Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

I welcome the publication of this Bill as it is long overdue. Before becoming a full-time TD I was a senior lecturer at the Dublin Institute of Technology and I am declaring that interest.

On the role of colleges of technology in education in Ireland, the country is at a crossroads in terms of the development of third level and fourth level education. Discussion around the Lisbon treaty referred to the knowledge economy but I prefer to speak of the knowledge society as this paints a larger picture. The knowledge society consists not only of people who study for economic reasons but also those who study to contribute to society.

The history of third level education in Ireland shows a university sector that has, traditionally, been well-endowed and centred in the main cities. Then there are the colleges of technology and anyone who examines the history of Irish economic development will acknowledge they have played a key role in giving people access to third level education and apprenticeships within a reasonable distance of their homes. This is the case in developing areas of greater Dublin, such as the Acting Chairman's constituency of Tallaght and my constituency of Blanchardstown, and, more particularly, in areas along the west coast, including Sligo, Galway and Mayo and in the south and south west. There are very successful colleges of technology in Tralee, Cork, Waterford, Carlow and Athlone.

It is important to this debate that we acknowledge that we used regional funds in the early days of the European Union to grant-aid, through European social fund, ESF, programmes, access to education for a whole cohort of students at all levels. In many cases this education was provided closer to students' homes and this meant the cost to families of young people participating at third level was lessened. Ireland places a huge value on education and the opportunity it provides to every child to progress and, as an adult, find gainful employment or, in more recent times, start a business. Education means young people need not necessarily emigrate or even migrate but can stay at home and build a professional life, even in remote areas of the west, south west and south east of Ireland.

It is important that in the debate on third and fourth level education we acknowledge the strength of the history of education in Ireland and the opportunities it has given people who otherwise might not have participated at third level. The Minister is currently examining various reports by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, including the report by Dr. Jim Port on Waterford and its status as a college of technology. We must have a debate in the Dáil on promoting the greatest possible amount of participation in third level education in Ireland and the Minister for Education and Science must give it much consideration. We must give people who missed out the first time round an opportunity to participate in third level education; some 20% have missed the opportunity to complete second level education.

Figures released last week show that an extra 10,000 people became unemployed last month, about four fifths of whom were men. Many of these people lost employment in the construction industry. It is important that we talk about educational pathways of opportunity, not just FÁS courses, which train people in a narrow, technical way for upskilling relating to a limited range of jobs. A broad approach is needed that will allow people get back into education and have the opportunity to progress to third level and compete for the types of jobs international investment brings to Ireland. There are serious concerns among employers that they cannot recruit the type of engineers, IT specialists, people with management skills and mathematical skills needed for the jobs on offer. This has been pointed out in a number of reports on skills in Ireland and it is critical to the future of third level education.

The original institute of technology structure was financed effectively by our use of EU regional funds. The overwhelming majority of the students who went to colleges of technology were financed out of the regional Structural Funds. It was a very good use by Ireland of EU Structural Funds.

We are here debating the Student Support Bill. Student support is moving inexorably into the university sector or into the institutes of technology which award degrees at primary and higher level. The key issue is whether we are offering the same range of opportunity for student support to students attending colleges of technology, institutes of technology and universities as were available 20 or 30 years ago when we used European funds. The answer is we are not. What is happening is that the current student support system is tilted quite unfavourably against people in the PAYE sector. I think it is tilted, and probably sensibly so, very favourably towards people who are farming or have self-employed backgrounds. When one comes to filling in the student application it must include the parents' means. A parent may be in the PAYE sector, such as a civil servant in a decentralised location, or a bus driver in the Dublin area. If in the year before their child goes to college they have overtime or bonus payments and are paid a trade union rate in terms of wages, they are unlikely to find that their child will qualify for either a full or a partial third level grant. This is our biggest problem.

We are saying to people who are largely coming from rural areas, farming and small business backgrounds that they will qualify because of the way in which the means test is structured but it is unlikely that many sons or daughters of people in the PAYE sector will qualify. I have had this debate with the Minister on numerous occasions and I have said to her that the college grant system needs an overhaul. We can go back to the de Buitléir report, published 15 years ago, which suggested the means test should be comprehensive and administered by a Department such as the Department of Social and Family Affairs to ensure fairness across the country. That recommendation was never followed up, partly because it was politically controversial. There was a perception that some of the people with, say, the largest farms and large businesses would end up not getting college grants. Given that we want, according to all the skills surveys, more than 60% of students from secondary school going into third level, it is important that we hold to the objective of people from rural backgrounds going to college. I think we are doing well with that objective. However, we have to ensure that people who come from urban and PAYE backgrounds have the same access if we are to continue increasing the numbers. I think the Minister has ducked that issue.

It was the Labour Party, rather controversially in terms of the left and the right, which introduced the right to free undergraduate tuition at third level. I was one of those in the Labour Party who strongly supported the then Minister for Education, Niamh Bhreathnach, in bringing in that initiative. It is fashionable on the ultra right and the ultra left to condemn free fees because it is seen rather like universal child benefit as giving Mr. and Mrs. Millionaire's children an advantage, as well as helping everybody else.

The issue of universal access to third level education is like the argument for universal access to primary and secondary education, that as a society we have to encourage as much educational qualification and achievement as possible for the economy and the jobs and society we wish to promote.

The opening of third level education to people in urban areas, which was the particular consequence of the Bhreathnach initiative, has been fantastic for society. It has produced the cohort of young people with high levels of skills who could stay at home in Ireland and work for multinationals coming into Ireland and also establish their own businesses. They are the Celtic tiger graduates and young people. This is not about an urban-rural divide. It is about encouraging as many people as possible to get into third level education and to get appropriate levels of qualifications and skills. I do not think the Minister has grasped that issue.

We have a serious deficiency in the teaching of maths and science. I do not know the detailed qualifications of the Cabinet and Ministers of State. It seems an awful lot of them are lawyers and solicitors. Few parties have engineers or scientists. I am happily joined by one of the few esteemed scientists in the Dáil, Dr. Mary Upton. She is unusual in most of the political parties, whether on the Government or Opposition benches. That is indicative of how as a society we look at and promote science in education.

People who write good books are interviewed on the "Late Late Show". People who make millions of euro, as business people, and people who have ideas in areas such as taxation, as I do occasionally, are interviewed on programmes. One seldom sees Gerry Ryan, Pat Kenny or others rushing to interview the latest maths star, even though Pat Kenny was originally a distinguished engineer, or the latest person who has done really interesting work in one of our senior colleges.

Large numbers of young men are becoming unemployed from the construction industry. Many of them either have only limited second level qualifications, having completed their leaving certificate, or have only completed the junior certificate. I know many of these young men. They have worked hard in construction for the past ten years. They have an amount of skills, entrepreneurial flair and talent. As a country we would be crazy to say to those young men coming out of the construction industry, given the downturn, that they should become unemployed, go on the dole and should not be ambitious about their education.

We could use those young people as a critical resource in terms of further education. That is one of the issues that needs to be addressed. In that respect this Bill is important. How will those people access third level education? In the current grant structure they will not necessarily easily qualify unless they face into long periods of required unemployment which we do not want them to do.

See this speech in context