here to get permission to do what we ask to do. I am sure Deputies opposite will agree on reflection that it is my duty to emphasise the role of this House in regard to all these financial matters.

Most Deputies said they would welcome a further opportunity to deal with educational matters. I hope that will arise later in the year. Further Supplementary Estimates will be necessary to deal with the effects of increased remuneration on the original provision in these Votes. The urgency of this particular Estimate is to enable a start to be made with the NIHE in Dublin.

Deputy Wilson spoke of what he alleged to be a cutback in the numbers of teachers allotted to vocational education committees and said that there would be a lean time ahead. We shall have an opportunity of discussing that at a later stage. He then went on to speak about the effects this cutback might be expected to have on the entrants to the NIHEs. I understood him to mean that it is the product of vocational education schools, technical schools throughout the country that would be attending these national institutes of higher education. I do not want to put words into his mouth but, if this was the intention of his remarks, it would be reprehensible because it is to be envisaged that those who go to the NIHEs will, in fact, come from all second level schools, be they community schools, comprehensive schools, voluntary secondary schools and schools under the jurisdiction of vocational education committees.

Mr. Wilson

And the RTCs as well.

Mr. R. Burke

And the RTCs. Perhaps the Deputy will have another opportunity of expressing a view as to whether what he said today represents his considered views on the matter.

May I say also that there is not much fruit in suggesting, either in this House or elsewhere, that I am pursuing loyally a certain policy which has been foisted on me. Cabinet responsibility is well known in this country. If Cabinets make decisions they are carried out and it does not bring us any benefit to speculate, incorrectly as it happens, as to whether one agrees or disagrees with decisions originally taken.

Deputy Wilson asked me whether the NIHE would be a recognised college of a Dublin university. This is the stated decision of the Government. To this end one is making efforts, in consultation with the various bodies, to bring this about. It is not possible for any Minister to say whether, in fact, it would be possible to achieve this. Therefore, it is not possible at this point to reply to the Deputy's query as to whether it will evolve into a constituent college— which is a natural follow on to a recognised college—or whether it will become an autonomous institution awarding its own degrees.

As for Deputy Wilson's point about close liaison being impossible under Fianna Fáil's policy in relation to the NCEA, I would disagree with this. It was possible but I think the matter has been made more probable by the Government's decision in reference to the NCEA and its role vis-à-vis the VECs, that, in addition to the functions already mentioned and, indeed, given by a previous Administration, the Government have now decided that the RTCs will be funded through the VECs and by the Department of Education in consultation with the NCEA. Far from downgrading this body—as I have said on numerous occasions since the Government's decisions were announced—they will be given much wider and very important functions and, if the eagerness to serve on this body, which has been evident in the two governing bodies already instituted is any indication, then there is a very strong and healthy future ahead of the NCEA.

Deputy Moore spoke about the Dublin situation. Like him, I share an admiration for the work being done by the Dublin City Vocational Education Committee. It is no secret that the vocational education committee advanced very strongly reasons why they should continue to have a governing role in relation to the NIHE. But the Government had made their decision that this was to be a national body, a body, as I said in my opening address, open to all the RTCs in the country and, indeed, to many other institutions. Apart from the one resignation from the college council the Deputy mentioned, most of the other members of the vocational education committee have accepted the Government's decision and are loyally working within its terms.

An Ceann Comhairle

May I interrupt the Minister to say that, if he desires additional time to complete his remarks, agreement in that regard will be readily forthcoming to the extent, say, of upwards of ten minutes?

Mr. R. Burke

Let me refer to Deputy Moore's remarks in this regard. I do not think it gets us very far in relation to these matters to have people resigning from college councils or, indeed, from the vocational education committee itself. I think it would be better if one were to adjust to the fact that the Government have made the decision. I agree with his point that the last place we should effect economies is in the field of education. This was a matter referred to by Deputy Thornley who spoke about my apparent inability to extract funds from my colleagues. Again, it does not get us very far to speculate on whether one has such an ability. The point is this. A number of Government Ministers have publicly expressed the view that, in the first few years of this Administration, in social policy, there would be an emphasis on raising the level of social welfare benefits necessitated by certain economic factors and that at a later stage there would be the allocation of increased moneys to education. These are Government decisions which will be taken by the whole Government. It does not get anybody very far to speculate as to an individual Minister's ability to extract funds, as it is called, from colleagues.

