Sean Barrett (Independent)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 12, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following:

"9.—(1) This Act shall not apply:

(a) to the evaluation of educational course materials, course designs, evaluation structures and materials that have been analysed and adjudicated upon by an external examiner appointed by the academic council and the governing body of a previously established university, the National University of Ireland, an educational institution established as a university under section 9 of the Act of 1997 and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland;

(b) to the evaluation of research outputs or research processes that have been subjected to any form of academic peer review that was deemed to be valid and acceptable by the academic council and the governing body of a previously established university, the National University of Ireland, an educational institution established as a university under section 9 of the Act of 1997 and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland;

(c) to student evaluations of staff that have managerial or human resource implications;

(d) to any additional pedagogical, didactic or research activities that have been subjected to external examination or academic peer review that have been enumerated by the academic council and the governing body of a previously established university, the National University of Ireland, an educational institution established as a university under section 9 of the Act of 1997 and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.

(2) The Authority created under this Act shall not in any way hamper, inhibit or run contract to the principles of academic freedom and tenure as outlined in the Act of 1997.".

It gives me pleasure to move this amendment in my name. I have been very concerned about this legislation in the two previous discussions we had in the House. The non-controversial part of the Bill is in the amalgamation of HETAC and FETAC. The controversial part, as far as my constituents are concerned, is the intention of the Minister to pressurise the universities into abolishing their own quality body and procedures, following ministerial and departmental pressures, when this Bill becomes law. This raises serious questions.

Section 14 of the Universities Act 1997 states a university, in performing its functions, shall:

(a) have the right and responsibility to preserve and promote the traditional principles of academic freedom in the conduct of its internal and external affairs, and

(b) be entitled to regulate its affairs in accordance with its independent ethos and traditions and the traditional principles of academic freedom[.]

The discharge of these duties by the universities is through a system of external examiners, typically from abroad. They see the vital examination questions first. They read all the first class honours scripts, they read the failed scripts, they read all the marginal scripts, and they take a random sample. That provides Irish universities with the international standing and reputation of the home university of the international external examiner. That is extremely valuable because universities are international institutions. Attempts by Marlborough Street to bring them under some kind of quango's thumb are seriously opposed within the sector.

Statements at earlier stages that there has been consultation about this are incorrect. I have been a member of the governing body of a university for the past two and a half years and it has never been discussed. In the case of charter universities, the charter cannot be altered without the consent of the people to whom the charter was awarded. These discussions have not taken place. There seems to be a momentum in the Department to do this, regardless of the wishes of the universities.

I submit to the Minister of State that the external examiner system is working. I tried to take research out of this Bill the last day, and that was refused by the Minister of State. The idea that a quango can evaluate research, when it is conducted in international journals and published, is bizarre to say the least.

The third aspect in the current system of quality control consists of the quality reviews. Unlike the Department, the Comptroller and Auditor General, when he reviewed Irish universities in 2010, reported the following.

In the peer review, considering their size, Finland, Ireland and Sweden were the countries with most universities pointed out by their peers as being excellent.

Ireland was ranked first out of the 28 countries for which the recruiter review measure was calculated. Recruiters regard the universities in Ireland and in the UK as providing highly employable graduates.

I do not know honestly what problem this quango is supposed to be addressing. I see it interfering in the way we run universities, and interfering with international status. We have to compete with Harvard, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge, and this interference in our autonomy by a quango of eight people, all appointed by the Minister, does not sit well with that.

For those who want to go on to do graduate work, Irish universities, my own in particular, have qualifications ad eundem gradum - at the same step - as Oxford and Cambridge. We have also sent people to Harvard, Yale and Princeton. It works. There is no need for this interference in how universities run their affairs.

I think the Department is way out of touch. This system has worked for nearly 400 years. The Webb and McDowell history of TCD shows that examination system was introduced there in 1637. Their book states that: "Dublin, in fact, possesses the questionable distinction of being the cradle of the public examination system." We had the examination system before Oxford and Cambridge. It is validated by external examiners internationally. The research is validated internationally by the editors of international journals. The graduates are highly employable as confirmed to us by the Comptroller and Auditor General in his report on September 2010. I have repeatedly asked that we do not interfere with the autonomy of Irish universities.

These are charter corporations. A charter is a binding agreement between the king who granted the charter and the successors. It is binding on both in perpetuity. It cannot be altered because a Minister or a quango feels that they do not like what is happening in universities. I would like to draw attention to the Supreme Court case in the US in 1819, where the government of New Hampshire attempted to interfere in the affairs of Dartmouth College, which was a charter corporation:

The opinion of the Court, after mature deliberation, is that there is a contract, the obligation of which cannot be impaired, without violating the constitution of the United States. This opinion appears ... to be equally supported by reason, and by former decisions of this court [...]

It has been shown, that the charter is a contract on the part of the government, that the property with which the charity is endowed, shall be for ever vested in a certain number of persons, and their successors, to subserve the particular purposes designated by the founder, and to be managed in a particular way [...]

Nothing seems better settled, at the common law, than the doctrine, that the crown cannot force upon a private corporation a new charter[.]

This unnecessary and unjustified interference in the internal affairs of Irish universities, when we are trying to compete internationally, raises the appalling spectre that we are now going forward as a country that cannot tolerate even one autonomous university, no matter how highly they perform internationally or how well they serve their students. We have students from the United States and on Erasmus schemes. They regard the availability of and contact with Irish academic staff as superior to their home places.

We have been convicted in our absence and this legislation has been brought in. There should have been proper consultation, at least with the Chancellor of the National University of Ireland, the former Senator Maurice Manning. One cannot set aside the examination system simply because it is disliked. Universities seem to be innocent bystanders of the wasteful amalgamation of HETAC and FETAC.

The Bill will paint an appalling view of Ireland by trying to turn universities into a branch of the civil service. They cannot survive that. We must have divergence of opinion and view, choice and different ways of doing things. When our system is acceptable on an international stage and we are trying to reach out to foreign investment, why choose to nobble Irish universities in this way? That is why I have proposed this amendment.

If there are already quality assurance schemes in established universities like Trinity College Dublin, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and the National University of Ireland and they are working satisfactorily to all concerned, why set up a quango of eight ministerial appointments to intervene in something of which I had hoped this country would be proud? I strongly ask the House to consider the amendment.