Lame-duck minister in no position to shake up the education system

By Matt Cooper

Friday, August 20, 2010

PROOF that politics is often about doing as little as possible, irrespective of whether times are good or bad, and then only when you absolutely have to do something, was provided this week by the Minister for Education, Mary Coughlan.

Faced with evidence of a crisis in education — a Leaving Cert programme not producing the desired results in preparing many teenagers properly for their futures and a third-level system struggling to pay its way and often performing below standard — Coughlan leapt to the defence of the status quo.

Instead of embracing the opportunity to demand and enforce major change she offered only the bare minimum: changes to the Leaving Cert will be marginal and the transparent need for the reintroduction of third-level fees will not be allowed during the remaining lifetime of this Government.

There was no concession that radical surgery to the operation and content of the existing system — and then change to the way it is all funded — is really required. The Leaving Cert is flawed, particularly in the provision of adequate levels of achievement in maths and science, so essential to the "smart economy" on which the Government hopes to rebuild the country. The reintroduction of third-level fees might just simultaneously provide better funding for the sector and offer greater equality to all in the ability to attend university or college.

There is little surprise in the Government opting to do nothing. Major change in the curriculum and efforts to improve greatly the standard of teaching would most likely lead to major objections from teachers. They are fed up already at their reduced income and were the most opposed to the Croke Park agreement that bought public sector peace earlier this year. The Government is not going to risk confrontation by demanding wholesale change to the way teachers do their business.

Fianna Fáil might be prepared to take the flak that would result from the reintroduction of third-level fees, but the Greens appear to have snookered them by demanding it not happen as part of last year’s renegotiated programme for government.

This is not necessarily good news though: there is considerable evidence to suggest that free third-level fees have disproportionately suited the better-off and not encouraged those from poorer backgrounds into third level. It has also left many of the universities seemingly short of funds (although a proper audit of work practices and courses might suggest that more work be done to secure value for money). The Government is about to receive a major report from a group led by economist Colin Hunt, once an adviser to Brian Cowen but now back in the private sector, which says the sector needs money from other than the state. This can only mean fees, but it will be ignored for purely political reasons.

During the good times tackling the vested interests was not regarded as a smart thing to do. Why bring trouble on yourself when the majority of voters were happy with you? As a result, there was relatively little action in changing our educational structures and only then after tortuous negotiation and the spending of much money.

It mattered little that there was mounting evidence things were going wrong in maintaining, let alone improving, standards and that this would have long-term repercussions. Most of the debate was about giving better pay to teachers and lecturers and then having enough money left over to build new facilities.

Now that we have hit the bad times — and desperately need a better educated population, to help them find reasonably paid work at home or abroad — the Government is unwilling again to confront vested interests. Now that the FF/Green coalition is deeply unpopular — because of doing things it didn’t want to do — why would it make things worse by causing more rows and disaffecting more people?

Why, when it has so many difficulties with which it is struggling to cope, would it take on more difficult and unpopular tasks? And when the minister in charge is a lame duck — badly winged by her experiences in her old job at Trade, Enterprise and Employment — who could trust her to be imaginative and determined enough to act?

nLansdowne Road is going to be a very expensive place to visit for major sports fixtures. It may be too expensive for many people. Both the IRFU and FAI are gambling about the appetite of fans during a major recession overcoming their lack of money.

If you want to go to the rugby internationals in November, then you are going to have to buy tickets for all four matches. The price for the package for ordinary stand tickets is going to be €340. If you go for the better seated premium tickets, then the cost will be €425. The South African world champions are first up but may bring an under-strength team. The All-Blacks are always worth seeing and both Argentina and Samoa are good teams who will test Ireland less than a year before the world cup finals. But these are still big prices.

The value for the soccer internationals is even more doubtful. The first European Championship qualifier in September is against Andorra, which is hardly a big attraction given that it is a small country that never wins away from home. Tickets are €50 (for behind the goals) and €70.

THESE are demanding prices. Children’s tickets are €10, if accompanied by an adult paying €50. I have to decide if bringing four kids at a price of €103 (once booking charges are included) is worthwhile for a game like this, especially as the North Stand area, where the kids are to be put, looks as if it might be a disappointing viewing experience.

Contrast this to the charges from the GAA for Croke Park this Sunday. Adult tickets are €45 for the Cork-Dublin match at which there is sure to be a cracking atmosphere and a real contest — potentially the best sporting occasion in the country this year. Children can go for a fiver each. Even including booking charges I could bring my kids for €70, which is a much better deal. Indeed were the prices to be reversed then the Cork-Dublin game would still look a better deal than Ireland-Andorra. And I’m aware that those prices are beyond the reach of many.

That the FAI and IRFU have felt it necessary to pitch their prices so high is worrying. One obvious difference with the GAA is that the latter does not have to pay its players and can pitch prices at a lower level. However, it also suggests that both of these organisations budgeted to make repayments on borrowings incurred for the Aviva Stadium based on Celtic Tiger economy expectations of what revenues could be raised.

I suspect the IRFU has a much better chance of making its revenue projections because its traditional fan base tends to be wealthier and because it has a greater number of guaranteed attractive games (assuming the team continues to be very competitive). John Delaney of the FAI may not like me saying this — he believes the FAI is the victim of unremitting and wrong negativity when it comes to discussion of its finances — but it seems their pricing is a high-risk strategy based on some desperation.

The Last Word with Matt Cooper is broadcast on 100-102 Today FM, Monday to Friday, 4.30pm to 7pm.

This appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, August 20, 2010