JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Thursday, 2 Nov 2006

Union of Students in Ireland: Presentation.

Chairman

Our next discussion is with the Union of Students in Ireland on Funding Fairness. On behalf of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science I welcome Mr. Colm Hamrogue, president of the USI and Ms Kelly Mackey, welfare officer of the USI.

I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I ask Mr. Hamrogue to make his presentation on behalf of USI.

Mr. Colm Hamrogue

I thank the committee for inviting us to make a presentation. This document was drawn up last year by the Union of Students in Ireland to lobby the Oireachtas. It puts forward seven steps to funding fairness for higher and further education. Those steps include the following: rationalising the student support maze; making financial support equitable; introducing baseline funding for under-represented groups; making grants adequate and the system efficient; abolishing fees for part-time education; implementing the McIver report on further education; and enacting graduate equality for Seanad elections.

According to the Higher Education Authority, almost 100% of children from higher professional backgrounds attend university compared with only 20% of children from unskilled or semi-skilled backgrounds. The Rowntree Foundation conducted research in this area and found that young people from disadvantaged or low-skilled backgrounds are more likely to drop out of an academic course due to financial problems or a fear of getting into bad debt.

Ms Mackey will now deal in greater detail with the rationalisation of the student support maze.

Ms Kelly Mackey

Currently there are approximately 163 authorities administering financial support to students. The maze-like structure of student financial supports must be rationalised. Existing application processes must be streamlined and replaced by a standardised, single application and assessment procedure. We recommend that a study be undertaken on how to rationalise the various financial supports in order to identify and eradicate duplication of procedure. We further recommend that information on financial supports is made widely available nationally, in a range of accessible formats, such as booklets, websites, help lines and so forth. These resources should be advertised regularly. I am happy to report that since the publication of the Funding Fairness document in April, the national access office has begun to investigate delivering an awareness-raising campaign or initiative on student financial supports.

The second step in the Funding Fairness document proposes that financial supports are made fair and equitable. The welcome introduction of the student assistance fund and millennium partnership fund in 2000-2001 saw much-needed supplemental financial support granted to students. However, with the introduction of the top-up grant in 2001, a total of 14,000 recipients saw no decrease in the need for the student assistance fund and millennium partnership fund. With regard to the former fund, there is widespread inconsistency in its administration at present. While the autonomous distribution process in colleges is to be welcomed on many levels, there is an urgent need to introduce overarching guidelines in terms of closing dates, means tests and so forth. At present, students in the higher education sector can apply to the student assistance fund but further education students are excluded. Furthermore, students attending smaller higher education institutions such as All Hallows College in Dublin, St Patrick's College in Thurles and St. Patrick's College in Carlow, cannot apply for support from the student assistance fund. This is despite the fact that the aforementioned colleges offer courses that are maintenance-grant approved.

There is also widespread disparity in the administration of the millennium partnership fund. Some local partnerships distribute funds uniformly to successful applicants, regardless of need, while others grant amounts based solely on need. We recommend that overarching guidelines are drafted, agreed and introduced as soon as possible to avoid further disadvantage experienced by some students in comparison to others. We also recommend that the funds are used to support students in the higher and further education sectors.

Mr. Hamrogue

I will now deal with the issue of baseline funding for under-represented groups. The student assistance fund, the millennium partnership fund and the fund for students with disabilities are not entitlement based. Since 2004, the student assistance fund has dropped from €8.15 million to €5.6 million. The maintenance grant is heavily underfunded now. The Higher Education Authority Euro Student Survey estimates the cost of living for a student is approximately €7,500 per annum but the standard maintenance grant is only €3,110. The student assistance fund is designed for sudden or unexpected financial hardship and the millennium partnership fund is designed for people from disadvantaged backgrounds but the maintenance grant is so low that these funds are now being redirected. The Union of Students in Ireland is recommending that such baseline funds be guaranteed and that the grant be increased.

We must see more collaboration between educational institutions and the community-based organisations that deal with this issue to ensure that the proper channels of communication are being used and proper implementation procedures are being followed. In that way, we will be able to ensure the students are receiving their fair share of moneys available.

The Funding Fairness document recommends that the grant system be made adequate and effective. I attended a conference last week at which a speaker who had dealt with student problems in the 1960s gave a presentation. The first point in that presentation related to the grant system. In that context, the fact that the grant system is a problem will not be news to anyone here. This year grant payments were dreadfully late. While traditionally some local authorities are notoriously slow to issue grant payments, this year the problem emanated from the Departments of Finance and Education and Science not signing off on the threshold income limits. Application closing dates are also a problem. They are set at 31 August and forms must be signed off by then. There is an enormous deficiency in the information provided to students who are filing grant applications. The form, which is more than 12 pages in length, is a maze. Delays can arise due to the bureaucratic nature of the grant system. USI recommends that one agency be appointed to deal with the grants authorities.

