Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The amendments relate to the membership of governing authorities and the various bodies that should be included. The joint committee conducted pre-legislative scrutiny on this Bill and there was significant discussion on the issue of how the governing bodies should be constituted. One of the principles is that they should not be too large so that they can be effective in terms of size. There were Seanad Members on that committee. I have nothing against Seanad Members but I am concerned a number of proposals in these amendments would add to the size of governing authorities.

In regard to the amendment in the name of Deputy O'Sullivan, I understand the intention is to provide that certain members of the governing body would be appointed by the Minister rather than by the governing body. There are differing views on that. One of the purposes of the reform of the governing structures of higher education institutions in the technological sector is to grant governing bodies greater autonomy in the appointment of their members, within the parameters of a competency framework to be agreed by the governing bodies and the HEA. Providing that the Minister, rather than the governing bodies, is responsible for those appointments diminishes that autonomy.

With regard to the second proposed amendment to amendment No. 12, the Bill currently provides that each governing body shall have between one and three academic staff as members. Those members will be elected by the staff themselves. As I said earlier, this proposal could serve to increase the size of the governing body, which runs counter to the policy for governing authorities of higher education students to be smaller and more effective. The suggestion that staff representatives be appointed from each of the institutes of technology involved does not accord with the establishment, through the merger of institutes of technology, of multi-campus technological universities with unified and integrated management and governance structures.

In regard to the point made about members being "recommended" rather than "nominated", this might create uncertainty. Where a person is nominated, it is clear he or she should be appointed. However, where people are recommended, it is unclear whether the governing body is required to appoint them or whether it can reject the recommendation. We could spend a lot of time discussing whether we should have more autonomy for institutions or whether the Minister should have more power, but I hope the Deputy accepts the point I am making in regard to "nominated" rather than "recommended".

In the context of decision-making, we do not want the governing bodies to be too cumbersome. At the same time, we want the competencies to be provided for on them. Anybody with responsibility for an institution as large and as important as this needs the competencies required for good governance. The governing body will also have between one and three academic staff as members. These will be elected by the staff themselves, which is important.