In November 1995 I addressed this House on my proposals for university legislation. Today, 16 months later, it gives me great pleasure to propose the Universities Bill, 1996, to the House. The importance and historic nature of the process we were then engaged in was fully appreciated by the House in the debate which then occurred and Senators will be aware that the debate extended from this House to the university community, the wider community and ultimately to Dáil Éireann, which passed the Bill after lengthy discussions.
The debate around my proposals and later the legislation itself has had a considerable influence on the content of the Bill before the House. That is as it should be. Real dialogue and debate means responding constructively to genuine concerns and proposals put forward. The Bill before the House gives effect to my central aims for university legislation in a manner which is broadly acceptable to the university community and the wider society.
The three main strands of the Bill are: the restructuring of the National University of Ireland, provision of revised governance structures and provision of a framework for interaction between the universities and central government and for accountability to society generally.
Legislating for the university sector calls for a particularly sensitive approach. The traditions, ethos and legal basis of the institutions themselves vary greatly, with one dating from 1592 and others from as recently as 1989. In addition, the balance between institutional autonomy and public accountability is a sensitive and delicate one. Yet a framework of legislation which would be more compatible with the role, function and operation of the universities in modern society was the objective from the beginning. The Universities Bill which we are now debating achieves that objective in a balanced and reasonable set of provisions.
We live in what has been called a knowledge society. The possession, transmission and utilisation of knowledge in all its many forms is essential to the success and welfare of individuals, communities and society. For centuries universities, at the apex of the formal education system, have had a significant influence on the socio-economic order of their times. Their potential importance and influence is now even greater. Centuries ago the universities were the preserve of a small male elite. Today, they are open to all on the basis of ability.
An independent university sector is a guarantor of freedom in our democratic society. Through their teaching, research and constructive criticism, the staff in our universities contribute in a very vital way to maintaining a mature democratic society, a society confronted with increasingly complex social and political challenges.
This Bill will underpin these vital academic and institutional freedoms and will facilitate the universities to continue to serve individual and social needs in the changed circumstances of contemporary and evolving society. Discussion of the provisions of the Bill have brought into sharp focus the issue of the proper role for the State in respect of universities. As institutions of higher learning and research, universities have rightly guarded their academic freedom and independence since their foundation. The level of autonomy enjoyed by our universities has served the universities, the education system and the State well.
Academic freedom lies at the heart of the concept of a university in this State. The Universities Bill contains a strong endorsement of academic freedom and the full expression of that freedom by, and in, our universities. Indeed, the Bill, in many respects gives pre-eminence to the principles of academic freedom. Section 13(3) provides that where there is a doubt about the interpretation of a provision, an interpretation which will promote academic freedom is to be preferred to one which would not.
The Bill also underpins institutional freedom, which is the capacity of the universities to conduct their affairs in a manner which they, as responsible institutions, consider to be in their best interests and in accordance with their ethos and traditions. I believe that by underpinning these freedoms, the provisions of this Bill will enhance the capacity of the universities to serve the cause of scholarship and the pursuit of knowledge and, in so doing, will advance the welfare of our society.
Autonomy and freedom cannot mean isolation. The Government, exercising its constitutional role as guardian of the common good, must have an interest in ensuring that there is a university system which operates to high standards, which is accessible to all who have the necessary intellectual capacity to make the experience worthwhile and which provides fields of study necessary for the national interest and for the full development of the individual.
However, these concerns, as well as the large amount of public funding which is allocated to the universities, do not give the State an unfettered licence to become involved in the affairs of the university. As I said in paragraph 22 of my position paper last November" ... while the universities are institutions which are an important concern for public policy, they cannot be regarded simply as instruments of that policy".
In pursuing its legitimate interests the State and its agents must be constantly alert that their involvement is measured and proportionate. They must ensure that the extent to which they become engaged in university affairs is sufficient only to ensure the continuance of a strong and vibrant university sector which supports the development of society, which is accountable to society for its activities and which operates in a manner consistent with the effective, efficient and transparent use of publicly provided resources.
The restructuring of the National University of Ireland in this Bill is a major milestone in the development of the university. In the last century and the earlier part of this century there was a major educational and political debate which resulted, in 1908, in the setting up of a university which would reflect and promote the values and traditions of the majority of the Irish people.
The success of the NUI and the constituent colleges and their contribution to the progress of Irish society and education is widely recognised. My proposals mark another phase in the development of these institutions which have played such a major role in shaping our country and giving it its distinct identity.
My proposals for the reconstitution of the NUI derive from proposals made by the senate of the university. Each of the present constituent colleges will become universities, with all the powers and characteristics of universities. These universities, successors to their respective constituent colleges, will be constituent universities of the National University. In this way the reputation of the National University will be retained for the benefit of the reconstituted universities. In addition, the retention of the NUI as an umbrella body will provide the constituent universities with a forum for co-ordinating their activities and overseeing the effectiveness of these newly independent institutions.
