Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I move amendment No. 51:

In page 20, to delete lines 17 to 21.

On a technical point, amendment No. 52 on the list of amendments concerns the director and the president. It might be printed wrongly.

The amendments grouped in my name and that of Deputy Enright relate to appearances before the Committee of Public Accounts by representatives of institutes of technology, universities and other bodies. The Bill states: "A Director, if required under paragraph 8 to give evidence, shall not question or express an opinion on the merits of any policy of the Government or a Minister of the Government or on the merits of the objectives of such a policy." I understand this is standard practice with regard to Secretaries General of Departments and certain other bodies, and I agree it is appropriate with regard to Secretaries General. However, an institute of technology, a university or the Higher Education Authority should not be put into the category. They should be free to discuss budgetary issues and the spending of public money, which is the function for which they are attending the Committee of Public Accounts. This section should not be included in the Bill.

We provided some examples in this regard on Committee Stage. For example, when the programme for funding research at third level, PRTLI, was stalled and funding was stopped for a period, it had an effect on the capacity of third level institutions to carry out their functions and do what they wanted to do and what they felt was right. As it was part of Government policy at the time — fortunately, it is not so any longer — it is an example of how, in giving evidence to the Committee of Public Accounts, a bar on criticising Government policy would inevitably curtail directors in explaining their situation with regard to a Government decision. That is one example but there are others.

This appears to be an attempt to muzzle representatives of academic institutions, who are not supposed to be instruments of Government policy and who are supposed to have freedom to exercise their judgment, ethos, aims and objectives. That is why we have tabled this series of amendments.

See this speech in context