David Norris (Independent)

I thank my colleague, Senator Henry, for making time available and Senator Mansergh for his courtesy in cutting short his interesting remarks to allow us to participate. I welcome the Minister to the House. It is appropriate as, like me, she was a teacher.

I have read a report of a speech made in Cork by one of this report's principal authors, Professor Shattock. He highlighted two major issues, namely, the massive increase in funding and the large-scale internal reorganisation and restructuring of universities. The first may cause difficulties for the Minister and the second may cause difficulties for academic staff. It is true and has been acknowledged on the other side of the House that there was a period of cutbacks totalling 14%, 6% of which has been recouped. We are still in a situation of shortfall.

The figures are stark. We are 14th of 26 OECD nations. We are often told about our wonderful educational system and spending but this ranking is factual. Overall investment in education is below the OECD average and investment in research and development taken as a percentage of the wealth of the State lags well behind both OECD and EU averages. The report points to low numbers of international mature students and students from traditionally disadvantaged areas. We must either make further investment or adjust the way in which finance is used.

This review coincides with a readjustment of university management structures. This will cause concern as increased business presence in university governance is called for. Expecting universities to be efficient and to take account of the so-called "real world" are issues but if they are driven too far in that direction there will be considerable dangers. What is the cost-benefit analysis of imagination, for example? In the old days it was the university versus the marketplace. Perhaps that was wrong and we should try to ride both horses simultaneously but it would be disastrous if we simply introduced the values of the marketplace wholesale to universities. There are examples — Queens University, Belfast, closed its department of classics and music departments are suffering the same fate in Britain. The president of the students' union, Francis Kieran, said: "We must be aware of the commercialisation of third level education as, at the end of the day, attending college — sentimental as this may sound — is meant to be about broadening the mind and experiencing new ideas." He is absolutely right. We must find a way to combine these ideas.

A problem exists regarding fees. There are no free fees, regardless of the intention to abolish fees. If the point of this was to encourage individuals from lower socio-economic areas into universities, it has been a disastrous failure. The rate of increase of participation in Irish higher education by lower socio-economic groups has actually slowed compared to the 1986-92 period when targeted student grants were the policy instrument. In other words, if they are targeted then the disadvantaged are reached. A recent report entitled Supporting Equity in Higher Education shows a disparity of almost five to one — 79% to 21% — between the higher, professional socio-economic group and the unskilled manual work group in total participation in third level education. The current approach is not working. When considering the result of money directed from taxpayers, the benefit to the individual student is a benefit to society as a whole.