Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin, to the House. Her speech is a very positive indication of her commitment to change. In her address, she emphasised the importance of change, development and investment and has demonstrated that these three principles are foremost in her mind.

It is important that as a relatively new Minister, Deputy Hanafin has undertaken much-needed reform of the third level sector. I do not wish to be political at this point, but in the past year the presidents of all of our colleges and third level institutions found themselves facing a financial crisis as a result of the fact that investment, under successive Ministers, had not kept pace with investment in other sectors, or even within the education system itself. The third level sector had fallen behind. It has been recognised that if our third level institutions cannot produce graduates of the highest quality because of underinvestment, this will have negative implications for the creation of new job opportunities in this country.

The Fottrell report is welcome and timely because it is clear to everyone that there is a shortage of medical practitioners in this country. In rural Ireland in particular, gaining access to a doctor, even during so-called working hours, is difficult and outside those hours, virtually impossible. The consequence of that is the crisis that exists in accident and emergency departments in many hospitals. The Minister, by creating an environment which will allow for the training of additional doctors, has allowed us to hope for a change in that situation. While it may be too late for some, for many people who rely on their general practitioner, this is a welcome step forward.

Some third level institutions have been preparing for this announcement for a number of years and may have the capacity to take in additional students this year. I am referring, in particular, to the University of Limerick, which has additional capacity through its forward-looking development plan. I ask the Minister to consider that option if it is available to her. It would move the reform programme forward and allow for a faster throughput of doctors.

Entry to the GMS scheme is problematic and has been for some time. I hope that any review being undertaken of training and output of medical practitioners will also examine access to the GMS scheme. Such access is a serious problem in rural areas and particularly in the west, where a high proportion of the population is ageing and where the need for access to the scheme will be even greater in the coming years.

I welcome the package announced by the Minister in co-operation with the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. If there is an opportunity to accelerate change and move the programme forward, I hope it will not be lost. There is no doubt that we have trained medical practitioners of the highest quality, who can take their rightful place at the top of any medical system. Indeed, many are in the highest positions abroad. Unfortunately, as the Fottrell report makes clear, many of our medical graduates are forced to go abroad for additional specialist training. The Minister did not refer specifically to this issue today but I hope there will be a parallel development of specialist training in Ireland. While such training is available here, its further development must be accelerated, in tandem with the proposed increased output of general medical practitioners.

Most people accept that the requirements for entry into medical faculties that existed until now, through the CAO system, made it almost impossible for students to gain entry without seriously damaging their lifestyles. In many cases, the pressure to gain the enormous number of points required took its toll on gifted students, whose only ambition was to gain access to medical school. I am pleased that the barrier is to be reduced somewhat, but not to the extent that the quality of those who gain access will deteriorate markedly. The fact that the pressure on students will be reduced is very welcome. The proposal for aptitude tests and interviews must be given careful consideration and I welcome the fact that a working group has been established to finalise the terms of the tests. Currently, people joining the Civil Service at any level must do an aptitude test and its content is relevant to the job application. I do not know, however, how an aptitude test could be framed to identify what is required to make a good doctor. I heard an eminent medical practitioner on the radio after the Minister announced her proposals asking how a test could assess the characteristics required. The experts the Minister has drawn together have an unenviable task and I hope they can devise a method whereby that end will be achieved.

I am concerned about an aptitude test being seen as a step forward. There were also hints that we might go along the English route, where the test would be followed by an interview.