I would like to share time with Deputies Seamus Healy, Mick Wallace and Maureen O'Sullivan.
Education Funding: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members]
The following motion was moved by Deputy Charlie McConalogue on Tuesday, 13 November 2012:
That Dáil Éireann:
agrees that:
- the new Student Universal Support Ireland central online system for processing student grants is failing abysmally to meet what is required for over 65,000 applications and this is causing undue hardship for third level students awaiting payments; and
- sufficient extra staffing should be supplied immediately to correct this ongoing problem so that student grants can be issued by Christmas;
recognises that third-level students are facing year-on-year increases in their registration fees which are unfair and unjust in light of a promised reduction in these fees; and calls on the Government to:
- refrain from further cuts to the education budget and increases in third level registration fees;
- ensure that all children who require special needs assistants are provided with them;
- reinstate the career guidance teacher provision; and
- preserve funding to Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools programme schools.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:
"notes that:
— the annual cost of attending college increased by over 950% during Fianna Fáil’s time in office, from €190 in 1996-97 to €2,000 in 2011-12, effectively bringing to an end the era of free third level education in Ireland;
— sixty-six bodies around the country were previously tasked with the awarding of student grants – a system which involved significant duplication of functions and under which students in many parts of the country faced very significant delays in receiving student grants; and
— arising from its disastrous economic mismanagement of the public finances, the previous Government oversaw cuts to the staffing of primary schools, the dismantling of schemes to support those from Traveller backgrounds, reductions to the additional teaching posts for children who require support to learn English and the introduction of a cap on the number of special needs assistants, SNAs, who could be employed in schools;
further notes that:
— the Government continues to exempt more than 40% of students from any requirement to pay the student contribution, as well as providing tens of thousands of students with maintenance grants to assist with the costs of third level education; and
— the Government has protected the overall number of SNAs and resource teachers in schools, is rolling out high-speed broadband to every post-primary school in Ireland and has created programmes such as Springboard and the Labour Market Education and Training Fund that will provide more quality education places for those who are looking for work or seeking to upskill;
recognises that:
— there have been some delays with the awarding of grants by the newly established Student Universal Support Ireland, SUSI, service;
— the City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee has arranged for the employment of additional staff by SUSI to bring such delays to an end and to ensure that all successful applicants receive grant payments by the end of December 2012;
— the Higher Education Authority, at the request of the Minister for Education and Skills, has written to all third level institutions asking them to avoid taking any action targeted at students who are awaiting the processing of student grant applications; and
— the establishment of SUSI in place of 66 separate grant awarding bodies will, in time, ensure that students continue to receive payments directly to their bank accounts and that student grants are administered in the most efficient way possible; and welcomes the significant reform agenda which has been undertaken by the Minister, including a new national literacy and numeracy strategy, the establishment of the Forum on Patronage and Pluralism in the Primary Sector, the overhaul of the existing junior cycle, a new examination of the points system and transitions between second and third levels, the announcement of a five year building programme, the reform of the VEC sector and the creation of a new national further education and training agency and the creation of a new landscape document for the higher education sector."
- (Minister for Education and Skills)
Is that agreed? Agreed.
The medical cards fiasco earlier in the year should have served as an advance warning with regard to the operation of SUSI. Many of us linked the two of them together at the time. The reality is that we are poor at putting good institutional architecture together when we need to reform things. The main reason is that a raft of reforms tends to be needed as a consequence of the continual postponing of reform. The reality is that the administration of a grant scheme is always most difficult in the first year of a degree course. In my experience, it is quite easy once it has been done in the first year. The odd case might differ in the years after that. This has been an annual problem, mainly because the administration of a large volume of grants has to be shoehorned into a short period of time each year. I suggest we could do things better, perhaps by organising the system over a much longer period of time so grants could be cleared from January onwards.
I am particularly worried about the effect of these difficulties on certain students. One often encounters cases of students who start a certain degree course only to discover that they would prefer to change to a course that is very different from the course they are doing. If such a student changes his or her degree course early enough in first year, he or she will not be penalised for the change. In the current circumstances, however, some students are likely to drop out at a sufficiently late stage to be counted as having studied for a full year. The difficulty for such students is that they will be required to pay the full-year fee the following year, which might put it beyond their ability to do a degree in future. We do not even know what changes in this regard might be in store in next month's budget. We need to give serious consideration to how such people might be assisted.
I would like to call for a proper debriefing on what went wrong in this instance. That will help us to learn from the mistakes that have been made in this case, as well as in the case of the medical cards fiasco, when we are centralising other systems in the future. Those of us who are in opposition usually have to spend weeks highlighting these issues before they are acknowledged by the Government. I do not want to have to do that with another fiasco of this nature. We need to learn from what has happened on this occasion.
Last night, we heard the Minister apologise to the country for this "fiasco", as Deputy Murphy has called it. I wonder why he cannot accept that the centralisation of services of this nature is simply wrong and that the Government made a mistake when it centralised this service. This service should be provided locally so applicants can interact with those providing the service. The key problem in the case of SUSI is that there is no way for candidates and their parents to interact with the service itself. When one contacts SUSI, one cannot get past the receptionist to speak to someone else. This service should be provided at local county council or VEC offices, where applicants can speak to those providing the service. Unfortunately, this Government, like its predecessor, has bought into a culture and an ethos which believes that centralisation is the best thing to do and big is always best. Big is not always best, however. It is certainly not best in the case of services of this nature. It is the wrong option. We should revert to the provision of these services at local level, even if it costs a little more.
One of the arguments for this system was that it would cost €5 million less than the old system. That was when it was not intended to provide the resources required, but now additional staff have to be brought on board to provide the service. I remind the House that we are talking about first-year applicants only. Students in the second, third and subsequent years of their courses are still being looked after at local level. This is a service that should be provided locally. Students who have called to my constituency office have told me they are no longer in a position to use IT services and cannot be registered permanently. I know of older students on back to education schemes who have been told by their local social welfare offices that their payments will be cut off if they do not register permanently. It is time to acknowledge that these services should be provided and properly resourced at local level.
I agree with Deputy Healy that this effort to achieve further centralisation has proved to be a step too far. This new organisation does not have the experience to deal with these challenges and, clearly, is not able to cope with 66,000 applications, at least for now. I am not saying this is the fault of the staff in question, as it is clear that the Government should have put a bit more thought into the matter. I am sure every other Deputy in the House has, like me, been contacted by plenty of people who are worried sick about their kids who are caught in a predicament while they wait for answers and for funds to enable them to stay in college.
The father of a second-year psychiatric nursing student in Waterford Institute of Technology contacted me because he is worried that it looks like his son will have to pack in the course. When I examined the history of his application, I found the timescale involved a bit boggling. He applied for his SUSI grant in June 2012. He got acknowledgment of the receipt of the application five or six weeks later. There was no word after that until 10 October last, when SUSI contacted him to look for his results for first year and his acceptance letter for second year. He sent that information back two days later. Almost four weeks passed before he got acknowledgment of the receipt of those details on 8 November last.
It is clear that there is a massive problem in this regard. The Government should give serious consideration to the possibility of engaging local authority staff throughout the country, who have the expertise and experience to deal with these issues, to help SUSI to deal with the backlog. In the meantime, it must be possible to arrange some sort of short-term emergency funding to keep these kids in college. It is an absolute disaster for them. One has to pay for good service, like everything else in life, and if one does not, one will suffer the consequences.
Tá cúpla rud le rá agam ar an ábhar seo. Having worked as a guidance counsellor and as a teacher, I have experience of the previous system, which involved a multiplicity of agencies. I have to say the local authority in my case - Dublin City Council - was very helpful. No student ever came back to me in September or October to say his or her grant had not gone through. When we try to introduce reform, there is always a danger that we will throw out what is good and positive as well as what is not needed. I think that is what has happened here. I appreciate that people in the education sector had called for the establishment of a centralised system. I think too much was taken on initially. The whole-country aspect of it has proved to be a disaster. A regional approach might have been much better.
