M J Nolan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Institutes of Technology Bill 2006 and commend the Minister for Education and Science for its introduction. The legislation follows on from several Bills introduced for the education sector, particularly at third level, further enhancing its reputation. The OECD recently completed a review of higher education in Ireland in 2004. One key recommendation from the report was to maintain the differentiation between the university and institutes of technology sectors under the remit of a single authority for the purpose of achieving a unified higher education strategy.

The Bill provides for a mechanism for greater integration and cohesiveness in the higher education system. It introduces certain responsibilities and onuses, particularly on the institutes' directors and boards of directors. We are fortunate to have excellent directors in the institutes who are committed to the institutes and proud of those they represent. The legislation governing the institutes has been introduced in a timely manner. In the 1960s, the then Government recognised the numbers participating in third level education was far from encouraging. The numbers of students going on to second level education at that stage were disappointing but they were transformed in the late 1960s and early 1970s following the introduction of free education by Donogh O'Malley.

After the crisis in the 1970s and 1980s, with mass unemployment and young people having severe difficulties in finding jobs, it was sensible for successive Governments to encourage them into further education. The establishment of the regional technical colleges could not have come at a better time. They took up much of the slack in the sector, when young people who had finished second level were encouraged to enter third level education in the regional technical colleges with grant assistance.

The regional balance was important, with technical colleges in Athlone, Letterkenny, Sligo, Galway, Carlow, Dundalk, Waterford, Cork and Tralee. That ensured that young students from rural backgrounds could avail of third level education in their own locality. Not too many families could afford to send children to college in Dublin, Cork or Galway at that time. Even today many families would find it difficult to keep children in Dublin because of the huge increase in the costs of accommodation in the city. The regional technical colleges, institutes of technology as they are now, have been singularly successful and the Department of Education and Science and the Ministers who oversaw their development must take credit.

This legislation will give more power to individual colleges and they will be able to change with the times. Different colleges specialise in different areas, which is important, but they must be flexible enough to meet changing demands in society, the economy and the commercial sector. Recently some colleges have changed their accountancy procedures to take into account changes in practice, with more European and US-style practices coming in. The courses are changing to accommodate those new methods so graduates will be up to speed.

Carlow Institute of Technology has ensured that the town has seen the largest increase in the number of second level students going on to third level in the last year. Over 74% of those who complete their leaving certificate go on to third level.

Institutes of technology have accommodated individual contractors, particularly in the construction industry, in block release courses. Unfortunately, not everything is positive in this area. Carlow has seen the demise of the sugar industry, which was a great source of apprenticeships. Since the closure of sugar plant, apprentices will no longer be trained and we must find new industries to take up that slack.

We have, however, seen opportunities develop in other areas. The Air Corps has placed on permanent display for the college's use one of its Fuga jets which had been grounded. The Minister for Defence and the Chief of Staff of the time must be commended for their foresight in ensuring the plane can still make a contribution to education. It is now used by Carlow IT to train electronics graduates in aeronautic electronics. Private companies in shipping or other sectors could also be asked to make contributions to the institutes.

We must not forget the VECs, which have supported the regional technical colleges. There were some farsighted CEOs in vocational education committees who moved on from the technical school sector, bringing their expertise into third level when the institutes of technology were created.

This Bill is a milestone in education legislation and the Minister is to be commended for it. Cases have been made for various institutes to seek university status. Any claim for such status for the south east must include Carlow IT. Waterford has made a lot of noise about university status but it may not be to its credit that it has not been as all-embracing as it could have been towards the institute in Carlow. It is unfair in that it is calling for an institute for the south east when it is in Munster. One of the last institutes to secure university status was the University of Limerick. Granting such status to Waterford to the exclusion of Carlow would be unfair as it would mean there would be three universities in Munster. With the demographics we will see in the census, Leinster clearly deserves a new university. It would go against demographic trends to talk about a new institute in Waterford and it is not well serviced on an infrastructural basis. Also, it is on the coast; a university should have a hinterland in all directions to draw students.

