Dáil debates

Thursday, 5 July 2012

Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Bill 2011 [Seanad]: Report and Final Stages

 

2:00 pm

Photo of Ruairi QuinnRuairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 69, line 19, to delete "8 members" and substitute "10 members".

I move to recommit in respect of amendment No. 9 as the proposal to increase the size of the board of the authority involves a marginal increase in the charge on the exchequer.

I indicated on Committee Stage that it was my intention to accept the proposal by Deputy Smith to make provision in the Bill for the Union of Students of Ireland to make a nomination to the board of the new authority. Amendment No. 10 proposes that the right of the USI to nominate a board member is specifically provided for in the Bill.

I also indicated on Committee Stage that I am very conscious of the fact that the authority will be dealing with a very diverse set of learners, particularly in the adult and further education sector. To reflect this, I am also proposing through this amendment to allow for two learner representatives to sit on the board, one of whom will be nominated by the USI. This leaves scope for the second learner representative to be representative of the further and adult education sector.

The inclusion of two learner representatives on the board of the authority is evidence of my firm commitment to strong learner involvement at all levels of the quality assurance process. Student involvement is critical to the successful operation of quality assurance processes within institutions and within the authority. The inclusion of a strong student voice at board level complements the other provisions in the Bill that specifically provide that institutional quality assurance procedures should include evaluation by learners of the education and training provided to them. I made the wording of this amendment available to Deputies Smith and Crowe in advance of it being finalised and I thank them for their cooperation on this issue.

I also expressed the view on Committee Stage that an eight member board may be too small to be effective if five positions are already reserved for the chair, the CEO, an international expert and two student learner representatives respectively. I am therefore proposing through amendment No. 9 to provide for an increase in the size of the board from eight to ten members. This will ensure a more balanced membership while simultaneously affording a strong voice for learner representatives at board level.

Schedule 1 to the Bill currently provides that the quorum required for a meeting of the authority, unless the Minister directs otherwise, shall be four members of the board. This was appropriate when the board consisted of eight members. As it is now proposed to increase the size of the board to ten members, it is considered appropriate that the quorum requirement should also be increased to five members. This is the intention behind amendment No. 11.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.