Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. I apologise for not being present but I listened to them on my journey into Leinster House this morning. I thank them for their assessments and contributions to this debate. It is difficult to have a meaningful conversation with them in the context of a decision to be made rather than being made. I am sure they will understand this puts us at a slight disadvantage. It is welcome, however, that a statement has been made by the Minister that he intends to move in the area of student fees and the overall funding model for third level. In the absence of the Cassells report, for debate purposes it is difficult to have a meaningful conversation with the witnesses.

I very much appreciate the contribution made by my colleague, Senator Malcolm Byrne, in terms of his expertise and what he brings to the Seanad and the Houses in general. I find it beneficial to speak after him.

When we compare ourselves to other countries it is important that we compare like with like and across the board, rather than comparing educational outcomes or the number of students who are enrolled. As the witnesses outlined, we have an extraordinarily high attainment rate for third level degrees. That is a testament to the educational sector and everything our third level has done to maintain high standards. The standard of teaching is high and student attainment is extraordinarily high. From a brief reading of the statements, I cannot recall what the attainment level is in the EU, although I know a rate of 60% was mentioned here. The witnesses stated clearly that the level here is substantially higher than the EU average, which is to be noted and welcomed.

The question of core funding from the Exchequer is a subject in all of the submissions. It is very clear that we do not contribute enough, regardless of which measurement tool we use. There is, therefore, a simple Government decision to be made on whether we want to fund education to a higher level or not. The clear indication thus far is that we do. In saying that, I am concerned that if the Exchequer stumps up and reduces or holds fees at a particular level for the student, would that automatically increase funding to third level. The answer to that is "No". One does not flow from the other and two decisions must be made. Should increases be suspended or should fees be reduced by 20%, 30%, 50%, 100% or whatever the percentage may be? On the other hand, funding must be increased to compensate for that. Therein lies my questions for the witnesses. Are we comparing ourselves with our EU partners in the same way? For instance, are the overall running costs of third level here and in other jurisdictions comparable? Are they higher or lower here?

The witnesses mentioned staff ratios. They are clearly not at the same level as the ratios in some other EU member states or OECD countries, which the witnesses also cited. What is the comparative difference? Do the witnesses have those figures to hand? If they happen to have them in written format, I ask that they be provided to the secretariat because they would be very helpful in our deliberations.

The witnesses mentioned reputation, which is a critical part of this conversation. We all know and appreciate that we cannot afford to stand still. I do not think there is any disagreement across the political spectrum on the need to do more than we are doing.

I did not agree with all that Professor Hegarty said but he made a valid point about the inherent disadvantage in the system and cited Dublin 10 and Dublin 6. I can give similar figures between outer orbital towns in north County Dublin. I am not proud of that. I have been a Member of the Oireachtas and a member of a Government party for 11 years. There was not very much we could do for quite a bit of the past 11 years. However, if we park Covid for a moment, we have not faced the same financial constraints since 2018, at least in terms of the balance sheet. I am not convinced we have done enough at third level to improve outcomes for and inputs from disadvantaged communities and schools. I am not sure the playing field is entirely level.

I ecstatically welcome the inclusion of further education and training or FET in the CAO in terms of terminal examinations process for second level students. That is a fantastic step in the right direction. I am interested in hearing the views of the witnesses on what the impact of that will be in the coming years.