Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 126:

In page 45, line 6, after “data,” to insert the following:

“including, but not limited to, disaggregated data in relation to public and private funding, funding from foreign sources (including the country to which the source is attributable, date of funding and description of any conditions or restrictions applied), and funding streams from entities outside of the designated higher education institutions that operate substantially for the benefit or under the auspices of the institutions, both inside and outside the State,”.

I would accept that amendments Nos. 126 and 127 are very close in their intention and aims and, indeed, in their wording, but I would make an argument that amendment No. 128 is slightly different. Amendments Nos. 126 and 127 are aimed towards transparency in the funding model. As I have said previously, the State makes a significant investment in the third level sector and we should expect that the State's values are mirrored back to it in the investment in third level institutions by having oversight of the types of funding and the funding sources other than State funding that are feeding into the provision of third level education. These two amendments go to the point about transparency and clarity in terms of the funding.

The HEA initiated a review of higher education and funding in 2017, the “Review of the Allocation Model for Funding Higher Education Institutions” final report for the independent expert panel of the HEA. I would emphasise the inconsistent and incoherent nature of the administration of funding for data collection and lack of overall transparency in HEA funding. This item references governance and public confidence in the system and I think transparency around private sources of funding will only strengthen people’s confidence in the third level sector. To quote from that report, funding streams from entities outside of the designated higher education institutions that operate substantially for the benefit of or under the auspices of the institutions, both inside and outside the State, are included in some instances. This is the practice of having a separate legal entity that may operate parallel to the actual third level institution. I do not think we have good oversight or good insight as to where the funding sources are coming from in that respect. As a major stakeholder in third level funding, the State should expect to have that level of transparency.

Amendment No. 128 is slightly different in its focus. It is related to something commonly known as the divestment movement. That is the idea that, with regard to investments made by third level institutions commonly held as, for example, pension pots, we should limit the exposure of those investments, in terms of investment in fossil fuels in particular. There is an issue around reflecting the values of the State, as well as the matter of stranded assets and the destabilising influence that could arise from investments being made in fossil fuels infrastructure or having that as part of a pension portfolio, and that subsequently devaluing. That is what this amendment goes towards.