Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 21:

21. In page 10, line 2, after “Education” to insert “and Royal College of Surgeons”.

I will not be.
The criteria for the university to be so designated outside Ireland but not so designated in Ireland - but located in Ireland - require that it have an international reputation and have 40% of the students from outside the European Union. We had the Minister at the Irish Universities Association conference a few doors down the road only yesterday. Of the people the Minister was talking to yesterday, no other institution would qualify for it. It seems to me that it is about the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, so why not put it in the title? We had the rather strange debate the last day that only people on this side of the House were saying that this was about the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and nobody on the Government side was willing to acknowledge that. I do not know why it is a secret and it may have weakened the Bill because, as the Minister knows, doubts began to manifest themselves on this side of the House - not with me yet - as to why the body for which this legislation was primarily and probably exclusively intended within our lifetime, was not mentioned in it.
The second issue is whether it needs to change its charter to become a university for some purposes outside the country but not inside it? Should it not be referred to in its own legislation, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (Charters Amendment) Act 2003? Perhaps we will have a longer discussion on it on Report Stage, but that aspect strikes me as strange. Senator Power expressed doubts when she said it is really a medical university. Other people subsequently asked whether it was possible to have a university that specialises in such a narrow area. News to my ears in those discussions was that universities need a full range of subjects and disciplines and particularly that the civilising influence on a university is its arts faculty.
While it started off with my support - it seemed like a good idea but there were doubts - at least if we want to go there and do it, why is it not mentioned in the Bill?

It would be very strange to have something implemented by a law and an Act of Parliament which does not refer at all to the body for which it is intended. This is the purpose of the amendment. It struck me as anomalous. I will not push the amendment, and I will not move amendment No. 22 as I would only be repeating what I just said, which is that it is strange.