Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their assistance. I should have thanked Bills Office staff for the huge amount of work they have done in preparing for tonight's session and for the turnaround times.

I take the point Deputy Sherlock made about the ERC seriously. I am very happy to engage with eminent people such as Professor Luke O'Neill and others in the ERC, who serve Ireland well not just in Ireland but internationally. I am very happy to do that on foot of this conversation.

I am also very happy to take up the other point made. I do not see me, the Department, the Government or the Oireachtas as bystanders to the conversation around terms and conditions and precarity in higher education. My comments on the record, including those made at the IFUT conference in recent years, show that. As we invest more as a people in higher education, we have every right, while 100% respecting academic freedom and the autonomy of institutions, to want to know what that investment will achieve in reducing precarious employment, and securing decent full-time employment and terms and conditions. That is very much the conversation my Department and the HEA has on an active basis.

When it comes to issues such as deficits and the like, these Houses passed the HEA Act relatively recently, which gives the HEA an important role in working with institutions and getting to the bottom of issues, in addition to working to make sure that any implementation plan about how people restore themselves to financial stability is grounded in the principles and objectives the State wishes to see in terms of what we prioritise in education. I will very much continue to monitor that.

Deputy Boyd Barrett listed the various agencies that have to be consulted, including the IDA and Enterprise Ireland. He also initially referenced an tÚdarás um Ard-Oideachas, the Higher Education Authority, which is the body that funds higher education institutions in Ireland. He mentioned me as the current officeholder and those who will come after me as well. We have a slightly different take on the wording of this, but I very much see this new agency as one that will be based in, or under the remit of, an education and research department, having to consult with a Minister who comes at things from an education and research perspective, and also having to consult with the HEA. It is important, however, that we continue to build on the very excellent links SFI has established with IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland, which have served Ireland well. I have seen that internationally. We need to continue to appreciate that.

I also see this, and I will very briefly go back to a point I made earlier, that what we are doing by putting arts and humanities on a statutory footing will open up programmes that perhaps people in those areas might have felt excluded from applying for in the past. I see greater opportunities for arts and humanities, in some of the examples the Deputy gave, to start applying for funding programmes. That is the genuinely exciting opportunity here for arts and the humanities. I see the logic of the amendment, but the existing provision in the section is a fairly standard requirement in legislation for an agency of this type, relating to performance, resource allocation and the like. The board composition matters. It will be the board making these decisions. I outlined the criteria for board membership.

To Deputy Sherlock's points and the way he put it, there is already a provision, quite rightly, for ensuring that the agency's planning accords with guidelines and policies. We are very proud that in this country we do not have political interference in who is awarded research funding. No one wants me deciding that, or any of my successors. It is, however, right and proper that the Oireachtas, and Ministers and governments of the day, can set priority areas for how we want to see our citizens' investment made, without getting into individual projects or individual funding decisions. The provision, as already worded in the Bill, is in line with similar provisions in comparable legislation. In addition, there is provision in section 31 for accountability of the chief executive officer to other Oireachtas committees in allowing a committee to request the chief executive to attend to tease through these issues, and for that person to give account of the general administration of the agency.

I understand the intention of the amendment, but I believe the existing provision already contains the capacity for the agency to be transparent and accountable in upholding its policy intentions. For these reasons, I cannot accept the amendment.

See this speech in context