asked the Minister for Education if, in view of the increased cost of travel and subsistence, he will increase the maintenance grant for students for the academic years beginning October, 1976; and if he will raise the income limits for parents whose children apply for such grants.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Student Maintenance Grants.
3.
I take it that the question refers to higher education grants. In this connection, it is not proposed in present circumstances to make any change in relation to the value of the maintenance element of higher education grants or in regard to the income limits applicable under the scheme.
Arising out of the Parliamentary Secretary's reply, which is a very disappointing one, would he not agree that there is justification for increasing grants, having regard to the cost of living, of digs, of travel and all those elements which apply to education?
I have no doubt that there are problems being faced by some people in this area, but the Government have to consider the situation in the light of available financial resources.
Is it not true that where there are large families parents who are drawing unemployment allowance at present can be disqualified, on the income limit, from their children enjoying third level education?
I have no evidence on that specific point. If the Deputy wishes to get such information I suggest that he puts down a separate question.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that if we are reaching that stage it is time that the income limit for parents was raised?
If that transpires to be the case I have no doubt the matter will be covered.
When was the income limit last raised to take account of inflation?
The present income tables were introduced in the academic year 1972-73.
Could I ask the Parliamentary Secretary then in view of that and in view of the fact that when this scheme was first introduced by Fianna Fáil, having regard to the income limits then set, it catered for approximately 75 to 80 per cent of the parents of the country; and does he not now accept that the purpose and concept of the scheme, in view of the Government's failure to raise the income limit to take account of inflation, is being undermined to the extent that at the moment, to give one example——
A question, Deputy.
I want to quote an example. A factory worker who has two children who is earning £2,200 per annum is precluded from getting any grant whatsoever for either of those children. Does the Parliamentary Secretary think that such a person should be excluded from the benefit of a scheme which is intended obviously to apply to all the children of the nation equally?
I am aware, as I am sure the Deputy is quite well aware, that there are severe financial constraints on the Department in relation to their expenditure on all forms of educational schemes, and the Department must set their priorities quite clearly in relation to the areas of various schemes. If extra money is to be provided in the area of higher education, for instance, this means that less money must be provided in other areas of education. It is a matter for political judgment as to which is the more important.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary accept that the scheme was introduced and accepted by the public as being a scheme of almost universal application and does he now accept that, far from being universal it applies to approximately only a quarter of the children, and does he accept that that is the Government's policy on education?
I am not aware that it was accepted to be of almost universal application.
Question No. 4.
(Interruptions.)
Order.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that there has been almost 100 per cent increase due to inflation since then and that, irrespective of priorities, he must consider raising the income limit for parents?
It is not 100 per cent.
It is damn near it.
A final supplementary.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that, in view of the fact that there will be limited earnings for students during the summer in view of the economic situation, apart altogether from inflation, there is a case here for increasing this grant, because in the past students could seek work in the summer to supplement their income and cannot do so now because work is not available?
I am sure the Deputy is aware that there is a good case for increasing almost every grant administered by the Department of Education. It is quite simply a matter of setting priorities. It is for the Minister to decide whether or not a higher education grant should be made or whether other areas of education require priority.
The scheme might as well be abolished.
Is it the Deputy's policy to abolish the scheme?
(Interruptions.)
Order.