Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and I want to touch on some of the issues addressed by both the Minister and Deputy Enright.

I welcome the fact that we are discussing higher and further education together because one of the difficulties is that we tend to sectoralise the different parts of education. The further education sector, in particular, has suffered because it is seen separately from the higher education sector. Even within the latter sector there is the fraction between the institutes of technology and the universities.

Like Deputy Enright, I welcome the fact that the institutes of technology will come under the Higher Education Authority. Perhaps the Minister, in replying, might indicate when we can expect that legislation to come before the House so that at least the two sectors can be more seamlessly integrated. I hope there will be further action on a more seamless approach to education in general and in particular on the further education sector which needs to find and be given its important niche in the context of the spectrum of opportunities in education for young people.

I too would begin by addressing the issue of the further education sector colleges being treated like second level schools, the difficulties the sector encounters as a result and the recommendations in the McIver report that the sector should be treated separately, as it is by most neighbouring European states. In such countries, the further education sector is a productive sector in terms of responding to the needs of the economy and to the needs of students who may not be in the 500 points category but who have a real future and in many ways also can use further education as a pathway to higher education. That is the way it operates in this country at present but it has grown in an ad hoc manner, developed largely by the vocational education committees without proper funding and structures.

When the McIver report was published in 2003, there was a real hope that the further education sector would be put on a proper footing. There was a particular hope in the approach to the recent budget that the €48 million required to undertake, or at least commence, the major reconstruction work would be provided. From speaking to representatives of the TUI, for example, I know that they were given to expect that the funding to which I refer would be in the budget this year. It did not happen as expected and there was considerable disappointment, not only for the people working in the sector but also for the 30,000 students in the further education sector. They do not possess the simple tools one would expect of people lecturing to third level students such as necessary information technology and library support, canteens, and proper departmental structures and seniority roles.

I have spoken to many working in that sector and wish to read from a letter I received from somebody who works in a city college with more than 1,000 students. It states:

We are lucky to have an information officer employed for four hours daily. She is not employed as a librarian [this is within the context of the library in the college] because, being classed as a second level school, there is no funding for that position. Our information officer is paid at a part-time administrative rate. She is responsible for the ongoing cataloguing of resources, the issuing of library materials, and the general running of the library and the monitoring of stock.

This is in contrast with [she names an institute of technology which I will not name] which has a similar student population and profile to our own. However, it employs 11 librarians and library technicians. The library has longer opening hours and has 20,000 printed resources.

Our opening hours are entirely dependent on the teachers who supervise the library in the absence of the information officer. In the absence of a teacher filling a slot, the library has to close. Therefore, it often has to close at 2 p.m., for example. Our students, many of whom have come from the third level sector to retrain, find this situation extremely frustrating. We cannot accommodate our night time students because of lack of budget for a second information officer.

Our computers and printers, to work well, depend on dedicated technicians to make the library function. We have in our college one full-time technician for the whole college (500 computers in all). We have to wait in turn along with every other department for the overburdened technician to repair the computers, printers etc. As students depend on the library to complete assignments, projects and study, a library without proper technical support is one not running to its full potential.

The recommendations of McIver would allow us to employ at least two full-time library assistants and two full-time librarians. This is not counting our night time allocation. We could employ at least one dedicated full-time computer technician.

There are two more pages in the letter, which I will not quote, but it gives a flavour of the frustrations of people in the PLC and further education sector. They know what they need, they have a report and they have a commitment in principle but the funding and structures to make that happen have not been provided. The Minister of State will contribute later and I would very much like her to respond to the concerns raised by Members regarding further education.

Many opportunities will be presented over the coming years to be more inclusive and to increase the number of students availing of further and higher education. I fully agree with Deputy Enright that resources need to be implemented at an early stage and the problem of early school leavers also needs to be addressed. We debated this issue during Private Members' business last night. The unemployment rate among early school leavers is higher now than in 1999 and, therefore, opportunities must be offered to them. Opportunities must also be offered to adults who left the system without a proper education. Adult education should also fit this jigsaw. The national adult learning council was set up a few years ago but it was disbanded later. This forum could pull all the strands together. What is the Government's intention regarding the council?

More than half our population avails of higher and further education, which is welcome, whereas a generation ago half the population probably did not go further than primary education. That is a significant success story and the plan is to maintain it. This success is no small measure due to so-called free second level education and free third level fees. I am glad the Government is continuing the policy on third level fees and it is not acceding to the pressure to reinstate such fees. Available statistics suggest all sectors of the populations are participating at third level. A report in this regard will be published tomorrow and it will probably highlight that people from various socio-economic backgrounds participate in third level at a higher rate than previously.

The HEA's target is that 60% of school leavers will enter full-time third level education by 2010. However, one demographic is falling. In 2004, there were 61,000 18 year olds but it is anticipated there will only be 53,000 in 2014. The Department, therefore, could provide more opportunities for people who have various difficulties through access programmes. Entry to third level is provided through such programmes but Ireland lags very much behind its European neighbours and other OECD countries in the number of students who transfer to third level through such programmes. Ireland also lags behind in the number of mature students entering third level. Given the falling demographics, increased opportunities should be available to students to enter third level through such programmes and post leaving certificate courses. People who do well in these courses should be enabled to take up a diploma or degree directly in ITs or universities. While such opportunities are available, they need to be more formalised. Future demographics will give the Minister the opportunity to do that.

More opportunities should also be created for part-time students. People are put off third level education because they cannot afford it. Many of them work and because they can only attend as part-time students, they must pay fees, which is a major obstacle. Recommendation 22 in the OECD report states: "Every effort should be made to increase part-time student numbers as a proportion of total numbers and, to this end, distinctions between part-time and full-time students should be removed for the purpose of the obligation to pay fees and receive maintenance support and in calculating the recurrent grant to third level institutions." The Minister is shaking her head because that will be costly but the recommendation has been made.

See this speech in context