Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

There has been a broad welcome for the new legislation recently published by the Minister. I acknowledge the fact that a number of the issues I had previously raised at the Joint Committee on Education and Science in September 2004 have been addressed in this Bill, such as attempting to create a more even development between the IT and university sectors. I hope the legislation will be beneficial and helpful in securing the long-term sustainability of the colleges and will further embed these institutions in the wider community.

It is hoped that by bringing the institutes of technology, of which there are 14, under the control of the Higher Education Authority, they will benefit and be able to develop their roles further. Essentially a unified framework for higher education will be created with the 14 institutes and seven universities being under the control of the one body, namely, the HEA. Can the Minister ensure in such a binary system that the ITs will no longer be a junior partner to universities? I note that students' unions, staff and the HEA view the extension of significant new managerial and academic autonomy to the institutes as positive. I would like to think the legislation has been influenced by the OECD report on higher education in 2004 which recommended further freedom and autonomy for the institutes.

I commend those who have made the institutes of technology the success they are. Not only have the institutes provided a great boost to the development and economic infrastructure of towns and regions, but more importantly they have opened the doors of higher education to thousands of people. An ESRI report for the HEA indicated that ITs are making significant inroads to increase participation from lower socio-economic groups. By widening access and participation, students with modest to poor achievement in the leaving certificate can now participate in higher education.

However, widening access on its own is not enough. These students must be supported to complete their third level education. Supports in place for university students should also be available for IT students. Many students contact me regarding crèche facilities, particularly students coming from disadvantaged backgrounds, and such facilities are essential. Counselling and other support mechanisms need to be built on. Greater flexibility also needs to be shown regarding the academic year for IT students because of the background many of them come from, and equal support has to be given in this area for universities and the institutes.

Institutes have been largely successful in their role of serving the very broad educational and vocational needs of this State, and there are now more than 90,000 full-time and part-time students pursuing studies in the institutes of technology. The OECD report of 2004 further identified institutes as having a pivotal role in addressing the knowledge economy. As well as helping attract direct foreign investment through supplying a pool of qualified graduates in the regions, ITs have supported the development of small and medium-sized enterprises and indigenous industry through a series of initiatives. Included among these is the M50 programme in my constituency, led by the IT in Tallaght — naturally, as a local Deputy, I would note that — in conjunction with the IT in Blanchardstown, with UCD and DCU.

There has been criticism in the past that under the control of the Department of Education and Science the institutes did not possess the freedom they needed to realise their full potential. The Union of Students in Ireland has regarded this control as placing institutes of technology in a straitjacket, and the union has strongly endorsed the new legislation. The OECD said the fragmentation of policy and policy implementation has stifled development, and this Bill will hopefully take a step towards integrating the components of our tertiary education system. Such collaboration in a unified system will hopefully reap benefits for all concerned. However, we must ensure this collaboration is extended to further education colleges with regard to widening access and lifelong learning.

In this respect I once more urge the Minister to implement the McIver report and ensure the future growth and success of PLCs. Institutes have called for the removal of managerial constraints, which they believe disadvantage them in comparison with universities. That was among the issues I raised at the Joint Committee on Education and Science in 2004. It is hoped these constraints will be addressed in the Bill, as indeed they are, to a large extent. In addition, ITs feel they are not on an equal footing with universities, stemming from the current need for ITs, unlike universities, to obtain approval from the Department of Education and Science before a new degree programme is initiated. Although the Minister will now place ITs alongside universities under the control of the HEA, the burning question from the ITs is whether the Minister will grant them the same level of freedom as universities were given under the Universities Act? The Minister might respond on this point.

A noticeable trend all over Europe, especially in Britain, is that governments are devolving responsibilities and freedoms to educational institutions. If such devolution is to be proceeded with by the Government, it should at least be balanced by tough accountability mechanisms. The institutes must not be allowed to lose their capacity for innovation which has seen them respond effectively to Ireland's economic and educational needs.

A recent survey showed that most of the public have an incomplete understanding of the wide range of academic options that ITs provide. Though the new Institutes of Technology Bill seems like an important step in addressing the lack of awareness of ITs, the Government must ensure that ITs have the financial resources to better communicate their wide range of academic options to the public. The institutes must be resourced to make people from families in areas of high disadvantage and with no tradition of higher education participation aware of the options ITs can give them.

I am interested in what the Minister will have to say with regard to the fears expressed by the Teachers Union of Ireland regarding the Bill. While the union is not opposed to the move of the institutes to the HEA, it is very concerned at certain aspects. For instance, the union says it will not countenance any erosion of members' conditions of service when the institutes come under the aegis of the HEA. There have been fears that the concept of permanency as traditionally understood is under threat.

Concerns have also been expressed regarding amendments that alter the Colleges Act 1992 which originally affirmed that termination of a contract requires ministerial sanction. While the Minister has accepted that this protection will continue for existing members, worries have surfaced with regard to the same job security for future members. The section in question seems contentious in that the provision of consent where an IT wishes to dismiss a staff member remains as an existing function of the Minister for Education and Science, but only for staff members employed before the enactment of this Bill.

Another issue raised is the composition of the HEA. It is imperative that such an educational body is primarily influenced by educationalists. There must be an appropriate representation from the institutes of technology sector. Has the Minister any plans to introduce statutory staff representation on the HEA as with student representation?

The Institutes of Technology Bill possesses more positives than negatives for the parties concerned in this area of education. However, the Minister must ensure action is taken to allay the fears about job security expressed by the unions. She must also ensure that the public profile of ITs is enhanced to enable greater and fairer access.

See this speech in context