Mr. Peter Cassells:

We have had a detailed briefing on the whole area of online programmes and MOOCs, massive open online courses. There is a need for blended learning. In other words, how does one use the technology as it will never operate on its own in the delivery of and accessing higher education? It will also require significant investment. Some submissions argued technology would reduce costs and one would not need funding. In fact, all the information shows it would require significant investment. One will never be able to provide it in such a way that there is no blended interaction between teaching and that technology is an enabler that does not take over from what is happening.

We looked at various international models from systems that are wholly publicly funded, as in Norway for example, to systems where it is a contribution from the student and parents to systems where these contributions are underpinned by a loan system such as in Australia and the UK. We need to examine the advantages and disadvantages of these options but, equally, their applicability in an Irish context. It is useless if our group gives Oireachtas Members a set of options if they cannot see clearly the impact in an Irish context.

Senator Ó Clochartaigh raised the issue of loans and a graduate tax. Again, this is an issue which we will be examining but we do not have a view on it yet. Members would be highly critical of us if we submitted a report that did not consider the advantages and disadvantages of the various options. All of the options will be examined but I cannot say at this stage how they might float. For example, the loans issue has much wider implications than what we can say about the repayment or level of those loans. If the State provides it, then one is into significant borrowing. That would that be an issue in an Irish context. Do we add significantly to our national debt to establish such a system? These are the issues which we must probe and, due to their complexity, is why it has taken us time to come up with implementable options.

The issue of wasteful spending was also raised. We are looking at the effectiveness of income streams, expenditure, workloads and the regional provision of different programmes in the next phase. We will also be examining postgraduate grants and part-time education. I was on the group which came up with the national strategy for higher education. One of the key elements around that was the flexibility of access and being able to enter the system through any route, whether it was through an apprenticeship and moving up, or further education and moving indirectly, or another stage in life.

There was also the need to ensure there was equity in terms of how everybody was treated. I know that from personal experience as I had to access higher education through the part-time route. In the report we will address both the costs involved and how those costs could be met.

On the question of apprenticeships, on one level one could argue that as an expert group on future funding of higher education, we must deal with issues from the viewpoint of funding, but the reason we have raised this issue in the first report is that demographics alone and the young population are driving a 30% increase in the numbers who want to avail of post leaving certificate opportunities, let us call it tertiary education. One cannot have a situation where the only route, not only from the point of view of funding but from what is right, would be to go straight to university or to an institute of technology. A strategy and a policy has been and is being developed on apprenticeships and another for further education. The point being made, which is crucially important, is the traditional view of apprenticeships as being in the crafts area versus apprenticeships in a range of areas across the spectrum of higher apprenticeships and also to industrial degrees, as they are called in Denmark. In other words that one can take apprenticeship training up to degree level and, as the Senator mentioned, up to PhD level.

A question was asked about NUIG and the bypass. I think the Senator will accept that I will bypass that for the moment. The reason I am responding to it is that we will be looking at the issue of capital expenditure, in other words if one takes the whole question of expenditure on infrastructure in our institutes of technology and universities, where will the expenditure come from and what is needed? What are the future requirements and how would one source the funding for the future requirements?

The issue of infrastructure will come up.