Some of my friends who are guidance counsellors have told me that when this system started in May, they knew it was going to be a disaster. The promotional CD that was sent to them at that stage was very complicated. Their attempts to contact SUSI proved fruitless. Representatives of SUSI also declined an invitation to attend a guidance counsellors' exhibition, where there could have been more engagement on this matter. While I accept that extra staff are needed, they should have been deployed before now to avert this crisis rather than being brought in to deal with it at this stage. I know how difficult it is to get forms back from students, but I suggest that the inordinate number of students who were unable to send back these forms is indicative of something wrong with the system. It is too complex.
I would like to make a brief point on special needs assistants, who help with classroom mechanics and ensure students with special needs do not pose a danger to themselves or others due to their physical or psychological conditions. I think the system needs to be examined because I think many special needs assistants can do more. This form of assistance needs to be considered in conjunction with the whole area of learning support and learning resources.
The third aspect of the original motion relates to third level fees. One of the reasons for the introduction of the current system was that the Government of the time wanted to increase the third-level participation rate of lower socioeconomic groups. The system has to be examined because that did not happen. The registration fee is now being increased by stealth. I do not think that should be on the cards. A lack of money should not preclude anybody from going to third level education.
Those are the three aspects I wanted to raise.
I wish to share time with Deputies Paul J. Connaughton, Brendan Ryan, Ann Phelan and other Deputies.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am glad to contribute to this motion and I welcome the fact Fianna Fáil and Deputy McConalogue have brought it forward. I want to focus in particular on the SUSI online system for grant applications. I raised this matter as a Topical Issue three weeks ago when I saw the problems emerging and when Members began to be contacted. As I said at that stage, while the leaving certificate means June is a huge month for students, August and September are even more traumatic in many ways because students must first get their results, then get their offer of college places, then go to the various towns and cities to their third level institutions to look for accommodation and then make their grant applications and wait for the results. In other words, they have a lot to be doing besides having to cope with trying to find lost documents and the kind of thing that has happened. In the middle of all of this, they are trying to check on the progress of their applications and are left hanging on telephones without getting replies and so on.
In the short term, the first point is to recognise there are major difficulties with the roll-out of the system. To be fair, the Minister and SUSI acknowledged that a number of weeks ago and in particular at the meeting of the Oireachtas committee yesterday.
With regard to the suggestion that the system has totally failed at this stage, the solution is to address the problems, and they have been addressed, although I agree with Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan's point that perhaps this has been reactive rather than proactive. At the same time, I remember sitting on the education committee during the term of the last Government and appealing to Ministers to get grants out at the end of March, and some students had in fact finished their summer exams by the time they received them. We must not forget the old system did not work that well either. In the short term, the solution is to put in the staff and to get this sorted. As I said, both the Minister and SUSI have acknowledged there is a problem, that mistakes have been made and that new targets need to be set. For example, there is a target that new decisions will be made on 5,000 applications in the coming days and that, by the end of December, all students who are successful will have their grants. That is the only thing within the control of SUSI and the Minister at this stage. If it is achieved, well and good, even if it is reactive.
The SUSI representatives told us yesterday about improving communications with students, including texting them and contacting them with regard to documentation that has been sought, but it is unacceptable that documentation for student appeals was lost. When I made an inquiry about a particular student who had made an appeal, there was no record of the appeal and it had to be sent in again.
I welcome the agreement of SUSI to take on board a suggestion I made in the House three weeks ago with regard to a tracking system similar to a passport application whereby, when a student makes an application, instead of hanging on a telephone or waiting for an e-mail reply, the student will be able to use a tracking system to see how the application is progressing. The student should also be able to see the position with regard to the getting direct information from the CAO, the Department of Social Protection and Revenue, and the data protection position in that regard.
What is vital is that all of the issues that have arisen this year should not happen again next year. I also welcome the fact the Minister has requested third level institutions not to disadvantage or discriminate against students as regards libraries, the sitting of exams and the like.
With regard to the overall education situation, it is a very difficult time but we must remember many good things have been happening in education this year, including the new junior certificate and the anti-bullying code that will be announced before the end of the year. While it is a challenging time, the Minister has got to grips with many of the issues that landed on his desk.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the motion. The introduction of any new centralised system will always have teething problems but special care must be taken when these problems can result in huge difficulties for students, many of whom are living away from home for the first time. I am heartened to learn that a tracking mechanism is to be introduced for student grants as I believe the total lack of clarity in regard to the student grant application system was causing huge frustration for students and their parents in recent weeks.
I have heard of many students considering dropping out of college because their parents simply cannot afford to sustain them through this torturous process, with no information as to when they could reasonably expect to have a decision. In fact, many parents have told me of their frustration at the fact that when older children were starting college, they could at least go to a local office and speak to someone face to face about the documentation required or get answers as to when they could reasonably expect to have an answer on when the documentation would be reviewed.
The centralised approach sought to create a more streamlined system but failed to provide for the human element of this thorny issue, or failed to take into account the very real worries of parents wondering what would happen in the event of their grant application being turned down after a number of months' rent had been paid. The State's resources are being squeezed on every side and, in common with any household across the country, we have to spend within our means. However, we should also consider the high cost in terms of economic, social and emotional costs when a student drops out of college because they are no longer able to finance their studies and remain unsure as to whether or not they will receive the grant.
In recent weeks, I have met with representatives of students unions, with students and with many parents who were worried by the uncertainty of the situation in regard to their sons' and daughters' grants. In particular, I have met with many parents who found they were spending large sums of money telephoning the student support line, money which was badly needed to support their sons and daughters in college. The tracking system will allow people to see where they are in the queue and, while delays will always be difficult, at least people will have a better idea of when they can reasonably expect to hear back in regard to the matter.
With just 3,000 grants awarded out of over 65,000, over 60,000 students are caught up in the current impasse. I know more staff have been drafted into the centralised system in recent days and that is beginning bear fruit as, anecdotally, a number of students have received notice that their application has now reached the final stage of processing. While there are problems with the system now in place in the City of Dublin VEC, it is worth remembering that, under the previous system, many students did not receive their grants until well into the new year, while the current system aims to have all grants administered by the end of this year.
I also believe that there are many lessons to be learned from the centralisation of the student grant system. First, in cases where people's very livelihood depends on getting the grant, greater care must be taken in the planning process for the introduction of a new system. For example, if the SUSI system was first introduced in Leinster for 2012 to allow the system to be tested, while counties outside Leinster continued with the status quo, it would have shown up a number of inadequacies. Then, in 2013, Munster could have been added to the centralised system, with Connacht and Ulster following the year after. Such a phased introduction of a centralised system would have greatly facilitated the changeover and would have greatly reduced the number of parents and students affected by a difficult transition process. I believe it is a lesson that can be learned from this process.
Of course, another facet to this is the whole issue of centralisation of services. A number of centralisation processes introduced in recent years have seen the national process centralised to a location in Dublin. This flies in the face of our spatial strategy and we should be seeking to take the pressure off Dublin by locating more centralised processing services in regions outside the capital city, encouraging a greater balance in terms of population and enhancing the opportunity for young people from the western fringes of the country to work within commuting distance of their own homes.
The operation of the SUSI grant system, even with the additional staff that have now been provided, must continue to be monitored to ensure parents and students are getting a service that meets their needs and one that is fair and balanced. I know the Minister has recognised the difficulties being encountered in the SUSI system and has brought increased resources to the system, as well as greater clarity. However, for most families, the only test of the success or otherwise of such a grant application scheme is how soon eligible students can receive the money necessary to ensure they can continue with their studies.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion. It is always good to have an opportunity to comment on yet another road sign on Fianna Fáil's road back to outright populism. There is no doubt that the creation of SUSI has caused undue hardship for students. There was a lack of sufficient planning and apportioning of adequate human resources to cope with the volume of applications.