The Bill also marks the coming of age of the recognised college of the NUI at St. Patrick's College, Maynooth, by establishing it as a constituent university within the new structure of the National University of Ireland. Although it is the newest university in the State, Maynooth will bring a long and distinguished history of academic achievement and distinction with it. This is directly attributable to the trustees of St. Patrick's College, to whose foresight and commitment I pay tribute. I am sure that all Members of this House will join with me in wishing the new university continued success.
An important objective of the provisions in the Bill is to place all universities on a common footing in respect of their relationship with central Government. A situation has developed where the State has much stronger regulatory and controlling powers in regard to the newer universities, Dublin City University and the University of Limerick. This situation has arisen due to the particular way in which these universities were formed, starting life as National Institutes of Higher Education. The legislation in 1989 was at the time intended as a temporary measure to bring the institutes into the university fold. These universities have now sought to be placed on a statutory basis similar to the older universities. I am glad to state that their impressive success and existing circumstances have convinced me that this should be so.
Turning from some of the youngest of our universities to the oldest — Trinity College — which has for over 400 years provided a home in the heart of Dublin for distinguished academic endeavour and internationally renowned scholarship. The Universities Bill will ensure that its long tradition of independent academic achievement can continue and prosper.
Trinity College is an integral part of our university sector. As such, the objectives of this Bill are as relevant for it as for the other university institutions. Therefore, the provisions of the Bill will, in general, apply to the college. However, in consultations with the college, and generally, I have been convinced of the desirability of retaining the legal position of the college, as far as practicable. The Universities Bill, therefore, will not of itself amend the charter of Trinity College. Those provisions which would amend the charter will not immediately apply to the college and may not apply at all where a private Act, sponsored by the college, is enacted. This Act would make the appropriate amendments to the charter in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Bill. The board of the college support this approach.
I would now like to outline the provisions relating to the second objective of the Bill — the setting up of revised governance structures. The principle underlying these provisions is that the major stakeholders in a university should, as of right, be represented on its governing authority. In this way the university can benefit from a range of experiences and perspectives, while stakeholders can be confident that the actions and decisions of the governing authority are taken in the knowledge of their needs and concerns.
The Bill sets out a flexible framework which will allow each university to devise governing authorities which best suit their interests. That framework includes a meaningful presence on the governing authorities of the various stakeholders in the universities. These include academic and non-academic staff and students, who, representing the university community, have the strongest presence. This is the first time that all such groups of the university community will have a statutory right to democratic representation on university governing authorities. The wider community is represented through nominees of relevant organisations and the Education Board, when established, while the State, as the major source of funding, is represented by nominees of the Minister for Education.
The provisions of section 15 of the Bill also allow the universities to respond to their internal and external environment and reflect their unique traditions and values. Provision is also made for representation from particular constituencies which have a special significance for individual universities, for graduates and for the cooption of members, especially members representative of artistic and cultural interests. The provisions allow for flexibility, autonomy, democracy and broadening of representation and as such should greatly enhance the governance of the universities.
The third objective of this Bill is the provision of a framework for interaction between the universities and central government and for accountability to society generally. I outlined earlier the balance which I believe should operate between institutional autonomy and the needs of public policy and accountability and which should have due regard to the respective rights and responsibilities of the university institutions and the State. One of the principal objectives of this Bill is to provide reasonable and proportionate provisions which will facilitate the accountability of the universities to the communities they serve.
The rationale for appropriate accountability derives fundamentally from the pervasive, integral and crucially important role of universities in contemporary society. The need for new forms of accountability by universities to update and modernise existing practice in line with best practice is not unique to Ireland. All over the developed world this complex question is being addressed.
Accountability does not mean control and my approach to the accountability and transparency provisions in this Bill is informed by the view that external controls which require advance approval for detailed decisions of universities are not appropriate because of the importance of autonomy for universities. The general approach of the Bill to accountability is that universities will have freedom to make operational decisions as they consider best, within a budget agreed with the Higher Education Authority. To balance that, the Higher Education Authority will have a central role in ensuring that there is appropriate accountability to the wider community for the expenditure of public moneys.
The Higher Education Authority has a statutory function to co-ordinate State investment in higher education and to advise the Minister on general policy issues. It has, therefore, developmental and funding roles. While the funding role is provided for in some detail in the Higher Education Authority Act, 1971, the developmental and support functions are expressed in a more general way. This Bill redresses the balance by setting out a number of areas where the authority and the universities may work together in the interests of the university sector.
The Bill provides certainty for all concerned and an opportunity to allow the universities and the Higher Education Authority to develop their partnership. The Higher Education Authority will now have a statutory requirement to assist the universities in achieving the objectives of Chapters IV, V and VIII of the Bill. As part of its support and developmental role, the Higher Education Authority may also issue guidelines to universities on staffing and the distribution of budgets. These guidelines will provide the Higher Education Authority and the universities with a formal opportunity for dialogue on important issues relating to the management of a university. They also allow the HEA, in a formal, statutory way and from their sector wide perspective, to inform a university of best practice nationally and internationally. These guidelines will not be binding on a university which will retain autonomy to act as it considered best.
The Bill also provides a statutory framework for borrowing by universities. The objectives in this regard are to provide a statutory underpinning of existing practices while at the same time ensuring that there are no additional unplanned calls on public finances as a result of activities by universities.