The proposal, however, to convert any institute of technology to a university goes against the first of the 52 recommendations in the recent OECD review of third level education. I hope the Government is not considering granting university status to Waterford. Siting three universities in Munster to the exclusion of Leinster would be wrong. I was disappointed by the lack of round table discussions between Waterford Institute of Technology and Carlow Institute of Technology. A recent decision by the south-east regional authority fell down on county lines, with the majority of the authority supporting Waterford and Carlow being left high and dry because of the paucity of its representation on the authority.

It would make more sense to build a case for using the existing infrastructure and a multi-campus approach where each county contributes. A model akin to that of the University of Ulster, which involves using a multi-campus approach and where each campus has equal status, should be considered. It has worked very successfully for that university so I do not see why it would not work in the south east. An institution created as part of a multi-campus approach would have a much better chance of being regarded as a real university which served the needs of the south east than an institution in Waterford which put a new sign on the door but which was regarded as an otherwise unchanged institution. Such an institution would not be a real university. I doubt whether a new university in Waterford would have the full range of courses, such as medicine, dentistry and pharmacy.

It is not timely for Waterford Institute of Technology to make such a pitch because it has been singularly unsuccessful to date in convincing the public of the rightness of its case. I ask the Minister and Department to weigh the merits of having a university in Waterford very carefully and to consider other institutes of technology in the south east, such as Carlow Institute of Technology which has outreach centres in Wexford and Kilkenny. It is interesting to note that CAO applications to Waterford Institute of Technology have declined by over 20% in the last two years, while CAO applications to Carlow Institute of Technology have increased by 15%. If this is indicative of what is taking place locally, the case for granting university status to Waterford is not very strong.

I welcome the Bill because it marks a further stage of development of the non-university sector by investing more authority and responsibility in institutes of technology for the conduct of their day-to-day affairs. It is quite clear in the Bill that the directors of the institutes of technology will play a much greater role.

It is important to outline the historical context in which our present system of technical and technological education evolved. An organised system of technical instruction did not develop in Ireland until the early years of the 20th century. However, from the second half of the 19th century, a number of individual institutions made contributions to this field. The report of the Recess Committee in 1896 called for reform and recommended that technical education be made the responsibility of a new Department which would administer State aid to agriculture and industry. It is important to remember that the Department of Agriculture played a major role in the education system until it was passed over to the Department of Education.

The Recess Committee was part of the Conservative Government's policy of killing home rule by kindness. The Irish people were to receive some very worthy measures, such as the Light Railways (Ireland) Act 1889, the Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act 1899 and the Congested Districts Boards (Ireland) Act 1899. With the help of these Acts, the Irish people were to be tranquillised and become subject to orders from the UK. We took all the powers given to us but kept marching onwards.

The Recess Committee also recommended the creation of a new type of second level school for agriculture and practical industry. The establishment of evening and continuation courses for those at work and of higher technical colleges arose out of this. It is interesting that the committee's view that the aim of practical education was essentially to aid the economic development of the country has not changed in over a century.

The Local Government (Ireland) Act 1898 set down the framework for a more organised local authorities structure for the country and enabled the new county and borough councils to levy rates for the support of technical education. This Act, coupled with the Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act 1899 which established the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, as envisaged by the Recess Committee, are two of the great landmarks in the development of technical education in Ireland. The Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act defined technical instruction as instruction in the principles of science and art applicable to industries and in the application of branches of science and art to specified industries for employment.

As well as the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, the Act provided for a board of technical instruction to advise on all relevant matters submitted to it by the Department. The borough, urban district and county councils set up local statutory committees which prepared schemes of technical instruction for their areas for approval and provided the necessary local funding which was a prerequisite for securing financial assistance from central funds.

It is important to remember where we came from. The one lesson we should learn from our history is that we are living in a time of change. I hope the Minister and her successors will continue to examine the changes in our economy and society and our educational needs. I hope this Bill will provide directors and boards of institutes of technology with the freedom they need to provide the best possible education for our young population.

See this speech in context