That is plain for all to see. The Minister has acknowledged the problems that have been created and has expressed his regret. He is acting to rectify the problem. Extra staff have been hired and targets have been set in order to process all successful applications by December. I am confident that the Minister, Deputy Quinn, grasps the gravity of the problem and is putting in place measures to fix it.
The introduction of a single awarding body for third level grants to replace 66 awarding bodies was never going to be easy. That said, there should have been better preparation and planning on behalf of City of Dublin VEC to ensure that it was capable of delivering the service for which it had pitched. I raised the point directly with representatives of SUSI and City of Dublin VEC at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection yesterday afternoon. I am confident the problem will be fixed and that SUSI will be in a much stronger position and will have learned from the current crisis.
The previous system was not fit for purpose. All of us in this House have represented people who were let down by late and inefficient processing. We now have a single grant-awarding body. SUSI has got off to a shaky start, but once these problems are ironed out we will be in a much stronger position in future years. I question Fianna Fáil's audacity in tabling a motion calling on the Government to refrain from implementing further cuts to the education budget and further increases in third level registration fees when its members are intimately aware of the scale of the economic crisis they created for this country. It is an astounding example of opportunism, but people will see through it. People will know it is opportunism when Fianna Fáil, the party that brought down the economy, calls for no further increases in third level registration fees. This is despite the fact that Fianna Fáil itself increased the annual cost of attending college from €190 in 1997 to €2,000 in 2011. People will know it is opportunism when Fianna Fáil, the party that suppressed 500 language support posts and removed 47 rural co-ordinator teaching posts in rural DEIS schools, calls for no more cuts in the education sector. People will know it is opportunism when Fianna Fáil, the party that signed this country up to a four-year agreement to get our finances in order, call for a halt to any further cuts or tax increases in any particular sector. The tragic reality of our situation is that cuts now need to be made and taxes need to be increased to restore our economic sovereignty. It is left to the Government to make cuts and to introduce taxes in a manner that minimises the pain as much as possible. The motion placed before us this evening does nothing to help this country tackle its economic difficulties; it provides no credible solutions and no credible alternatives. As a party, Fianna Fáil made a commitment to provide credible and constructive opposition, but I see none of that reflected in the motion.
As we face into one of the toughest budgets in the history of the State, with inevitable further cuts in the education budget, we must look at areas in which changes can and should be made. One such area that demands attention is bankers' pay and pensions. The news last weekend that a new executive began work in the IBRC this week on a salary of €500,000 was like a dagger to the morale of the ordinary Irish citizen. With salaries and pensions for executives still at exorbitant levels, the public are quite rightly seething with anger. Action must be taken in this regard in the forthcoming budget. We must take action, whether through a surcharge or a super-levy on the incomes of senior bankers and others who have retired on massive pensions. The people of this country will not stand for further cuts in education and other front-line services unless we are seen to tackle those issues and deliver a fair budget. The Labour Party is committed to doing that. The Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, is working hard to craft a fair budget for education but, unfortunately, he is distracted from that work by having to deal with the populist opportunism contained in this Fianna Fáil motion.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this serious issue. If it were not so serious I would say Fianna Fáil was trying to have a laugh with its Private Members' motion. It is interesting to note that since Fianna Fáil has moved to the opposite side of the House it seems to have the answers to everything. What a pity it did not have the answers when it was sitting on the Government side of the House.
SUSI was introduced to replace the previous system under which 66 bodies around the country used to process grant applications for third level students. In making this step forward, the Minister, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, sought expressions of interest from all of the previous grant awarding bodies to formulate the best way forward. The merging of 66 bodies into one is no easy task and each new configuration requires time to settle and also time to evaluate.
Delays have been experienced in the awarding of grants. The Minister has accepted that to be the case and in a brave manner has accepted full responsibility for it. He has stated that the SUSI system has not worked as well as he had hoped, but that is not to say it is not working at all. Delays in students issuing grants are not a new phenomenon. Under the previous system governed by Fianna Fáil the situation was no better, and was often worse, given that students did not receive confirmation of their grant status until well into the new year. I have personal experience of that. The academic year starts in September to October. Perhaps insufficient staff were initially appointed or trained from the outset but all of the subsequent requests relating to staffing and other resource issues submitted to the Department of Education and Skills by SUSI have been granted to the extent that SUSI is now staffed to the level it has requested.
We must look to the future. The Minister has sought to provide confirmation to more than 30,000 students between now and Christmas that they will receive the grants to which they are entitled. We must ensure that every student who is entitled to a grant and who has made a correct application will receive a payment before the end of the year. Other speakers referred to the welcome tracking system. However, the appeals process requires some work. Appeals systems are in place for many schemes, including the medical card scheme. One issue that adds to the difficulty of processing applications is the submission of incorrect information. I do not say that is the cause of the delays but it can and does cause problems, as anyone who has tried to navigate the medical card system has found.
Perhaps an interactive telephone helpline could be introduced to smooth the path of applicants. The Minister has led the way in introducing a system that will flourish in the future. All new systems have teething problems, but the option of speaking to a person should be considered. I appeal to universities to take a pragmatic approach to those students who have not received their grants and to stop putting undue pressure on them.
Three Deputies remain to speak. I ask them to take approximately three minutes each.
No one can deny that SUSI has not performed as well as had been hoped. However, recognition must be given to the Minister in acknowledging the problem and apologising for it. It is to his credit that he has never shied away from admitting when something was wrong in his Department and he has always moved immediately to correct any mistake that has arisen. I have every confidence that SUSI will perform better next year with the benefit of having learned from this year's mistakes.
Once again, Fianna Fáil is seeking to make political hay out of the Government's attempt to deal with a mess created by it. SUSI is a move in the right direction with respect to streamlining the grant system. Delays were experienced in the previous system administered by VECs and county councils. As locally elected representatives, we are aware of significant problems in all political spectrums. The Donegal Democrat carried a report on 28 December 2009 complaining of such delays, with students still waiting for their first maintenance grants to arrive in December. The article quoted a local councillor as saying at the time that "the situation must be addressed to ease [the students'] difficulties" and that " the [then Fianna Fáil] government’s delay in confirming this year’s allocations put county council’s and VECs under 'severe pressure' to process grant applications quickly." The then councillor said it was unacceptable that some of the applications were still outstanding and would not be paid until after Christmas. That councillor's name was Charlie McConalogue, now Deputy McConalogue, a person for whom I have the height of respect in regard to the intention of this motion.
Did you say that, Charlie?
I have always been consistent. I never stood for it.
Order, please.
I move beyond the issue of SUSI to address a concern recently raised by student representatives at GUH, UCHG and GMIT regarding the student assistant fund. This is co-funded by Government and our European partners and acts as a lifeline for students who are most at risk of dropping out. I appeal to the Minister of State to do everything possible within the discretion of a very challenging budget to ensure we maintain welfare services across student unions and student support systems for those students who find themselves in a distressed situation. Between increased demand and recused funding, the payment from this fund has fallen. I take UCD for an example. The average payment there in 2007-08 was €750 but last year this had fallen to €400. Many of my constituents report many difficulties. This is a very small amount of money relative to the scale of our budget and I ask the Minister of State to keep that in mind when he speaks to the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, in order to ensure that we maintain levels of welfare support for students at third level.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Private Members' motion. Today, approximately 500 students marched from Eyre Square in Galway to my office but unfortunately, because they had picked a sitting day, I was unable to meet them. However, I had met them at a public meeting the previous Thursday, with my Galway colleague, Deputy Keaveney, where we discussed the issues facing the student population. Nobody in this House denies there are acute pressures on students in the form of rent and other bills, as there are pressures on families struggling under the current economic crisis and recession. The student protest was welcome because students need to be politically active and to engage in the political process. As a student I did the same thing so I encourage them to continue protesting, something I view as positive.