In my speech to this House in November, 1995, I outlined how I wished to strike a balance between the requirements of institutional autonomy and public policy and accountability. I believe that in these provisions the Bill achieves that balance.
Turning to issues of quality in education, there is agreement in the university community on the need for quality assurance and for appropriate procedures for measuring and ensuring quality. The approach in this Bill places the primary responsibility on the universities for putting such procedures in place. The procedures must include evaluation of all departments and faculties of the university not less than once every ten years.
Evaluation will be by university staff in the first instance. This will be enhanced by evaluation by people from outside the university, including people who are competent to make national and international comparisons on quality issues at university level. In addition, there will be an assessment by those, including students, availing of the teaching, research and other services provided by the university. The universities will implement the findings of evaluations where it is practical to do so. The Higher Education Authority will have a review and reporting role.
The role played by education in improving the life chances of its recipients is acknowledged the world over. At one time the completion of primary education was regarded as a sufficient preparation for working life for many people. That is no longer the case. Technological advances generally and in information systems have removed from the workforce many of the opportunities for unskilled labour. A third level education is now a prerequisite for many of the best paid and most secure employments.
While education is acknowledged as improving life chances, lack of education is equally acknowledged as reinforcing disadvantage and marginalisation. Because of their key role in society, universities have a very significant role to play in redressing the imbalances in our education system, particularly at third level, as a prerequisite to redressing inequality in society. Universities are in a key position to improve the lot of the disadvantaged and many already have programmes in place. Under the Bill all universities will now have a statutory duty to devise and implement appropriate equality policies.
Each university will set out its policies on access and equality in its activities. Universities shall implement the policies set out in their policy statement and the Higher Education Authority will review the implementation by the universities of these policies and may publish reports of any review.
Tá sé an-tabhachtach dom go mbeidh sé mar chuspóir do gach ollscoil an Ghaeilge a chur chun cinn. Is dóigh liom go bhfuil sé seo a dhéanamh ag ollscoileanna éagsúla cheana féin, ach anois, beidh sé mar phríomhchuspóir acu uilig é seo a dhéanamh. Níor cuireadh faoi bhráid an tSeanaid Bille ar bith a léirigh cuspóir mar seo do na hollscoileanna. Tá mé sásta go bhfuil an Bille fiúntach agus éifeachtach faoi cheist na Gaeilge.
I consider the promotion of the Irish language by universities to be a worthwhile and necessary part of their mission. The Bill imposes on the universities a statutory obligation to promote and preserve the Irish language. This is the first time such a statutory requirement will be imposed on the universities generally and will I believe give a significant impetus to this important area of university activities.
The Bill provides, in section 9, for the development of the university sector with the possibility for the establishment of future universities. The provisions provide a careful balance between flexibility in the development of the university sector and safeguards for the quality and effectiveness of the sector. This will benefit the development of the university sector in the future.
In establishing an educational institution as a university it is essential that the process involves a rigorous and objective appraisal of any such proposal and the Bill provides for this. Otherwise, the high reputation enjoyed by the universities as a whole could be damaged. Of primary importance in such a process is the evaluation of the capacity of the educational institution to provide the kind and level of education appropriate to a university. It is also essential that the new university would receive widespread recognition as a university, at home and abroad. A further guarantee of quality and accountability is that the order establishing a university must be made by the Government and must be ratified by both Houses of the Oireachtas before it becomes effective. This will allow for an open and public discussion of the merits of the proposal before any action can be taken.
Section 9 of the Bill will provide a mechanism by which an institution can attain university status. If, in the future, moving to university status enhances the mission of the Dublin Institute of Technology, I am pleased that section 9 of the Bill provides an appropriate mechanism.
The Dublin Institute of Technology is growing as a distinct and distinguished institution in its own right. Building on its legislative base, put in place in 1993, it has made major strides with the active support of my Department. I stress my commitment in my time as Minister to the development of the Dublin Institute of Technology. Staffing and student numbers in the Dublin Institute of Technology have increased substantially. Many new courses at certificate, diploma, degree and post-graduate level have been developed. There is now recurrent funding of over £50 million in this academic year. In addition, since 1993 over £18.5 million of capital funding has been invested.
I congratulate the Dublin Institute of Technology on the progress it has made since 1992 in building a single integrated institute. The Dublin Institute of Technology has a vital role in higher education in providing qualifications at certificate, diploma and degree levels. The successful completion of the review group process on degree awarding status is another step in the history of the Dublin Institute of Technology. I put in place the formal mechanism to evaluate the institute for degree awarding powers. In line with the recommendations of the international review team, my announced intention to grant degree awarding powers from 1998 onwards is the next stage in the successful process of development of the institute.
In conclusion, I am sure we all share a common objective. We want to protect institutional autonomy and preserve academic freedom. We also want to maintain an effective and accountable university system capable of delivering the highest academic standards and the highest standards of research and intellectual inquiry to its students and to society generally. We are debating this Bill at a time when the excellence of our universities is widely recognised, nationally and internationally. Now is the time to build on that reputation and provide the university sector with a framework for development into the future.