Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the delegations. I am sorry I had to leave, but there was a division in the Seanad.

It is no secret that I am a product of the further education sector and that I am always looking over my shoulder at the staff of the old VEC schools who gave us the sector we have today. The system was not planned and grew organically. We owe a significant amount to teachers and principals, in particular. I have come across some imaginative principals in my time.

I have a number of concerns about where we are going. The first concerns the allocation of staff to further education colleges. I am not sure if this issue was dealt with. However, the allocation is based on the second level staffing system and it concerns me greatly that we are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. It simply will not work. For example, every college should have a liaison officer to deal with local industry and who would be responsible for promoting courses and the college locally. In the not too distant past a number of ETBs sought to second staff to be further education development officers. I applaud this and funding should be made available for it because ETB managers are overwhelmed by the volume of work they must do, besides trying to take on an additional role. If one considers the multiplicity of programmes offered by the large boards such as those in Cork, Dublin and Dún Laoighaire, etc., there is so much work for the senior management team to do that it is not possible to allocate the time needed to conduct an overview of the development of further education and training within their areas.

I am concerned about course development in further education colleges, in particular. The college in Ballyfermot has developed outstanding programmes which were developed organically and for which there was no great plan. They were a product of the innovation of the teachers. I would not like SOLAS, with its overarching responsibility, to ring-fencie or take a national view of how courses should be developed and kill off innovation at the bottom of the pile where the teachers are.

I am worried about the funding mechanisms that will be in place down the line, especially when the delegates refer to output-based funding. I can understand from a quality assurance and a value for money point of view that people want to see a return for their money or outputs to reflect the input of cash. However, there is an holistic aspect to education that we must address. Not everybody will achieve or receive a certificate; therefore, they must be catered for. I am not sure whether they should be catered for by modular provision or by allowing them to explore the programmes that might benefit them.

Modular provision brings me back to services for industry. Training centres market their programmes and meet the needs of industry in the workplace and I have long been saying further education colleges should do the same. I recall a number of years ago planning to deliver a degree programme to De Beers in Shannon. I would like to see that flexibility and freedom in the sector. My former union members might have a difficulty with moving in that direction, but it is the one in which a modern economy needs to go to deliver programmes.

I am concerned that every ETB does not have training centres located within its area If I was an ETB chief executive officer, I would not want to borrow from a neighbouring board to provide training; I would want to have control in my area.

I am extremely proud of the further education sector and the old IVEA and the ETBI for the work they did in developing the sector. If it is to receive the recognition it deserves, SOLAS must come in 100% behind it, fund and staff it properly and give the teachers, lecturers and tutors the standing they rightly deserve in society.