The ideal situation would be that which pertained just before I went to college, when there were no fees and a grant system. That system was slowly eroded over the years. Even in my time in university, from 2000 to 2005, the fees increased dramatically, doubling every year during my undergraduate years. This Government came into office at a time when pressures on public finances were enormous. Promises were made and commitments given in the course of the campaign which the Minister has acknowledged he regrets making. Knowing the man, I believe he made these promises in good faith, believing he could implement them. However, when he looked at his budget after coming into office and the decisions he had to make, he had to pick priorities. There were the issues of SNAs and resource teachers and primary school class sizes which are all very sensitive. Sometimes one must commend a person who breaks a promise to protect something larger, over a person who keeps a promise at a cost to even more vulnerable groups of people. That is not easy to explain to people. However, a right decision is a right decision and over time people will see that it was done for the betterment of society as a whole.
The student movement is a very important one. It should broaden its campaigning agenda, however, because the issues facing students nowadays are not only the costs of third level education but solidarity with their peers who are not in third level courses. There are issues of youth unemployment, emigration and the need for a new deal for young people. If it does not address such issues, the student movement is being neither fair nor true to its own origins and to the greater struggles for which it campaigned in the past.
In my view, the Minister is doing his best amid undoubted challenges. I commend the student movement for the role it has taken in this issue and for its advocacy on behalf of its constituent group. I ask students for a broader debate and to engage in the greater discussions and the greater crisis in which this country is involved. I certainly wish them well, and wish all students well in their third level education.
I was not fortunate enough to go to university but I realise the importance of doing so and the critical difference third level education makes to the economic and social future of our country. It is a driver of social mobility.
Each year we are educating more children with less money. I have enormous respect for the thousands of teachers, lecturers and assistants who work to educate our children. Parents throughout the country are dedicated to providing a better life for children. Most hope for this and work hard to ensure their children will have a better life than they had. It is up to this Government to work with them towards securing their children's future by fixing the budgetary mess that was left behind for us. We recognise there are problems with SUSI. Last night the Minister apologised and I welcome the manner in which he spoke. He recognised the difficulties in getting it to work. Having worked with the City of Dublin VEC for many years, I know Jacinta Stewart and her staff will move heaven and earth to fix these problems and provide students with their grants. If there is anything I can do I will assist them. There were similar issues around the centralisation process for medical cards. The system adapted and changed and the problems were fixed. I hope and believe this is the last time we will see these problems with SUSI.
This country is in the grip of a very great economic crisis. This year we are borrowing almost €14 billion more than we raised in taxes in order to maintain services. The Opposition fails to recognise the radical reforms that are taking place in education even given the need to reduce expenditure in the coming budget by at least €70 million. The Government is committed to maintaining the number of special needs assistants and is spending €1.3 billion per year on special needs education. There is a countrywide schools building programme that will ensure students of the future will have the classrooms they need. There is investment in local jobs and communities. When I was a councillor we used to look into fields where classrooms had been promised. Now, during the biggest economic recession, this Government is starting to provide the classrooms needed for the next generation. That is what planning means.
We are overhauling the junior certificate to make it fit for purpose for the 21st century, something that has been talked about for decades. We are rolling out high-speed broadband in schools throughout the country, connecting pupils to the world. The Minister, Deputy Quinn, is committed to improving literacy and numeracy skills, the building blocks of any education system. As an urban Deputy I have seen those factors ignored in many underprivileged areas. People did not have an opportunity to have a proper second level education, never mind getting inside the precious gates of universities, which I believe to be their right.
Deputy Nolan referred to the USI campaign. As a Deputy who has been targeted by it, I welcome the campaign. I hope it broadens out further so we can fight the battle for everybody to have access to education. I have spoken to many students who came to see me. The vast majority have spoken about a vision for education in the future. They have a broader vision that goes beyond the current problem, and I have come away wiser. However, I must tell them the truth. I tell them registration fees will increase by €250 each year until 2015, when they will reach €3,000. I tell them I will work to try to maintain that limit because there is a need for certainty. I tell them we are committed to ensuring that more than 40% of students will qualify for a maintenance grant and will not pay registration fees. I tell them our current budget deficit is 8.5% of GDP, which means that we are borrowing almost €14 million more than tax revenue in order to fund day-to-day expenditure. Every extra euro we borrow is money they and their children will have to pay in national debt. I tell them my priority is to ensure that the maximum amount of resources is targeted at primary and second level schools, which I have seen ignored for decades in my community. I have seen young children beginning their secondary education with no literacy skills. Too many students from disadvantaged backgrounds in my community fall behind in all the early stages and never have the opportunity to reach third level education. This is where I want to see the scarce resources targeted.
It is better to be honest and up-front about the difficult decisions we must take as a party in order to restore our country's fortune during a time of deep economic recession. Deputy McConalogue moved this motion in good faith. There are many good young Fianna Fáil Deputies with a clear vision for the future.
That must be you, Charlie.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately, I cannot really take Deputy Micheál Martin's comments on certain matters seriously, particularly as he was a member of the Cabinet which sold the country down the river. Those opposite should take a careful look at themselves. Deputy Micheál Martin has no credibility when it comes to issues of this nature.
Unfortunately, the Deputy's party cannot claim the moral high ground.
The next speaker is Deputy Michael P. Kitt who, I understand, is sharing time with Deputies Michael Moynihan, Seamus Kirk, Éamon Ó Cuív and John Browne. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the motion and commend Deputy Charlie McConalogue on tabling it. During my long years in politics, the payment of higher education grants has always given rise to many issues. The first relates to the fact that people are obliged to supply so much detailed information with their application forms. It is easier to deal with the applications process at local level than by means of a new centralised system. There are, however, ways to proceed, to which I will return.
The other issue which arises is that of duplication. There certainly was duplication under the old scheme. In Galway, for example, one could be obliged to deal with the county council and County Galway VEC. If applications went to the wrong body, delays would result. I accept that there was a need to rationalise the system. However, the Minister and his Department should have made better preparations for the change to a centralised unit. The Department had plenty of time to make such preparations. Like previous speakers, I wish to offer the example of the changes made to the system for the allocation of medical cards. In that instance, the relevant Department decided to introduce the scheme for those over 70 years of age before centralising the entire application system for medical cards. As a result, there was a phased introduction. The system to which I refer is not perfect, but I was glad to hear many colleagues - even those on the Government side - state there should also have been a phased introduction of the system for the awarding of student grants. Perhaps it should have been introduced in Dublin and the rest of Leinster before being rolled out to other parts of the country. The new system seems to have been introduced in a very confusing way.
When the centralised applications unit for medical cards was established, many smallholders in my county were of the view that they should continue to do what they did previously, namely, provide details of livestock and herd tests for their local welfare officers. However, this was not acceptable to the centralised applications unit. The same issue arises in respect of the detailed information which must be submitted to SUSI. We must ask whether it is possible to use new technology to transmit all the relevant information to a single unit. I hope this proves to be the case. I am concerned that when the new water services body and its centralised unit are established, similar problems will arise.
As previous speakers indicated, the position on adjacent and non-adjacent grants has given rise to confusion. In view of the number of applications returned to those who made them because they were incomplete, it will not be possible for the Government to honour its commitment that the processing of student grants will be completed by the end of the year. Students will be obliged to resubmit their applications and will have to wait until after Christmas and into the new year for their grants. I do not believe such students should be placed at a disadvantage in attending lectures and accessing library and other on-campus facilities.
Last Saturday's edition of the Irish Independent contained an article about students facing late fee penalties. I have heard no response to this claim from the Government. It is welcome, however, that the Higher Education Authority contacted universities and institutes of technology about this matter on students' behalf. Third level institutions should ensure student grant applications are dealt with and that individuals will continue to have access to student services until their grants are paid. The Minister thought that the new system would ensure students would receive information more quickly, but that has not proved to be the case.
Third level students are waiting for their grants. Huge numbers of applications are being classed as incomplete and students have been requested to provide further documentation. I saw a report on television last night in which a student indicated that he had applied for a higher education grant five months ago and that he had yet to receive a response. Students cannot wait any longer. If delays arose in issuing grants under the old system, students would still receive approval letters from their local authorities. As a result, they could register fully with the third level institutions they were attending. Let us consider coming up with a way to fund the third level sector without placing a burden on students. I understand third level fees are going to increase by €1,000 by 2015 and that a capital asset test will be introduced next year. That test will make it more difficult for farming families and the self-employed to qualify for student support. I am very much opposed to the increases to which I refer. I am concerned about the fact that SUSI does not have sufficient staff to allow it to deal with the applications submitted to it. Students will be obliged to drop out of college, which will be a disappointing development.
There are two issues on which I wish to make a brief comment. I would not like there to be further cutbacks in the part of the education budget relating to special needs assistants, SNAs. Children with autism and special educational needs require the services of their SNAs. Career guidance is an integral part of the school curriculum and the decision to remove the specific allocation for guidance counsellors from second level schools was heartless. This decision affected 1,000 guidance counsellors in 700 schools and impacted on the most vulnerable and disadvantaged students. I hope the Minister will reverse the decision to which I refer and reinstate the ex-quota allocation of guidance counsellors.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and thank my colleague, Deputy Charlie McConalogue, for tabling the motion to which it relates. When my party raised this serious issue which relates to what is happening within the grant awarding body, SUSI, on Thursday morning last, the Tánaiste dismissed our concerns. If they were honest, every Member of the House would state he or she has been inundated with queries from families clearly under the limit relating to grant aid in respect of the paperwork to be submitted to SUSI. The families to which I refer find the process completely frustrating. There is also another group of individuals who have not yet been contacted and consequently do not know where they stand.
A raft of issues arise in respect of this matter. I refer to student grants, access to third level education, encouraging individuals from different socioeconomic backgrounds to pursue higher education courses and ensuring people are able to obtain the grants for which they qualify in the shortest possible period. However, there is a particular issue to which I wish to refer and it relates to project maths. The Minister should learn from the disaster that was his introduction of project maths on a phased basis. Many of those from the education sector who have approached me about this matter have indicated that the main beneficiaries of the introduction of project maths were book publishers. It has taken years for the new syllabus to be fully introduced and students have been obliged to buy new books each year. These books are unsuitable to be passed down to siblings or sold second hand. Maths teachers throughout the country have shelves of books on the new project maths course. They have not been given adequate in-service training or sufficient information on project maths and were not consulted on its implementation.
Do people know that the teachers to whom I refer are unaware of the format that next year's leaving certificate maths paper will take? Do they know that the students who will sit the leaving certificate examination next June have not yet received sample copies of the examination paper from the State Examinations Commission? Even if that paper was issued today, it would be one month before the publishers interpreted it and produced sample examination booklets for students. Are the Minister and the Government aware of this problem? Teachers have not been provided with the sample paper, the format the examination will take or a breakdown of the marking scheme. Effectively, they are working in the dark and the Minister is concentrating his energies on dreaming up phased changes to the junior certificate programme. Again, these changes were launched without the major partners in education being consulted.
Are teachers not important enough to be consulted? Is their opinion and their contribution to such a change not necessary? It is very unfair to introduce such a large charge without consulting one of the most important partners in the education sector. Will the Minister immediately inform leaving certificate students as to the format and the marking scheme for next year's leaving certificate maths examination? We are facing into the third week in November. The students are studying for their important examination next June at the end of a two-year course but the Minister and the Department of Education and Skills have not given the format of the examination. It shows a lack of awareness on the part of the Government. The same lack of awareness was apparent last week with regard to the student grants issue and there is now a sudden realisation on its part. It is important that the mistakes made with regard to this process and the awarding of grants are not being made in other sectors of education. Grandiose notions must be changed to action. There must be fairness and proper procedures. At this late stage it should not be beyond the Minister to inform those preparing for the leaving certificate as to the format of the examination in June 2013.
I wish to add my voice to what has been said by the other speakers in this debate. Many students with applications for grants pending with the new body, SUSI, are experiencing serious difficulties. SUSI has taken over the processing of student grants from 66 different authorities.
When the new system was introduced the Minister said it would be quick and easy. It is clear it has turned out to be neither quick nor easy. Only 18,000 applications have been processed to date. This leaves in the region of 50,000 still awaiting processing.
We are all realistic enough to know that new public bodies will have teething problems, in particular, a move from administration by the local VEC structures to a more centralised system will result in problems. Hence the importance at the planning stage to have ensured there would be sufficient staff, indeed additional to sufficient staff, to deal with problem cases expeditiously and to avoid a backlog of applications.
Many students are at college today and they are unsure as to when the grant money will arrive. They or their parents have been forced to borrow in order to tide them over until they are given an indicative position on their grant application. The danger is that the whole educational process will be delayed. I refer in particular to the settling-in period which new students in third level colleges must undergo. It can become disconcerting and there is a danger that such students may drop out of their courses.
The Minister made very extravagant promises about the student grants scheme before the last election. These promises were far too extravagant for the circumstances of the time. I am sure he has had plenty of time to reflect on his promises. I do not know whether he regrets what happened at that time. Many students believed that their man was now in Marlborough House and that he would look after their interests. This has not transpired.
There are significant difficulties with the new system which require action now. Given the quite catastrophic position that obtains with the processing of applications, there must be a case to be made for the establishment on a transitional basis of an advisory office structure in each third level college around the country. Students encountering problems with compiling and providing the details required for a grant application could be helped in these offices by means of a face-to-face meeting from an official of the new agency. Students or their parents could discuss the application, identify any deficits in information and be given a reasonable timescale to provide the information. This transitional arrangement might be of assistance in overcoming the serious backlog. The hope that all applications will be processed and the system will be fully functioning by Christmas is unsatisfactory for students, for parents and for the system. We need emergency measures now.
Tá áthas orm deis a bheith agam labhairt ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo. Níl a fhios agam céard atá á dhéanamh ag comhghleacaithe an Aire Stáit sa Rialtas nach féidir leo córas riaracháin a rith. Tógann sé bliain ar an Aire Coimirce Sóisialaí, an Teachta Burton, carer's allowance a cheadú agus ní féidir leis an Aire Oideachais agus Scileanna, an Teachta Ruairí Quinn, córas a chur i bhfeidhm leis na deontais a cheadú le haghaidh mic léinn triú leibhéal.
Tá rud i mo chloigeann ag rá go bhfuil ceann de dhá rud i gceist, iomlán mí-éifeacht agus daoine i mbun chúraim riaracháin nach bhfuil in ann an jab a dhéanamh, nó b'fhéidir go bhfuil siad níos glice ná sin. B'fhéidir gurb é an rud atá i gceist acu ná an caiteachas a bhí le titim i mbliana a chur siar go dtí an chéad bhliain eile. Mar a deir siad i mBéarla, táthar ag ciceáil an canna síos an bóthar. Is ceann den dá rud sin atá i gceist, agus tá sé in am a rá linn cé acu - mí-ionracas nó mí-éifeacht. Is náire é seo do dhaoine a gcaithfidh fanacht ar a gcearta. Nuair a bhí na hAirí atá anois mar Airí sa bhFreasúra, b'iad ba thúisce a bhí ar a gcosa ar an taobh seo den Teach ag fiafraí cén fáth nach raibh rudaí níos fearr.
It seems that the Minister of State's Labour colleagues are either completely inefficient or perhaps they are very clever. It could be that with these manufactured delays in process is pushing the money down into next year in order to keep the budgets right. It takes a year to get a carer's allowance and people are stacked in a queue. The officials in the Department of Social Protection used to remind me that relatively speaking, very few people get supplementary welfare allowance while they are waiting in the queue. By pushing people into a long queue, the pay date is put off. It will inevitably catch up on the Government unless it keeps making the queue longer. However, this policy buys a bit of time. Either they are completely inefficient and are unable to run a Department or they might be a bit clever by trying to hide the fact that they do not have money. They may be trying to push the money onwards because the State works on a cash paid basis, not on an accrual basis. They are trying to keep the Estimates right for the troika and put the expenditure into the following year. One way or the other, it will catch up with them. The people waiting for the Labour Minister for Social Protection or for the Labour Minister for Education and Skills, those who badly need money and who need to know so they can tell the colleges that they are eligible for a grant and should not be charged a registration fee, need answers.
The situation with regard to SUSI is ludicrous. The amount of information sought for the most obvious of questions is ridiculous. I cite the case of a farmer with a seven hectare farm - a small Connemara farm. It was known from the beginning that SUSI would require farm accounts.
The individual had made a profit of €132. I accept the authorities must ensure one is not making a profit by writing off depreciation on tractors, for example, because this does not comprise an eligible expense. We sent the authorities a little profit and loss account that showed that the total income on the farm in question was €3,000, that the individuals concerned were in receipt of means-tested social welfare, and that all the expenses related to the purchase of materials such as fertiliser and fencing wire, which comprise the normal day-to-day purchases on a farm. Despite this, the authorities wrote back looking for a balance sheet. It was obvious that the farmer could not have been presenting depreciation as an expense in the accounts. The authorities wanted a profit and loss account for a second time and a lot of other information on the farm although it was clear that the farmer did not have any farm machinery and that the only asset was the land itself. This is mindless bureaucracy. The same applies in the case of medical cards. Mindless bureaucracy is totally ridiculous when the answers to the questions asked are obvious.
In fairness to the local authorities and VECs, when they were handling applications they did not ask for an additional heap of paper when the answer to a question was obvious. In most cases, they asked for information only when one rang them to ask why a grant was not sanctioned. What I have described is an utter administrative mess. It is vital that people have their grants sanctioned immediately and that the Minister scraps the absolutely ridiculous mechanism for doing the job. He should not be dealing with people who have not a clue about the realities of life and return to a system in which applications are processed near to applicants' locations. Thus, the staff would have some idea about the realities of people's lives.
The Government promised so much. Unless my more malign theory is correct, the Government is totally inefficient. The theory is that the Government is delaying everything on purpose so the balance at the end of the year will come right. The Minister needs to tell us what he will do next year to ensure grants are sanctioned quickly.
The Minister has many highfalutin ideas. One of the great ones was to stop the support for people proceeding to fourth level education. In a country in which we have said time and again that we need workers with the highest qualifications, the Minister has imposed an income limit of €27,000 in respect of fourth level education support. Thus, students whose parents earn gross salaries of €32,000 or €33,000 will receive no support in fourth level education. Many working families can no longer afford to give their children the opportunity to obtain masters degrees and doctorates, which are so important in the high-tech economy we are trying to build.
I do not have to stress what the Minister is doing for rural areas. He is closing the small schools which are getting fantastic results and in which 70% of children proceed to third level education. In addition to taking people's incomes, the Minister proposes to count the value of their assets when determining eligibility for the third level grant. Most people who inherit farms and small businesses never regard them as tradable assets. They regard the assets as assets to be held in trust for the next generation but it seems the Minister wants people to have to sell land to send their children to college.
If the Minister believes this measure will not affect considerable numbers of people in urban areas, he is incorrect. It will affect them because large numbers of people in urban areas own second properties whose values are lower than the mortgage values. If the Minister starts to assess asset values, he will find out that many working families will not be eligible for a third level grant.
The Minister signed a pledge to reverse the increase in the registration charge. He will not apologise even though it was he who was exaggerating, before the election, the scale of the challenges we face. On the other hand, he was promising what could not be delivered.
Is náireach an mhaise don Rialtas é. Tá sé in am ag an Rialtas a bhfuil ag dul do dhaoine óga na tíre, agus dá dtuismitheoirí, a íoc amach. Muna bhfuil siad in ann an córas riaracháin a stiúrú agus muna bhfuil na hAirí as Páirtí an Lucht Oibre in ann a gcuid Ranna Stáit a stiúrú agus córas éifeachtach riaracháin a chur ar bun iontu, tá sé in am acu éirí as na postanna sin agus ligean do dhaoine eile dul isteach, daoine as a bpáirtithe a bheadh in ann córas riaracháin a riarú.
I thank Deputy McConalogue for tabling this motion on SUSI and student grant delays. Earlier this year - in June I believe - the Minister announced with great fanfare that SUSI had gone live. He was pictured in every national newspaper and on television and he contended SUSI would solve all the problems arising from having 66 grant-awarding authorities. He stated their problems would be a thing of the past. If we are honest, we must accept that SUSI was never going to solve the problems given that there are only 65 staff in Dublin to deal with 66,000 applications. There was no way the 65 staff could deal with so many applications and award the grants without delay.
There are many staff with considerable experience in the local authorities and VECs that used to allocate grants. They dealt with grant applications for years and they should be seconded into the SUSI system within the next week to deal with the backlog. They sometimes wonder what their role is now that there is no grant system in their areas. Surely their vast experience should be drawn upon. I suggest the Minister of State and Minister consider using the staff to help out in what has become a farcical set of circumstances.
There is a very good article in today's Irish Independent written by John Logue, president of the Union of Students in Ireland. It is not a political article but one outlining the facts with regard to the difficulties faced by students in not getting their grant approvals. They find they are unable to avail of many of the facilities within the college because they do not have a letter of approval. In the past, when the VECs and councils dealt with this issue, they would get the letter of approval to the student and the student could go to the credit union or bank and use it to acquire finance, but as John Logue pointed out in his article, that cannot happen now because they are not getting the letters from SUSI.
The Minister made great play last night about the fact that he had contacted all of the universities to tell them they were not to kick out the students, so to speak, but to be lenient. However, when I spoke to some members of the management of colleges in Waterford and Carlow, they said they needed the money to survive. It is important that the grants be paid as quickly as possible.
The Minister said the SUSI system would be foolproof and would eliminate the issue of incomplete applications, but we are being told now that SUSI has a large number of incomplete applications. I have come across many cases in which students are being told by SUSI that despite the fact that it has evidence that their applications were received, the applications have been mislaid and they are being asked to reapply.
The Minister might indicate in his reply how the appeals system will work. A huge number of appeals have been submitted to the Department. They have been put to one side because SUSI is trying to deal with the current applications, and it appears the appeals will not be dealt with until way into the new year. That will cause great hardship for students and their families and, if we are to be honest, we know it will lead to a situation in which many students will drop out because they do not have the finances to remain in the absence of approval from SUSI.
The Minister should second the people in the VECs and local authorities who have experience in this area to SUSI. I am sure they would be only too glad to come to Dublin and help out for three or four weeks to deal with the backlog.
I thank all Deputies who contributed to the debate, which is focused for understandable reasons on the operation of the student grant system. It is important to reiterate that whatever delays have arisen, the decision to centralise the processing of student grants was and remains a solid decision. Maintaining a system of 66 separate grant-awarding bodies in the face of rising demand was not sustainable, and I am confident the creation of SUSI will serve us well in future years.
We have had many genuine and heartfelt contributions across the House on this issue over the past two evenings, including the contribution from Deputy McConalogue last night, but the contribution earlier by Deputy Ó Cuív, who is rapidly becoming the primary purveyor of conspiracy theories in this House, suggesting that somehow the Minister or SUSI has deliberately delayed payment of grants to students, is so deluded it does not bear any further comment.
I acknowledge the issues that have arisen in the past two evenings and I welcome the apology made by the Minister, Deputy Quinn, last night to students and their parents for the distress that has been caused. It was refreshing to hear a Minister speak honestly about his role and responsibilities. It was equally refreshing to hear a Minister not attempt to abdicate responsibility and lay the blame at the door of others, a practice that was all too common in past Administrations.
What about this Administration?
The Minister, Deputy Quinn, spoke again with the head of SUSI this morning and it remains the case that all staffing requests received from SUSI have already been granted. No new staffing request was received today. In total, there are now 96 staff working in SUSI and they are supported by 79 other staff working on document processing and queries from students. This is a combination of core and temporary staff who have been hired to help work through the delays that have arisen. SUSI is now staffed to the level requested. We expect it to get on with the job it has been asked to do and to ensure that all students receive their grants as soon as possible. It is now time for all those involved in SUSI to focus on delivery and to make sure that by Christmas the target of 33,000 grant applications has been met.
Will that be 33,000 paid?
Yes.
Last night the Minister, Deputy Quinn, said it would be 33,000 confirmed.
How many students did the Minister of State refer to?
There are 96 staff working in SUSI, and they are supported by 79 other staff working on document processing and queries in general from students.
(Interruptions).
While the debate on this motion has understandably focused on the issues that have arisen in regard to SUSI, there are a number of broader questions contained in the motion tabled by Fianna Fáil. In its short 18 months in existence the Government has already established a strong track record in education, from protecting SNA and resource teacher numbers to ensuring that more than 40% of students remain exempt from the student contribution and substantially increasing the number of training places available for the unemployed. Our priorities for protection in education have been made very clear-----
What about guidance counsellors?
-----but standing still is never enough, and we are committed to reforming and improving our education system. A new national literacy and numeracy strategy was launched in 2011 to raise educational standards in primary and second level schools, and €6 million is being spent on the roll-out of that strategy this year. The recommendations of the forum on patronage and pluralism in the primary sector are being implemented to bring about greater parental choice within our education system. The junior cycle is to be overhauled, with a new school-based approach to assessment starting for students entering post-primary education in 2014. A national anti-bullying forum was held for the first time in May, and an action plan on bullying will be published by the end of the year - coincidentally, this is a matter that was under discussion in the Seanad this evening.
We have also announced for the first time ever a transparent and honest five-year building programme for the school capital programme. We are reforming the VEC sector by creating 16 new education and training boards; that legislation is currently before the Dáil. I have been overseeing the creation of SOLAS, a new further education and training agency which will give this sector a clear direction and a new vision for the future. Early this year we announced a ground-breaking ICT action plan that will see the ICT sector and my Department working hand-in-glove to address skills gaps in this sector to ensure that Ireland remains at the forefront of the technology industry worldwide, and work is under way to re-examine the entire higher education landscape. In just 18 months, therefore, the Government, despite the serious economic challenges we are facing, has built a firm foundation for what I believe will be one of the most ambitious educational reform agendas undertaken by any Government.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil le mo chomhghleacaí, an Teachta McConalogue, as ucht na hoibre atá déanta aige. I thank Deputy Charlie McConalogue for bringing this motion to the House. I pay tribute also to Deputy Joanna Tuffy who, as Chairman of the Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection, ensured, along with Deputy McConalogue, that SUSI executives were brought to account yesterday afternoon.
I agree with the Minister of State that the apology from the Minister, Deputy Quinn, is welcome. However, the difficulty we have is that the Government amendment displays the same arrogance that blinded it to the problems of SUSI right up until yesterday when the SUSI representatives appeared at the committee and before Deputy McConalogue's motion came before the House. It must not be forgotten that last Thursday the Tánaiste sat where the Minister of State is sitting now and more or less said there was no problem, that it would be fine and that all the money would be paid out. The Government has now realised, after some sort of conversion over the weekend, the full extent of the problem.
The problem has not gone away despite the Minister's apology. The Minister of State has confirmed on the record of the Dáil that 33,000 people will receive their grants by the end of December. If he is not sure about that, I ask him to clarify it now. Unfortunately, there are 66,000 applications. What about the other 33,000 students who have to submit information? They are still in college and they want to know if they can return after the Christmas break. They will need library access, but we still do not know their position. If one is unlucky enough not to be on the pile that is dealt with before SUSI goes on its Christmas holidays, when will one's case be dealt with?
This is the problem with this issue and that is why Fianna Fáil will not go away on it. We will continue to ensure SUSI, Student Universal Support Ireland, and its Government parent are held to account for the lack of delivery in the system.
The Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, must ask why we are here again. At the same time as SUSI was being planned and the Minister, Deputy Quinn, was doing up his press statements, we were debating in this House the debacle of the centralisation of the medical card system. The same issues applied in that case such as not enough staff, too much information required, information being lost and not enough communication with stakeholders in the system. At the same time as these problems were apparent in the medical card system, the Department of Education and Skills was planning the roll-out of SUSI. Surely, someone in the Department must have thought the same could happen to SUSI. Did anyone in the Department get out of their glasshouse and think to talk to officials in the Department of Health? Surely the Minister of State, knowing from his constituency work dealing with medical card applications, must have thought about putting a similar problem happening with the SUSI roll-out on the table at a ministerial management meeting. Surely, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, who is a little bit more isolated from reality than those of us serving constituencies, would have thought the same. However, they did not think to put this question. It is not purely their fault. Those departmental officials hiding behind the Ministers and SUSI need to be held to account as well for once again rolling out and implementing a flawed system as a result of which citizens of this Republic are tonight suffering. Once again, the faceless officials who run Government get away with it while the politicians and the delivery agencies are hung out to dry. If the Government does anything at all, it can at least put a stop to that.
The Minister of State claimed SUSI has all the staff it needs. It cannot if there are still 33,000 applications for which we do not have a target deadline for their completion. If SUSI is telling the Minister of State it has all the staff it needs, then that assumes he is comfortable in accepting there will be further delays in the system and people will have to wait until February, March or April to get their grant. If only Labour Members bothered to come into the Chamber for a debate on education - I cannot blame them for not coming in because there is nowhere to hide their blushes - I could quote them section 6.3.1(i) of the Croke Park agreement which states “it will be necessary from time to time to increase staffing in certain designated priority areas in accordance with government policy”. It continues, “redeployment of staff/posts may be necessary for temporary or long-term needs on foot of changing business patterns or priorities or to respond to urgent work demands.” What is more urgent than giving assurance to 33,000 applicants that they have a future in third level education after Christmas? The Minister cannot seriously tell us SUSI and Abtran, the company which only came into the equation yesterday and the Minister never told us about, are happy with their staffing levels but they cannot give us a deadline for when the entire grant applications for first-year students will be paid.
The Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, accused Deputy Ó Cuív of conspiracy theories. Deputy Browne and I attended a meeting in Wexford last night where the theory that the Government is deliberately delaying the paying out of grants was floated by a retired senior civil servant. If the Minister is serious about disproving the conspiracy theory, he should put the staff in the agencies to deal with those stuck in the quagmire of the grants system. It is not fair on the staff in SUSI. They are trying their best to engage with people affected but there is not enough of them nor is sufficient backup being given to them.
The one good point these 66,000 applicants having going for them is that they are the last class to have had proper guidance provision in school. I noted when the Minister was stating all his accomplishments, he did not mention that one. He did, however, mention the work his Department is doing on bullying in schools. Great work and great talk. When one takes the guidance counsellor who will deal with bullying out of the schools, as will happen next year, then all it will be is talk. Future SUSI applicants will be at a disadvantage because they will not benefit from guidance on third level applications and careers thanks to the Minister of State, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, and their colleagues in Fine Gael and Labour. There is no sense in the Minister of State talking about combating bullying, building up technology skills and career progression when the guidance counsellor, the engine for seeing all of this through, has been removed from schools because of Government cuts. Will the Government please reflect on this when it is making its forthcoming budget choices? As the Minister of State with responsibility for skills, Deputy Cannon must be aware the most of what the lack of proper guidance in our schools will do to our skills base. We are already having difficulty matching up skills to industry requirements. The Minister of State cannot make it worse by cutting off guidance counsellors.