The problems which have ensued from the decision to calculate SSIAs as part of the threshold income limits will have to be addressed. There is no reason that the Department of Education and Science cannot issue threshold income limits earlier or announce the dates on time in order to lessen the strain on students. The first few months in college are the most pressurised time for students, as well as their most financially challenging period. For example, they have to pay course fees, put down deposits on new accommodation and purchase course materials.

Consideration should also be given to the cost for students of essential equipment and child care. In 2002 and 2003, some 20% of the student assistance fund in the institutes of technology was spent on child care. That money comes from the national office for equity of access to higher education in the HEA. As part of the student support Bill, which is currently on the Government's legislative programme, grant supports for students are being expanded to include child care but we are asking for child care to be factored into the Bill, rather than taken from the student support fund. This brings me back to the issue of underfunding of under-represented groups. So many areas are underfunded that the few financial support systems which exist are not being used for their original purposes.

If students fail a year, they can find they are refused funding to repeat the year under the grants system. The loss of funds in those instances puts students under enormous financial pressures and forces some to drop out of college.

Ms Mackey

With regard to the abolition of part-time fees, approximately one in five students in college are enrolled on a part-time basis. According to the 2004 Eurostudent survey, part-time students have more than double the monthly expenditure of their full-time counterparts. The national access office has cited the lack of financial support for part-time students as being an issue in need of immediate redress. A student's part-time status not only prohibits him or her from maintenance grant support but also from child care subsidies, hardship funds and the student assistance fund. We recognise that many students in part-time higher education are sponsored by their employers, so we are not calling for the abolition of fees for such sponsorship.

However, we also recognise that part-time education provides a means of upskilling and training for adult learners who cannot enter full-time higher education due to family commitments or personal circumstances. We believe that part-time student fees are counter productive to the national objective of improving access to third level education for underrepresented groups. We recommend that fees for part-time students be abolished and that financial supports, such as maintenance grants, be awarded to part-time students in need of financial assistance.

Mr. Hamrogue

I will address the implementation of the McIver report on further education. Those who are familiar with this report will agree that the level of investment in further education is appalling. In 1989, approximately 12,000 students were pursuing further education. According to the Government's White Paper on education, that figure had increased to more than 30,000 by 2004. Basic needs, such as canteen facilities, are not being met, staffing levels are insufficient and even if classrooms were doubled in size, they would barely accommodate current student numbers.

Higher education offers people the opportunity to improve their skills by going to college for the first time. However, the further education sector has not been as high on the agendas of successive Governments as higher education. The view is that somehow it is not as good as higher education, as our report shows. We are calling for the immediate implementation of the McIver report and for the €48 million agreed between the Department and the TUI to be provided on a full basis. Implementation has been incredibly slow thus far, with potentially damaging consequences for the education sector.

Ms Mackey

The final issue we wish to raise concerns graduate equality in Seanad elections. As members will probably be aware, there is a widespread public perception that the university panel is undemocratic and academically elitist, and has the effect of devaluing degrees from the newer universities and institutes of technology. We favour third level representation in the Seanad but believe the constituency of graduates needs to be extended to include graduates of all higher education institutions. We also believe that the inclusion of all higher education institutions will increase vocational diversity because the majority of courses offered in newer universities and institutes of technology are oriented towards professional vocations in science, engineering and information technology.

The seventh amendment to the Constitution, which was approved in 1979, made provision for graduates of higher education institutes other than NUI and Trinity College, Dublin, to vote in Seanad elections, but legislation has not yet been introduced in that regard. We recommend, therefore, that the proposed Seanad reforms should take place as soon as possible and that they should rectify the current democratic deficit in the election of the third level panel.

Mr. Hamrogue

We would like the committee to give its consideration to the issues we have raised. Our report is backed up by research which comprehensively identified the problems in higher education. A great number of reports have already been made on higher and further education and the Union of Students in Ireland is calling for their implementation. Ireland is now a world player, yet our spending on education is below the OECD average. Reference is constantly being made to a knowledge-based economy but, if politicians and the Department of Education and Science want that to become a reality, they will have to invest in higher education. Saying that we have done better than last year is not good enough.

The grant problem, for example, has been in existence since 1960. If we want a knowledge-based economy, our higher education system will have to be able to compete with European and other international systems. For the sake of higher and further education in Ireland, I urge that the recommendations of the various reports on the sector are implemented.

Deputy Enright

I met yesterday with USI representatives, so I do not have many more questions to put to them. I accept the importance of further education but I would like to learn more about the child care facilities which are currently available to students. I understand from the presentation that proper facilities are not available on every college campus. That is hard to believe. It is a basic need that must be addressed. Could the witnesses expand on that issue?

On the student assistance fund and the new Bill, which we expect to come before us by the end of this year, is the USI happy with how responsibility has been transferred to the VECs? It seems the witnesses are saying the bigger issue is getting approval from the Department to go to the councils and VECs rather than any difficulties there. When I make grant queries to colleges and councils on individual grant cases they usually tell me to contact the student bodies in the individual colleges. What funding is there for that emergency fund? It seems to be a catch-all that is used to deal with every problem. This is unsatisfactory but seems to be the only mechanism in place.

