A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I intend to comply with your wishes and confine my remarks to the amendments before us, which, as you know, deal with reducing the involvement of vocational education committees in the governing and running of regional technical colleges.
In the course of a tilt at this topic earlier in the day, the Minister of State claimed that the raft of amendments before us were in line with the position as set out by the then Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, when she introduced this Bill in November and that he was responding to the wishes expressed in this House at that time by introducing the amendments now before us. I invited him to indicate to us where any Member of this House had sought to reduce the involvement of the vocational education committees in the running of the regional technical colleges because I certainly could not recall any such request being made either on Second Stage or during the earlier part of the Committee Stage debate. I would like to know who took the initiative in the intervening time to introduce these amendments, the effects of which are to drive the vocational education committees out of third level education.
During the earlier part of the debate, considerable concern was expressed that the Bill as it then stood envisaged a very diminished role for the vocational education committees, indeed, I would like to quote from the pertinent contribution of the then Deputy Dempsey on 21 November last. I do not intend to quote his entire contribution but selected sentences because I think this contribution gives a very accurate flavour of the contributions made here during the course of the earlier debate. At column 687 of the Official Report of 21 November 1991, he said:
The former Minister for Education referred to the need for colleges to maintain strong links with the vocational education committees. I regret that these Bills will not do that. They will diminish and almost break the link with the vocational education committees. The only functions the vocational education committees will have will be to act as trustees for the land and property of the colleges, to pay superannuation to the staff and to nominate people to the governing bodies.
Now even those functions are being taken from the vocational education committees under the Minister's amendments. I wonder where the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Dempsey, stands in relation to the Bill at present, because he developed the point in columns 689 and 690 of the Official Report of the same date. He said:
...local democratic input was vital in the development and expansion of regional technical colleges. It is absolutely vital that this input is maintained and strengthened. For that reason I again appeal to the Minister, in considering these Bills either in the context of the Green Paper or the Committee Stage debate, to restore the vocational education committees to their rightful place in the regional technical colleges scheme of things. I believe these Bills pander to the wishes of a small but powerful minority, including some principals of the regional technical colleges who see an enhancement of their status in the Bills and the opportunity to rid themselves of the shackles of local democratic control and accountability. I believe this small minority is supported by highly placed officials in the Department who are anxious to regain control of the success story of Irish education over the past two decades.
These are sentiments with which I fully concur.
We are owed an explanation as to where the sudden change in the direction of these Bills came from. Why is the limited involvement of the vocational education committees in the regional technical colleges now being excised? We are owed an explanation for that. I would like the Minister of State to state specifically if the principals of the regional technical colleges sought to have the role of the vocational education committees reduced since the commencement of this Bill. Did they have meetings with the present Minister for Education and did he agree to any request from them to reduce the role of vocational education committees? To what extent did he consult with the IVEA and with the TUI? Did those bodies agree that vocational educational committee should have a reduced involvement with the regional technical colleges?
We are due an explanation as to why a set of amendments which were not sought by Deputies — as far as I can recall — or which had not been sought publicly except, perhaps, by the principals of the regional colleges — and to be fair to those principals I understand, although I do not agree with the reasons they would seek to have the role of the vocational education committee, reduced. They are perfectly entitled, as is any other interest group, to lobby the Minister on that but I cannot recall anybody else seeking to have this position changed. I would like to know how we came to this point. It is not unusual for a Minister during the course of a debate on a Bill to introduce new sets of amendments, but generally the introduction of new sets of amendments results either from demands made in this House or in the course of the public debate, but that has not been the case in this instance. The only thing that has happened since the Bill was introduced is that there has been a change of Minister. I would have preferred if the Minister for Education was present to hear the concerns being expressed about the change in policy which he seems to be encouraging. A change of Minister brings with it a change of policy. I do not know whose song the Minister is singing in this instance. Having regard to the comments by Deputy Dempsey, as he was then, I cannot imagine that this change has widespread agreement in the Government.
We are owed an explanation as to the rationale behind the introduction of these amendments. What are the political reasons for their introduction? Where did the pressure come from and who is behind it? These amendments were certainly not sought in this House. I am absolutely opposed to them and they run completely counter to the general drift of the debate so far on this Bill.
