Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The Social Democrats welcomes this legislation and the establishment of the new Department. It is a good move. The guiding principle in regard to education across all levels must be seen as a means of achieving a fair society and ensuring that people have the opportunity to reach their potential. Everybody, regardless of background or means, should have the same opportunities for further and higher education. It is not just about equality of opportunity. The objective should be to aim for equality of outcome because as we know current levels of participation in third level by people from low income backgrounds are poor, with participation levels in some areas in single digit figures. Not a whole lot of progress has been made in recent years in those participation levels. There are many reasons for this. I reiterate that it is not enough to set equal opportunity as the objective. We need to be all of the time seeking to ensure, as much as possible, that we put in place the kind of supports necessary for people who for cultural or traditional reasons would not have participated in third level education. It is important to identify those barriers which prevent people from full participation and that we attempt to achieve equality of outcome. Opportunity in education and equality of outcome are central to a progressive and fair society. This has to be our objective. We know that education can be the gateway to a fair and equal society. It is about people reaching their potential, greater quality of life for people who participate in third level education, greater earning potential and a greater contribution to society and to the economy. We should be aiming to achieve this for all of our citizens. We should be setting that as a our very clear objective.

Currently, there are major funding challenges which pose a real threat to our third level institutions. This has been the case now for a number of years, as reflected in Irish universities slipping down the international rankings. Increasingly, our universities are seeking to supplement their income by taking in more international students, who are required, and are in a position, to contribute substantial fees. Sometimes that is at the expense of our own students in terms of disciplines being very competitive and Irish people not getting that opportunity. It is not a good basis on which to calibrate the funding of our universities. Increasingly, universities have been doing this but it has been very much impacted by Covid, which poses even greater challenges.

The Cassells report shows that significant investment is needed in third level education. As a small country in an increasingly globalised and competitive world Ireland's education system can be a great competitive advantage. It is fair to say that the high level education of many people who have gone through the education system in Ireland has given us a great edge and that has been recognised internationally. The third level sector needs strong Government support if it is to continue to maintain high standards. While planning for third level financing the Government needs to ensure that equal opportunity is the priority. This means funding third level predominantly through State funding, phasing out student fees, which continue to act as a barrier, and ensuring that Ireland never has to rely on income from students from abroad. We undoubtedly need to reduce costs and improve supports for students. We need to reduce third level fees by phasing out the student contribution charge and to reduce the no maintenance support for students' commute from 45 km to 25 km and to consider increasing funding to the SUSI grant scheme by a minimum of 7% and to eliminate delays in payments which cause significant stress and hardship for students. We should also reinstate maintenance grants for postgraduate students because, increasingly, postgraduate qualifications are seen as very important in terms of high level jobs. We need to reinstate maintenance grants for students to ensure that a postgraduate qualification is not seen as the preserve of those who are well-off. Postgraduate qualifications impose an even bigger burden on people coming from low income households. We also need to recognise the work of postgraduate research students and guarantee fair pay and working conditions for them.

On apprenticeship schemes, in my view, Springboard+ needs to be adapted to include school-leavers. We also need to promote digital apprenticeship programmes through initiatives such as the UK Tech Partners scheme. I would encourage the Minister to have a look at it. We have a high number of tech companies in Ireland. It is reasonable to expect those companies to start to run apprenticeship schemes.

If they do not manage to do that, or are not prepared to do that, we should consider the introduction of an apprenticeship levy to encourage major companies to contribute to a tech apprenticeship scheme. There is no doubt that greater funding for apprenticeships in State bodies and companies is also required. We need to consider ensuring improved participation in apprenticeships for women and for people with disabilities also.

In the whole area of research and development we know increases in this area bring in great returns - in fact, a twofold return on investment - with an increase in university staff and investment in basic research to balance applied research. That should be a priority.

Greater investment in Teagasc to support farmers in the changing world environment is required and needs to be looked at.

As a previous Minister for Health, the Minister is probably aware of the need to ensure that decisions on research funding are based upon the needs of broader society and the economy. Too often, because the main bulk of research funding has been controlled by the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, the main criteria applied to decision-making in that area are the number of jobs created. That is very narrow perspective to have. We should be looking at what is needed in the health area and its priorities. Research should be based on those sets priorities rather than the narrow jobs perspective.

An area the Minister will be familiar with in health area also is the need for proper skills planning. Too often we identify the need for more staff in particular areas but when one tries to recruit those staff, they are simply not available. Skills planning is absolutely key.

The decision to include the salary increase for the super junior Ministers is a mistake. It is a negative in terms of what should be a very positive Bill. Will the Minister reconsider the inclusion of that unpopular move in this legislation? Will he consider putting that to the House on another occasion and not seek to include it in this otherwise very positive legislation, which I think the House would be very happy to support in its entirety were it not for that provision?

See this speech in context