This year I met a student who dropped out of his college course after three weeks because it did not suit and notified the college immediately. The college had already received its 50% from the Department. The student is caught next year and will have to pay 50% of the fees. This seems to be a quick, black-and-white way of calculating it. The advice I got from the college was that he should still apply to the local authority for the grant, which I think is wrong. He is not going to college and should not receive the grant. However, if he did so the college could refund him some of the registration fee. Is there a figure for the numbers who drop out that early on? There needs to be a mechanism for dealing with this. While I accept that the State cannot pay for two first years for one person, it is a harsh way of evaluating somebody who has been there such a short time.

Chairman

We will ask all the members of the committee to ask questions and make comments and then ask the witnesses to respond.

Deputy O’Sullivan

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. We have seen this document and the witnesses have discussed it with us previously. It is comprehensive and my questions will be short. This morning I asked the Tánaiste, who was taking the Order of Business, when the Bill would be published. The Minister for Education and Science had said she hoped to have it enacted by the end of the year so that its provisions will be implemented by the start of the 2007 academic year. My original understanding was that the intention was that a Department, possibly the Department of Social and Family Affairs, would assess people for grants centrally. However it has been decided that the VECs around the country will do so. Have the witnesses discussed the content of the legislation with the Department or the Minister? As the Bill has not been published yet, we do not know what is in it, however the indications are that it will be simple and will transfer responsibility for deciding on grants to the VECs. It needs to do much more than that on the issues the witnesses raised about inequalities around the country. It is frustrating for students that they hand in everything they think they are supposed to only to receive a letter two weeks later asking for further documentation, an ESB bill for example. I am sure the witnesses come across this every day of the week. As public representatives we do. How much information do the witnesses have on what will be in the Bill?

I agree with the witnesses on abolishing fees for part-time education. My colleague Senator Tuffy, who is unable to be here today, also has strong views on that. Do the witnesses see it happening on a gradual basis? How do they see it being implemented? I understand it was recently discussed with the social partners in the partnership agreement.

On the assistance fund, I understand the USI suggests there should be separate headings or funding allocated for issues such as child care. Do the witnesses still see that there should be an increase in the student assistance fund and that it should continue to be flexible but that it needs to be bigger because such a variety of issues have to be addressed under it? Do they envisage a separate funding for child care?

Deputy Andrews

I welcome the witnesses. I agree with them on the Seanad elections, although the current and previous representatives of the universities in the Seanad are able and excellent contributors to the Oireachtas. It strikes me that the NUI and Trinity College, Dublin, are like the rotten boroughs of old and are in need of reform. It is anachronistic that they have representation in the Oireachtas to the exclusion of the other universities, some of which have achieved much.

We have discussed fees for part-time education a few times and one of the proposals was to give tax credits that people could use in the lifelong learning context. If people chose to study later in life on a part-time basis their choice could be used to calculate their taxes. Naturally only taxpayers would benefit from such a proposal. Another proposal is the lifelong learning accounts being proposed in the UK. What is the USI's view on that?

I agree with the USI that a single grant agency must be established. That is a core issue. As the witnesses pointed out so well, the system is fractured and different people apply different policies creating confusion not just for the USI and the students, but for everybody who tries to make sense of the area.

The witnesses expressed some frustration at the constant harping about fourth-level education and the knowledge economy and how it is changing the way universities are run from teaching to being more research and development focused. In the old days some research and development was done in the background but teaching was the main function of any university staff member. It seems we are going in the other direction so that staff members are more focused on research and development in order to attract funding, while teaching takes a back seat. That is the impression I have and I would like to hear the witnesses' views on that.

Deputy English

Most of my questions have been covered and I agree with most of the witnesses' comments. Although I have not read the document in full, the fact that one has to be over 23 years to be assessed independently of one's parents does not seem to feature prominently in it. That is a major issue that I often deal with. It is ludicrous. I have dealt with a mother of two children who was aged under 23 years and who therefore had to be assessed on her parents' income. This issue is not being pushed enough by the USI and I would like to hear comments on that.

A single system to streamline grant application must be established. Hopping from Billy to Jack between councils and VECs with nobody taking accountability is crazy. I agree that the thresholds should be published early in the year. People should know where they fit in by June or July and should be able to make their applications. The first few weeks or two months of a student's first year is the most difficult time and he or she could wait until Christmas to get the grant. Students are told they must have their applications in by August or September and the deadline moves continually. There is no set deadline, until a student is told he or she is too late. This needs to be streamlined too.

The issue of fees for part-time education must be addressed. Tax credits or other initiatives might be the way forward. Many people want to retrain but cannot because the cost is too high. It is ridiculous. While we talk about education for life, we do not encourage it by helping people.

To what level does the USI think we should raise the grant? We are told about the maximum earnings one can have but is the union familiar with the minimum earnings one must have? I have dealt with two cases recently in which the students were told they did not earn enough. There is also a question mark over what they were earning in the previous years for grant purposes. