Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Mar 1995

Vol. 450 No. 4

Written Answers. - Student Support.

Michael McDowell

Question:

51 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Minister for Education the conclusions, if any, which have been arrived at on the recommendations of the advisory committee on third level student support; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [5112/95]

Helen Keogh

Question:

58 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Education the conclusions, if any, which have been arrived at on the recommendations of the advisory committee on third level student support; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [5113/95]

Minister for Education (Ms Bhreathnach)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 51 and 58 together.

The following improvements in the administration of the student support system were announced and implemented in 1994; the requirement of separate academic attainments for the award of a third-level grant was abolished; applicants who have secured a place on an approved third-level course are now deemed to have automatically satisfied the academic requirements; new rules for second chance cases; for the first time students who dropped out of college can qualify for a grant to study at the same level as they studied previously after an interval of five years; the provision of a special budget to assist students at college who are encountering financial hardship; and the simplification and earlier issue of the student support schemes at the end of April 1994 which was several months earlier than the date they were issued in the previous years.

As well as the above I also propose to implement the following recommendations: — the processing of grant applications and payment by the Central Applications Office; transfer of the means test to the Revenue Commissioners and transfer of the appeals function from the Minister for Education to the Appeal Commissioners under tax law. I have already announced that I will not be proceeding with the above administrative changes in the 1995-1996 academic year because of the complexity and detailed planning work associated with such changes.

I have now also published the report of the advisory committee. I am anxious to take careful note of the debate which the publication of the report has generated before reaching conclusions on remaining recommendations of the Advisory Committee.

The perceived inequities and anomalies in the third-level student support means-testing arrangements have led to considerable debate in recent times. I will be taking particular account of the public reaction to the proposed changes in the means-testing arrangements as recommended in the report of the advisory Committee.