Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I might work backwards and pick up on a couple of the issues that have been raised and move further on them. The Minister has heard that the issue of lone parents is a significant one. While there have been small improvements, that group, which makes up a large proportion the population, tends to have particular obstacles in its way. I know that reform of SUSI will have a part to play in that regard. I am not asking the Minister to tell us everything that will be in the national plan when it is published in June but what other measures will be included? I am thinking in particular of access programmes. Many access programmes focus on the important idea of the bridge from school to third level, who crosses that bridge and so forth. I am also thinking of people who may be moving away from social protection payments and other supports. I know there has been a lot of concern around, for example, those who may have parenting responsibilities and are only available part time. Such people are often forced into short-term courses rather than encouraged or supported. It can be a matter of timing. A person might be told in March to undertake a six-month course rather than facilitated to enter college in September. Some gaps are arising in that regard. I would like a sense of how the Minister is engaging with the Minister for Social Protection, with whom we will also be meeting, on the topic of those gaps and route accesses. I do not only ask with regard to the SUSI grant but also with respect to situations where people are being pressed into courses that might not be suitable. I worked with young unemployed people for a period of time. At that time, young unemployed people and parents whose children had reached a certain age and who were being encouraged into employment were being routed into a certain kind of education and employment.

I will also take up the issue of precarious employment, which is a specific issue. I appreciate what the Minister said about the ratios but there are a few other issues. I recently launched the new respect strategy in the National University of Ireland, Galway. The university is developing a respect charter, which is a welcome initiative. I spoke to many academics on that occasion, and I have spoken to other academics around the country, about the Athena SWAN initiative, which is very good. The Government has given it teeth by linking access to research funding to attainment of certain levels of Athena SWAN. It is notable that certain strands within universities, let us say well-resourced departments, are progressing further. The sciences and business schools are able to progress further. Part of Athena SWAN sensibly relates not simply to codes of conduct and everything else but to actual, secure employment. That is one of the key issues in terms of women's progress. We need a change in institutions to allow for secure contracts and genuine progression pathways. That is happening less in the arts, partly because the arts are less resourced. That is one factor. There is a cultural issue but there is also a resourcing issue. How might that be addressed? Secure employment, which is a key plank of Athena SWAN, is recognised as a gender equality issue.

The Minister has talked about the research money that has gone into gender equality and research. I have written to the Minister's Department about public-public research on a number of occasions. Research that may not have a high financial aspect attached to it but has a high public good quotient is not always ranked highly for progression.

I know the Minister has engaged positively with the proposals of my colleague, Senator Ruane, for non-disclosure agreements and their. There has been a signal that they should not be used further. Perhaps the Minister will comment on that because it is a core issue whereby patterns of gender inequality within higher education institutions are not being identified.

Another issue which has come up again and again is the importance of separate pathways for reporting. That would mean that one is not necessarily reporting to the same person whose job is to recruit the superstar academic and who has financial imperatives but that there would instead be multiple ways to report. Some people could be designated to focus solely on addressing the issues of abuse within institutions.