Mr. Wilson

I think the Minister would agree that education is the highest social service.

Mr. R. Burke

Indeed. In fact, I am glad to have had the acceptance of the Opposition on this point and I look forward to the continuous support of the Opposition publicly in making this point.

Mr. G. Collins

Could the Minister say when it is likely he will start getting moneys?

Mr. R. Burke

That remains for the Government. Deputy Collins will appreciate from the trend of my remarks that any personal statement in this regard would be inappropriate.

Let me say also on a personal note that I welcome Deputy Thornley's decision to desist from what he himself described as "Minister bashing". I think this is becoming the situation generally throughout the community because it is realised that this is no longer a fruitful exercise and what we are now going to concentrate on is policy. I was very glad to hear Deputy de Valera attempt to deal with the broad principles of policy in a manner which would do justice to a larger debate on this subject. If I refrain from replying to his points, it is not through disrespect but through a feeling that I would want to consider my reply and, perhaps, on another occasion, on another Estimate, deal more firmly with this ground. The Deputy will realise that what Ministers say in this regard would need to be very carefully considered, given the various interests to which Deputy Thornley referred when he drew attention to the fact that I smiled when he said something about people who enunciated the highest principle but really who were looking for the highest rate for the job at the least expenditure of effort.

In this field of education on has to tread very carefully. I should like simply to say to Deputies generally that there is quite a lot of movement in the higher education field since the Government took their decision on 13th December last. For example, it has been possible now for a university in Dublin to recognise certain courses in our higher technological college in the Dublin area. I have had consultations with other universities which have expressed a desire to co-operate with the Government's stated intention in regard to other institutes, for example, in the Limerick area. It is generally accepted that what was thought relatively impossible six months ago has now become possible. This, I would ask the Dáil to accept, is because firm decisions were made in regard to the broad principles of policy, as I explained on another occasion. As to the actual implementation of some of the consequential matters, there is continuing consultation with the various bodies involved.

One can look forward over the next 12 months or so to a further elaboration by me of Government thinking on these matters so that when we come to publish a more comprehensive paper in regard to the matters there will be, as a result of our methods of procedure, a very high degree of consensus for the pre-legislative proposals which will be elaborated in a White Paper.

I should like to thank the Members of the House for the way in which they have received this Supplementary Estimate and to say that it was not entirely within my powers to dictate the timing of it. I was trying to facilitate members of the governing body of the NIHE in Dublin.

I should like to reiterate that there is no question here of robbing Limerick; in fact, quite the opposite is the case. Limerick is pretty well provided for by the increase to £952,000 in the current Estimates. I should like to thank the House for the co-operation I have received. I look forward to the continuation of this high standard of debate in regard to education in general, and higher education in particular at some future date between now and Christmas.

I should also like to thank the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee who referred to the way in which we are carrying out the procedures of the House. As I have said on another occasion, any irregularities which may have occurred previously are in the past.

Major de Valera

They are in the past and I would not have mentioned it if either the Minister or anybody associated with it were, so to speak, responsible.

Mr. R. Burke

We are now doing the thing according to the established procedures of the House and we welcome the Deputy's remarks in that regard.

Major de Valera

I appreciate that I ranged too far and I did not expect an answer. I should like to put three points: technology is not necessarily science—there is a distinction; literacy is not learning nor proficiency knowledge. That is the distinction I was trying to make.

Mr. R. Burke

The Deputy's remarks would require a further reply at another stage. He can take it that that is the reason why I am not replying more fully at this stage.

Major de Valera

I welcome that statement by the Minister.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister said that the provision for Limerick was in the expectation of a higher staff, a bigger number on the staff, and I should like to know if an assessment has been made on this and how many fewer people will be employed on the staff in the NIHE in Limerick which will release some of this money?

Mr. R. Burke

That is a matter about which I should like to communicate more specifically to the Deputy in regard to numbers. There is no need for alarm in this regard because there was a pretty generous provision in respect of that. The places set aside for Limerick have not as yet been taken up and I do not think there is any reason to fear any detriment to Limerick in regard to these matters.

Vote put and agreed to.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Tuesday, 29 Jul 1975