Professor Vincent Cunnane:

I will respond first before inviting my colleagues to come in. Dr. Ryan might have some numbers to offer. The Deputy identified several key issues. The first was about having to do more with less. We have got very used to that but it cannot continue. It is no longer sustainable or tenable to go on in this manner. We believe the Government is going to proceed on the basis of what is set out in the Cassells report. That report will be back before the committee, it is hoped, by the end of quarter 2.

A sustainable funding model has not been found for the higher education sector. That is particularly so in the case of the technological sector. There are differences in the way the overall budget is distributed between the traditional university sector and the technological sector. That budget covers our day-to-day business and everything we do. The money is distributed in a particular way and we do not have enough of it. That has led to particular issues. In regard to transitioning, our laboratories and workshops - the face-to-face side of things - are very poor based on European comparators. There has been no investment in capital equipment on the scientific side of things for many years. Our funding has been augmented in very recent times in respect of the apprenticeship training model.

That has had a major impact on the mechanical, electrical and other craft apprentices who are now benefiting from state-of-the-art equipment. Nevertheless, the underfunding year after year has had profound impacts on our equipment base. Has it impacted on the quality of the students? No, we have compensated for that. How much longer can we go on with that? That is the question. I would place systemic and sustainable funding as a top priority for us, irrespective of institutes of technology. In the transition to technological universities it is of paramount importance.

Senator Conway-Walsh rightly referred to the percentage of funding and the higher education research and development, HERD, survey, which covers the technological sector and has a concentration on several research-led institutions. That has traditionally been the case but it is changing significantly. Dr. Ryan might have the figure from the HERD survey - I cannot remember it off the top of my head. The last HERD review noted an increase by approximately 38% in terms of funding, although I may need verification of that figure. It has grown significantly in any event. That is the main point.

There has been a great widening of the research side. Those numbers are on research expenditure. The numbers for contracts won under Horizon 2020 and contracts co-ordinated by our various institutes have grown significantly in recent years. This has arisen in parallel with the technological university activity of growing research. As we have grown our research, we have grown our ability to compete for research funding. We have utilised increased State funding for research to grow our competitiveness on a European basis. It is growing but it is still a problem. We still need to see significant increases in that funding. As Dr. Ryan outlined, the recurrent grant allocation model for distribution of funding to the institutes of technology had no dedicated research funding. This changed only in the past two years and only a small amount - €5 million in total - is for distribution among us to recognise the core activity of research. That has to grow significantly. We have asked for the figure to grow to €40 million in the coming years.