Paul Murphy confronts Department over Carlow College closure

Thanks a lot. Thanks for coming before us. I want to focus in on what's happening in terms of Carlow College, which I presume you're aware of. There's a letter in the Irish Times today which is quite impactful by someone who, in his own words, is leaving, so it didn't go the way he had hoped. He says, what struck me most about Carlow College was how personal it was. Students were not simply numbers on a register. Lecturers knew us, challenged us, and took a genuine interest in how we were getting on. It was only later, when I moved on to postgraduate study elsewhere, that I realised how rare that experience had become. Carlow College, I think, was first opened in the late 18th century, one of the oldest educational institutions in Ireland, and now it is effectively closing down. 87 staff members are facing redundancy. There won't be any new students in Carlow College, as I understand it. Some existing students will be affected because they expected to do four-year degrees, come out with Level A qualifications, are now being told to come out with Level 7 and do one year less because, effectively, the wind-down of Carlow College and then the assets, as I understand it, are going to be transferred to the South East Technological University. From what I can tell, effectively, what has happened here is that there was a process towards a merger between Carlow College and South East Technological University, and that isn't going ahead for some reason, and instead, Carlow College is being wind down with the impacts on staff, students, local community and so on. So the first question is, well, is there anything that I have wrong there in terms of assessment of what we've got? Yeah, maybe we start there. So first thing to say is, so Carlow College is a private college, it's not part of the state system, but there are students in there who are funded under the free fee scheme, and I think just starting where you started, Deputy, our first concern has to be around students who are undertaking courses that they're looked after, and they're allowed to finish their studies and so on, and obviously there's a staff cohort, and it's also a building which is quite significant in the town of Carlow in terms of the way that that town operates, and for that building to be, for example, left empty would be a concern. So the concern has been to find a solution for Carlow, but it's a private entity, okay, the one thing I would say is I don't think we were ever clear, we were looking for a solution, I don't think that solution was going to be necessarily a merger, and particularly because this was an entity which was experiencing significant financial difficulties. So we have to try to protect the students, we have to try and, you know, we would be concerned around the staff, and we have to protect the taxpayer as well. So a solution has been found which is being described as the teach out solution, which is so that those who are currently in Carlow, the students can continue their courses, and there will be a transfer of the property and assets into SETU, and then there will be a process around trying to work through how many of the staff can be transferred into SETU. So the aim here is to try to as far as possible protect the learners, and see what can be done as far as possible for the staff. I don't think the word merger is one that was necessarily you know the only way, there's a number of different ways this can be characterised, but that's the aim. Was it accurate at one stage? You're saying it's not accurate that there was a merger ever really on the table here? I wouldn't say that, I think there were a number of options being looked at, and it has been looked at for a very consistent period of time. When did the department become aware that a merger wasn't going to happen? I'd like Keith to go through the detail there. So Deputy, as far back as 2022, the department advised Carlow College, which is a private church-run entity, that its continuing deficit position would make it very challenging for an integration into SETU to take place. And we advised them that if that's what their preferred option was, then steps should be taken to address that situation. A lot of engagement over the period. The most recent set of intensive engagement, we were advised that by Carlow College that they didn't have the money to operate as a going concern, and so the department sought to engage all stakeholders to broker a solution that protected students, that did the best deal possible for staff in the circumstances, and that had Carlow College, the buildings, as an enduring asset to be used for Carlow. So it was a very challenging position, but we were very clear all along that the state couldn't nationalise the deficits of a private entity. In the current, in the planned process of the winding down of Carlow College, there is extra public money going to go into that, isn't there? So there is an asset, which is the buildings, that has a valuation attached to it. The state is essentially acquiring that asset, and that, on the basis that those funds can be used to, in particular, look after the staff in terms of redundancy. So the state is taking, or has taken an active interest in this, as I think it should, but in that case, why has the state and the department accepted a situation where 87 workers are going to be made redundant, as opposed to seeing them integrated or given the choice of being integrated into C2? Yeah, so I mean, it's not necessarily the case that 87 are going to be made redundant, Deputy, there will be a process of, so there's potential for some of those staff to move into C2, depending on, but I keep talking to that. Yeah, I think, you know, there will be, you know, by virtue of growth in C2, there will be opportunities for open competitions. I think we were challenged, Deputy, in terms of managing public finances, that there was an asset that had a value attached to it, and going beyond that in just, you know, especially in a situation where we advised that private entity that it was operating unsustainably, and that if it didn't bring its operations into a sustainable basis, then it would be very challenging to operate any sort of merger. I think we would be in this committee, on the contrary, asking why do we spend more than the valuation of the asset. I mean, tell me, have you done an assessment of the relative cost of closure, funding of redundancies, versus a 2P transfer over into C2 of the workers? So my understanding is that CETU did do that, and it would have, you know, understandably resulted in enduring current costs, which are not in scope of our department. We don't have the budget for the enduring costs of taking on staff from the private sector, putting them on the state's books. And so, you know, the minister and the department were both exercised to ensure that student staff and the building were looked after. I mean, if there was another solution, Deputy, that could have had those staff transferred, then that would have been a preferred option. In other circumstances, so in other times and places where there have been transfers, St Angeles, up in Sligo, the financial operating position of the private entity was a much stronger proposition, and so it was able to effectively wash its face. In this, the Carlow College has been operating in a deficit position for a very substantial period of time, and we did not see a basis for us to take on, essentially to nationalise the deficit and to take on those staff. And there's a memorandum of understanding between SETU, Carlow College, does it involve the department? So it doesn't, we're not a party to the department, but obviously we're, you know, funding the purchase, which underpins the memorandum. Can that memorandum be provided to the committee? I don't know, I'll check. You have it, the department has it. We have it, and sorry, I would not have a problem sharing it, Deputy, I just, but as, since we're not a party to it, I will check, and I can't see why it couldn't be shared, but I will check, and certainly there might be a timing issue in the sharing, but I think in principle, I don't see a reason why it couldn't be shared. Okay, great, if that could be done, that would be great. Finally, just in terms of the department's assessment of this and the kind of relationship between Carlow College and SETU, was there any point in which you thought that this would be a 2P type transfer over of workers with existing rights and so on? We certainly would have contemplated that, so it's certainly, we weren't taking a principled position against this, but in any circumstances like that, we have to be mindful of the public finances and exchange resources, so if there was a scenario where that could have been done, and the staff, you know, that they weren't in a deficit position, they were, if they were in a surplus position, and there was assurance that could have been continued going on, then we would not have had an objection to a 2P type scenario. When did you decide that that isn't what's happening here? When it became clear that notwithstanding that the department had on a very significant number of occasions advised Carlow College that if it didn't get its finances in order, it became gradually more obvious that this was, but we were still, you know, we were still open to looking at all options, so it's really only in the past number of months where it became very evident that the finances were such, and that it was an option that we engaged in, you know, in a process to secure the best possible deal. I mean, and in fairness to Carlow College, and in fairness to SATU, the interests of those workers were very much at the fore, and that's, you know, that's why the state is sort of underpinning this with a property purchase that would allow more favourable conditions. The alternative to the intervention between the MOU and the purchase of the site would be a disorderly wind-down, now with staff losing their jobs, probably this week. Thanks a lot.