Earlier I listened to a normally sensible Labour Deputy - I do not know what got into him tonight - talking about Fianna Fáil using this debate as its revision to populism. All I can see is the Minister, Deputy Quinn, climbing a ladder outside Trinity College Dublin with his little biro to put his name under a Union of Students in Ireland, USI, pledge not to reintroduce fees. This was the man who put himself forward as the economic guru of Labour, who understood the nation’s problems and would be a potential Minister for Finance after the last election. He understood the gravity of the challenge Fianna Fáil faced but he put his name to a pledge and told the USI he would be with them in their corner. He was no sooner in the door in the Department than he wished he had an eraser to rub his name off that pledge. That is the difficulty even with his apology last night. It is welcome. However, if one is to put a bet on a horse called Ruairí Quinn, one does not look at his track record if one wants to win.
The Minister of State must solve this issue. He cannot leave this Chamber tonight in the comfort of abandoning 33,000 student applicants. If he is serious, he will solve it. He must give us a deadline on when this backlog will be cleared for which we can hold SUSI and the Government to account.
I thank all Members who spoke on this motion and for the support of Deputy O’Brien’s party and the Independents. I must also acknowledge the efforts of Deputy O’Brien and the chairman of the education committee, Deputy Tuffy, for bringing SUSI before the committee to get to the bottom of this matter. This is what the Minister, Deputy Quinn, and his political team and Ministers of State should have been doing a long time ago. I commend those student unions working with the many students in distress as a result of this crisis created by the Government’s inaction and inattention. Many of them have been in contact with me and other Deputies seeking a resolution to this problem. I welcome many of them to the Visitors Gallery tonight. I also commend my colleagues in Ógra Fianna Fáil on bringing this matter to my attention.
I welcome the humble approach taken by the Minister, Deputy Quinn, in the Chamber last night when he apologised for the financial distress many students find themselves in as a result of these delays in processing their grants. I also welcome him taking responsibility for this issue.
Unfortunately, that has been the case on too many occasions in the past and it is the case again with this Government. We saw an example of it last week involving the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, with regard to the children's referendum whereby there was a refusal to take political responsibility. Nothing drives the public as mad as people not taking responsibility for things they should be doing. It was only right for the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, to have taken responsibility for this issue and for the crisis that has been created. It was created due to his inaction and his refusal to get involved or take control. He should have done so weeks ago before this became the crisis it is now whereby only 3,000 students of the 66,000 who have applied are in receipt of their grant.
Yesterday on "Morning Ireland" the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, commented that he was not entirely sure why there was a backlog. That was yesterday morning. Last night in the Dáil after he made his apology to me he stated: "I will be having a conversation with SUSI and, on foot of this Legislature stating publicly and democratically that we have a problem, I will ask officials whether they need additional resources." Last night the Minister, Deputy Quinn, said that because the Dáil told him there was a problem he would talk to Student Universal Support Ireland. However, had he listened to students and other Deputies he would have started discussions with SUSI weeks ago. Deputy O'Mahony, who contributed to the debate earlier, raised the matter as a topical issue three weeks ago. I raised it as a topical issue along with Deputy Nolan as well. Had the Minister been listening rather than hiding from his responsibility to monitor what was going on we would not have found ourselves in the quandary we are in today, nor would the many students throughout the country who are struggling to continue to keep themselves in college as we come up to Christmas. I put it to the Minister that he should have intervened before now. He replied across the floor of the Dáil that, "There was no reason for me to intervene". That was his response. He then went on to tell the House that he expected 33,000 students to have their grants confirmed before Christmas. He used the word "confirmed". I asked him whether he could guarantee that. His response in the Dáil last night was, "I would love to say that I am satisfied but I cannot do so because I do not know".
It is only right that he apologised for the debacle up to this point. Unfortunately, taking responsibility is not simply about been man enough to take responsibility or the blame for where we are. It is also about taking responsibility for sorting out the problem. It was obvious from the Minister's contribution last night that he has not yet taken responsibility. It is obvious from the response of the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, that this is still the case. The Minister of State has made a fresh commitment that 33,000 will be paid as opposed to the Minister's commitment last night that 33,000 would be confirmed. It is obvious that the Government has not yet taken control of this problem. As a result, no one can assure the students here tonight and throughout Ireland that they will get their grant before Christmas. It is clear from this debacle that many will be waiting to be paid their grant until well after Christmas.
The Minister should take responsibility to deliver a solution rather than simply take the responsibility of the blame. The Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, along with the Minister, Deputy Quinn, and the other Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Sherlock, make up the team in the Department. They should sit down with SUSI and work out what is required to ensure that the students who depend on the assistance of the State to stay in college get it quickly and before Christmas.
The way the Government has gone about this will ensure the crisis will continue. It is simply not good enough. I hope the Minister of State will take away the message given tonight by all Deputies in the House and by many in the Gallery that this must be resolved. The Minister of State should take that message and find a solution such that the students of Ireland are paid their grants and can stay in college. They should be relieved of the financial desperation that many are experiencing as a result of the ineptitude of the Government up to now.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 78; Níl, 45.
Tá
- Bannon, James.
- Barry, Tom.
- Breen, Pat.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Collins, Áine.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Conlan, Seán.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Coveney, Simon.
- Creed, Michael.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Deering, Pat.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Doyle, Andrew.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Brian.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Keaveney, Colm.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- Lyons, John.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McFadden, Nicky.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- McNamara, Michael.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- Mathews, Peter.
- Mitchell O'Connor, Mary.
- Mulherin, Michelle.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Murphy, Eoghan.
- Nash, Gerald.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Donovan, Patrick.
- O'Mahony, John.
- O'Reilly, Joe.
- O'Sullivan, Jan.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Phelan, John Paul.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Spring, Arthur.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Twomey, Liam.
- Wall, Jack.
- Walsh, Brian.
- White, Alex.
Níl
- Adams, Gerry.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Browne, John.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Cowen, Barry.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Daly, Clare.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Flanagan, Luke 'Ming'.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Halligan, John.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Lowry, Michael.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O'Brien, Jonathan.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Sullivan, Maureen.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wallace, Mick.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies John Lyons and Paul Kehoe; Níl, Deputies Michael Moynihan and Seán Ó Fearghaíl.
Amendment declared carried.
Amendment No. 1 not moved.
Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 77; Níl, 45.
Tá
- Bannon, James.
- Barry, Tom.
- Breen, Pat.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Collins, Áine.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Conlan, Seán.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Coveney, Simon.
- Creed, Michael.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Deering, Pat.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Doyle, Andrew.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Brian.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Keaveney, Colm.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- Lyons, John.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- Mathews, Peter.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McFadden, Nicky.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- McNamara, Michael.
- Mitchell O'Connor, Mary.
- Mulherin, Michelle.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Murphy, Eoghan.
- Nash, Gerald.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Donovan, Patrick.
- O'Mahony, John.
- O'Reilly, Joe.
- O'Sullivan, Jan.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Phelan, John Paul.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Spring, Arthur.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Wall, Jack.
- Walsh, Brian.
- White, Alex.
Níl
- Adams, Gerry.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Browne, John.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Cowen, Barry.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Daly, Clare.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Flanagan, Luke 'Ming'.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Halligan, John.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Healy-Rae, Michael.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O'Brien, Jonathan.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Sullivan, Maureen.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wallace, Mick.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies John Lyons and Paul Kehoe; Níl, Deputies Michael Moynihan and Seán Ó Fearghaíl.
Question declared carried.