Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I welcome the Minister. I thank the Bills Office, the Leader's office, the Cathaoirleach's office and my research assistants, Dr. Charles Larkin and Ms Ursula Ní Choill, for their help in preparing the Bill.

We are dealing with the role of the university and the contribution it will make in the future to the development of Ireland as we try to renew the country in the post-bailout environment. There is a superb tradition of stimulating debate, valuing experience and making a valued contribution to Irish society which the Bill attempts to reinforce by dealing with issues such as academic freedom, academic tenure, having a career structure for research, Exchequer oversight, new arrangements for pensions and fostering innovation to enhance and increase the contribution universities can continue to make to the development of wider society.

Regarding the role and function of the university, we include the ongoing support of the humanities. I was delighted when the Minister, speaking in the House last week about the development of future skills needs, referred to the importance of languages. It is very important that the range of disciplines that have characterised the development of the university to date be retained and that some departments and disciplines do not achieve priority status over others. That was a problem encountered in the United States, where some departments took an inordinate share of the budget, while others became poor relations.

The international evidence is that the more autonomous a university is, the better the performance that will result. It is important to distinguish universities from other institutions which also serve the country in their own ways. We accept that adjustments were necessary during the recession, but there has been a reduction of approximately 2,200 staff , while the level of State expenditure per student has fallen from €11,800 to €9,000. We must plot a course forward and that is what the Bill has been designed to do. There are problems relating to tenure to be dealt with arising from two court cases, Fanning and Cahill in 2005 and 2007, respectively. We can also make suggestions on how we could enhance the intellectual contribution of universities to wider society and are delighted to do so.

The first part of the Bill includes definitions of "education", "research", "innovation" and "scholarship" which provide for them to be as broad ranging as possible. We also seek to extend the definition of "remuneration". Universities should be independent, globally aware and engaged. They were global long before "globalisation" was a term applied to wider society. Trinity College Dublin came from Oxford and Cambridge universities which, in turn, came from the university in Paris. Today, happily, one can google somebody in San Fransisco as easily as somebody down the corridor or in another department in the same university. We, therefore, stress the international importance of universities and global awareness.

Universities should aim to become independent of the State. As we are discovering at the banking inquiry committee, contrarian views and different opinions are vital in this society on all issues. A university under the control of the State or subject to undue State influence is a contradiction in terms.

With regard to academic freedom, it is important that ideas be expressed and that measures to end the employment of an academic never have any relationship with the views expressed, except where they are unacceptable. What we seek to control is arbitrary dismissal and to set up procedures that would be common to the rest of the public service for the adjudication of a breach of a contract and to deal with a failure to fulfil that contract. Nobody condones a failure to mark examination scripts or give lectures, but there must be a procedure under which this happens so as not to have cases such as the two mentioned ending up in the Supreme Court. Going to the Supreme Court with industrial relations matters is a waste of public money by everybody concerned and we wish it to cease. There is a structure in place to deal with industrial relations matters in sections 5 and 7 and it should assist. We describe tenure as "the right ... not to be arbitrarily dismissed". The freedom to express one's views is linked with tenure. The two are joined together, which is why we link the two issues.

In section 6 which deals with funding we introduce the concept of proportionality. Section 12 funds - the core of interventions by the Minister and the Higher Education Authority - should be retained. There are other funds from other Ministers and bodies such as the Health Research Board and Science Foundation Ireland subject to these constraints.

It will undoubtedly be a feature in future generations. Where universities seek other sources of funding, which is part of their duties under this Bill, we need rules that reflect the situation, as well as less control by the Higher Education Authority or the Minister. However, controls should be retain in regard to pay because we do not want a two-tier structure whereby those universities that have considerable outside funding become a new elite. The Commission on Public Appointments would have a role in this regard and the Minister, if unhappy with the situation, could invoke the visitors for each of the universities, who are usually persons of senior legal standing, such as judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court.
It is a matter of regret that a burden was put onto the Exchequer in 2009 when a number of university pension funds went bankrupt and had to be taken over by the State. The university funds involved were Trinity College Dublin, University College Dublin, University College Cork, National University of Ireland, Galway, National University of Ireland, Maynooth and the National University of Ireland itself. The list also includes the Industrial Development Authority, Shannon Free Airport, FÁS, the Irish Goods Council, An Bord Bia, the Arts Council, the Regional Tourism Pension Scheme Fund, Fáilte Ireland, the Institute of Public Administration and the Economic and Social Research Institute. In future, these would be defined contribution pension schemes rather than a charge on the Exchequer. Given the nature of these pension arrangements, we fear that staff will be seen as a contingent liability on the State rather than assets. If the pension fund becomes self-financing, it would deal with that problem.
We also propose the establishment of direct activity corporations, which would be spin-off companies unrelated to Mom and Pop companies or public limited companies. We also propose arrangements to deal with copyright and intellectual property, all of which are in line with the policies developed by the Departments of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and Education and Skills.
I will conclude at this point in order to retain the good will of the Leas-Chathaoirleach. I thank the Minister for attending the debate and hope the ideas contained in the Bill are helpful. I am convinced these institutions have an important role to play in the development of this country. The front page current edition of The Economistcarries the following heading: "America's new aristocracy: Education and the inheritance of privilege". Doing this properly will help this country solve the many problems we came to this House to correct. I comment the Bill to the House in that spirit.