Irish Examiner view: We cannot take our universities for granted
University College Cork is one of many third-level institutions which does not know what funding will be available from year to year. Picture: Larry Cummins
We have, perhaps foolishly, always thought of our third-level education system as one which could be taken for granted. That is a luxury we can no longer afford to delude ourselves about. As the sector which has contributed so much to Ireland’s development as a nation, but also to our economic wellbeing, the university system has been a critical component and one which we cannot afford to see diminished.
In this newspaper yesterday, Sean O’Driscoll, the head of the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) painted a grim picture of a core funding crisis in the sector.
Mr O’Driscoll, a former businessman and Government adviser, maintains that by sticking to an unsustainable business model for our universities, the Government is taking a dangerous strategic risk which could undermine the whole system of third level education here.
As the chairman of the UCC governing authority, Mr O’Driscoll says he has been shocked and astounded by the short-term nature and inadequate funding available to Irish universities. That it is not an affordability issue, but a simple funding one, he maintains, means it is easily put right.
At issue is that universities do not know from year to year what funding they will have available, and this stymies planning and the execution of proper spending estimates. The three-year funding period he has proposed seems a sensible and easily implemented idea.
As a former minister for further and higher education, Taoiseach Simon Harris must know that these core funding issues need to be addressed, much as he must know that in his assumed role as a pioneering and progressive leader, failure to do so may have drastic consequences.
As the plane carrying exiled Venezuelan politician Edmundo Gonzáles touched down at the Torrejon de Ardos military base outside Madrid on Sunday, it seemed the likelihood of the restoration of democratic norms in the country were fast diminishing.
In hiding since the election on July 28, Mr Gonzáles was forced to leave the country because his life was in danger from what US secretary of state Anthony Blinken described as “the anti-democratic measures [president] Nicolás Maduro has unleashed on the Venezuelan people”.
The 75-year-old retired diplomat went underground in the days after the election which, according to detailed polling data published by the opposition, he won. Mr Maduro, however, claimed victory, and earlier this month his administration issued charges against Mr Gonzáles which would have seen him jailed for the rest of his life had he been convicted.
Working straight from the authoritarian playbook, Mr Maduro reckoned that exile for Mr Gonzáles was a better option than having him create a stink throughout his native country from within a jail cell, with government officials saying that granting him safe passage to Spain would “contribute to political peace”.
With numerous international governments having declared Mr Gonzáles the legitimate victor in the election, international support for Mr Maduro has all but vanished and his claim to have won has been widely rubbished.
Having refused to publish voting data which confirm his claimed 52% victory, the political crisis — which has engulfed the country since polling day — has not diminished and Mr Maduro’s grip on power has tightened thanks to his control of the army and the courts.
While countries such as the US offered carrots to Mr Maduro to hold a free and fair election — and, most importantly, respect the result — Venezuela now faces further crippling sanctions on its already debilitated state-run oil industry.
Last week, America seized a luxury jet used by Mr Maduro and has threatened further actions against him and his associates. The trouble is that the authoritarian socialist has an even firmer grip on power now more than ever.
Over 2,000 people — mainly peaceful protestors and political opponents — have been jailed since the election. Trying to incentivise Mr Maduro to relinquish power has become extremely difficult, and the Biden regime is increasingly wary of stirring up foment in Venezuela for fear of exacerbating the immigration debate domestically before the US election.
As it stands, Mr Maduro still appears to hold the whip hand.
The dark arts of the lobbying sector might remain a mystery to anyone outside Government, but a new regime regulating their activities may finally throw considerably more light on their work.
The announcement from Leinster House that 62 public bodies have been added to the lobbying register means that anyone who lobbies any of the organisations named in the new statutory instrument will have to officially declare their intentions as they have to do if they were lobbying local or central Government bodies.
In our already over-complicated and over-indemnified world, one in which overt surveillance has become a norm, it might seem churlish to ask for even further information from people seemingly intent merely on exerting influence or colouring viewpoints. But it is not.
The intention of the legislation signed into law last week by Public Expenditure Minister Paschal Donohoe, and which comes into effect on January 1 next, is to effectively create more public trust in the workings of Government and its agencies.
While the Regulation of Lobbying Act of 2015 introduced transparency to the process of lobbying Government departments, it did not embrace the need to include many other public bodies.
However now, those trying to lobby bodies such as the HSE, or the Central Bank of Ireland, or Tusla, will be open to public scrutiny, which allows citizens to monitor the potential influence that interest groups and representative bodies might bring to bear on any number of issues.
This is another area where light will be shone on once dark corners, and that, in itself, is a victory for democracy.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
