Mr. Tony Donohoe:

I will take up two of the questions asked by the Deputy. As regards his question on apprenticeships, I agree fully that one-day-a-week release is preferable to block release. It is probably more workable. As a general comment, there are still design flaws in the apprenticeship system. Mr. McDonnell referenced the €2,000 grant which is inadequate and paltry compared with the subsidies given for craft apprenticeships. The target of 10,000 apprenticeship registrations probably will be realised but more than 80% of them are still in the craft area. It is a major disappointment that less than 20% of registrations are on these new post-2016 apprenticeships that are applicable to other sectors of the economy. They are important and the model was good because they gave the opportunity to progress from a basic level 6 right up to a level 10 PhD. They were a tangible way of linking further education and higher education. Unfortunately, although the model was great, the reality has failed to deliver. I do not think it is fully about finance. The speed at which these apprenticeships have been developed and approved has not been what it ought to have been. I still think the model is worth pursuing but it has not really delivered.

As regards fees for third level and the Deputy's response to the comments of Dr. Smyth on income-contingent loans, we have been debating fees for a long time and, unfortunately, it has become a distraction from the total funding that is required by the system. I agree that income-contingent loans are the only workable solution. They are the most equitable solution because geography is much more of a determinant than finance when it comes to whether a person chooses to go to higher education. Just over 40% of students going to third level do not pay fees, so there are other motivating factors that are deeply entrenched in the social inequalities that exist. The OECD has stated that one cannot have a sustainable funding model that predominantly relies on the state. Government policy decides otherwise, so we probably need to move on from this debate, unfortunately. The most important thing is that we address the overall funding.