The Minister for Education and Skills, Richard Bruton’s, desire for “consensus” on a new funding model for higher education has been challenged by a number of Oireachtas Education and Skills Committee members.
Carol Nolan TD, Sinn Féin’s spokesperson for education and skills, who sits on the Education and Skills Committee, has criticised Fine Gael and the party’s position on a new higher education funding model.
Bruton and his party have remained silent on their preference for a new funding model since the publication of the report of the government’s higher education funding working group in July, which puts forward three options for higher education funding.
Speaking to The University Times, Nolan has accused Fine Gael of “giving the impression that they’re neutral”. She added that she genuinely feels “there is an agenda to have a loan system in place”. “I just think it’s a measure to just hide from the whole issue and hide from having to make a decision”, she said.
“Obviously the minister wants to maintain his popularity but a student loan system is not going to work, and I don’t believe for a second the government are neutral”, she added.
While Fine Gael is not alone in refusing to put forward a clear position on higher education funding, Bruton has repeatedly said that a decision should be made by the Oireachtas Education and Skills Committee. Responding to a question from The University Times at an event in Trinity organised by Trinity Young Fine Gael last month, Bruton said he hoped that he could bring a “consensus” proposal to the government ahead of the next budget.
This seemed to contradict the earlier date of the second quarter of 2017 outlined in the Action Plan for Education, which was launched in September.
Bruton also reaffirmed his commitment to a neutral stance on the issue: “I have decided not to say this is what we’re advocating. We need to listen to the others.” This followed previous comments in an interview with
This position has been strongly criticised by Nolan: “The Minister and the current government have to take responsibility to act on this issue and they can’t just hide behind the Education Committee.”
In an email statement to The University Times, Diane O’Gorman, a spokesperson for the Department of Education and Skills, noted that referring the decision to the committee was a commitment made in the programme for government.
She also referred to the extra €36.5 million provided to higher education in the Budget in October, adding that it would “allow the sector keep pace with demographic increases and introduce targeted initiatives in areas such as disadvantage, skills, research and flexible learning”.
Other committee members, while less critical, also expressed concern over the chances of a consensus being reached. Speaking to The University Times, Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh, from Sinn Féin, said: “There are going to be very strong ideological differences. I do think that up to now, at least statements from Fine Gael, have been very much in favour of a free market model of education. I don’t see them budging too far from that.”
“I don’t know whether we’re going to bridge the differences of political opinion in the committee”, Ó Clochartaigh added.
This was echoed by Fianna Fáil’s Senator Robbie Gallagher. Speaking to The University Times, he said he wouldn’t “underestimate the challenge of trying to get a consensus from the committee”.
The committee are currently considering the report, commonly referred to as the Cassells report after the group’s Chair, Peter Cassells, which set out three options for higher education funding – the abolition of the student contribution and the creation of a predominantly state-funded system, the continuation of the current student contribution charge coupled with increased state investment, and the introduction of an income-contingent loan system.
Since the report’s publication, a number of groups have presented to the Education and Skills Committee, including university heads, student and trade unions and the employers group Ibec.
Trinity’s Dean of Research, Prof John Boland, who presented to the committee last month, was heavily critical of the process. Speaking to The University Times, he described his appearance before the committee as “repetitious”.
“A lot of the senators and deputies wanted to be seen to be making a point, and they would read out a list of questions even though they were exactly identical to other questions and so it wasn’t clear that they had read the report. It wasn’t clear that they understood what was meant by, for instance, the loan proposal”, he said.
Boland said he was not “hugely optimistic” following his appearance before the committee that a decision would be made in the near future.
“It is unfortunate that Fine Gael has not covered themselves in glory in terms of being an education government”, he said.
Speaking during his presentation to the committee, Cassells suggested that a “hybrid” of the three options put forward in the report was possible. Members of the committee, however, have repeatedly indicated that such a decision will ultimately need to be made by Bruton.
Gallagher suggested that it would have been helpful to have been given some indication of Bruton’s preference on a funding model: “Normally the government of the day would outline their preference on something and then the rest of us could debate it and come up maybe with alternatives.”
If the committee is unable to come to a decision, this raises doubts that the Minister’s timeline for a new funding model will be met.
Róisín Power contributed reporting to this piece.
