Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It might have been academic as to whether I had been precluded because the Minister has responded, at least in part, to a similar amendment Senator Higgins tabled. I am referring to the issue of academic freedom. Senator Higgins's similar amendment to section 8 refers to the specific issue of the academic freedom of students. I take on board what the Minister said about existing legislation that needs to be read in parallel with this legislation regarding guarantees of academic freedom. However, my amendment to section 8 seeks to include the idea of the academic freedom of students when we are talking about the objects of an túdarás. Among the listed objects is "to respect the academic freedom of higher education providers and academic staff in those providers". There is no reference to students. Senator Higgins and I have proposed amendments to that line. Hers is slightly different from my effort, but the end point would be the same. It would cover the academic freedom, not just of higher education providers and academic staff, but also the academic freedom of students.

This legislation recasts the situation that existed heretofore regarding the HEA and stands alongside existing legislation on higher education. The Bill rightly covers new ground and increasingly important is the need to recognise, promote and defend the academic freedom of students. On Committee Stage, I set out the reasons for doing so. I said it was not just a matter of equality. In another place I have proposed that an equality statement would involve reporting back on colleges' policy on promoting the academic freedom of students. It is also a matter of quality. What makes higher education higher education and what makes a university a university is that they provide a place for people to explore new ideas and possibilities, sometimes in ways that make us uncomfortable or challenge the status quoand establishment thinking.

On a previous occasion, I stated that if a student or postgraduate researcher wanted to engage in studies in areas that might challenge current orthodoxies, for example, on the issue of climate change, a university is precisely the place where there should be freedom to do that kind of thing. Increasingly, we live in a world where there can often be a chilling effect on the free expression and exploration of ideas. That can happen in informal ways in university campuses, but it can also happen where power is exercised academically. As a result, it is important for the legislation to address the issue of academic freedom of students.

On the previous occasion, I mentioned the increasing challenge by inter-institutional links of an international nature. I mentioned the joint colleges, the joint delivery of courses with China and so on, questions about the human rights, human dignity and academic freedom of Chinese people coming here to study in centres which are partly or possibly completely funded, partly controlled and perhaps completely controlled ultimately by the Chinese Communist Party. We need much more discussion than we have had to date about how Confucius Institutes operate and are funded. Last year we had controversy about how Chinese is taught and examined at leaving certificate level.

We are in a very complex and delicate situation, and it is important that legislation on higher education is not just set in traditional narrow ways about what academic freedom is but actually addresses new challenges and new problems. Part of that involves recognising and promoting academic freedom of students. That should be done with an eye to potential problems of an international nature, of a global nature and of an economic nature. It should also be done because we recognise that the environment we live in is not always one where people are free to explore ideas. This legislation should be about guaranteeing the quality of what our universities and higher education institutions can do for people and can do for our community, our society and our world.

Promoting and guaranteeing excellence is what that is all about. That is why so many of the universities were concerned about the precise way in which their autonomy and independence are to be respected. We had other debates about other sections and amendments and no doubt we will return to them. However, the academic freedom of students is pretty central. I do not understand why the Minister would not accept the amendment to section 8 concerning the objects of an túdarás. If the objects of an túdarás include education providers and academic staff in those providers, why is there no reference to students in that context?