The announcement by the Minister for Education that she will bring forward a number of amendments to her Universities Bill after it is introduced in the Dail next week is welcome. Such was the volume of criticisms emanating from the colleges, and the similarity of their content, that it would have been unwise of Ms Breathnach to carry on regardless with plans for legislative change. Any measure which met with such disfavour from colleges, staff and students alike would be doomed to failure.
This most recent debate on how the universities should be run has rumbled on for more than a year now. Although it has incited passionate opinions on the university campuses - and particularly in Trinity - for most of the general public arguments about academic freedom and accountability appear to have little relevance. This is regrettable, since the taxpayer provides more than 80 per cent of the funding for the seven universities, either through capital costs, running costs or student support. It is in everyone's interests to ensure that the more than £300 million in State support each year is wisely spent.
Initially, much of the debate centred on the proposed composition of governing bodies under the new structure. However, Ms Breathnach now seems to have met most of the concerns of the universities by reducing the number of seats for outside representatives. Ten seats were to be allocated to outsiders, but in the Bill this figure now stands at a maximum of four in Trinity, it could be as low as one. Whether such a level of representation is sufficient to give the taxpayer and the Minister an adequate voice remains to be seen.
This and other dilutions of the original proposals seem to have done nothing to dim the opposition in some quarters to the legislation. Senator Shane Ross seems prepared to risk expulsion from Fine Gael by voting against the Bill. The former Taoiseach, Dr Garret FitzGerald, has described the Bill as "Thatcherite". The opposition is summed up in the recent submission by the Senate of the National University of Ireland, which described it as "intrusive" and "coercive".
Most of the objections now relate to the proposed relationship between the colleges and the Higher Education Authority. The Bill gives the HEA the power to issue guidelines on the division of spending by the different universities; it also requires the colleges to submit strategic plans to the HEA on a regular basis, and to make annual reports. Information on the staffing structures and pay scales of each college must also be provided.
The Minister says these guidelines are not mandatory, but the colleges remain unconvinced. Ultimately, though, the final form of the legislation will be determined by political considerations. The Bill will be defeated in the Senate if Ms Breathnach fails to secure the support of the university senators. The Government cannot afford the embarrassment of losing such a vote, particularly in the run up to an election, and is likely to make further concessions in order to avoid such a result. In suing for peace, however, Ms Breathnach should not lose sight of her original objective of greater accountability. The mechanism by which this is achieved may be a matter for debate, but the principle is not contested.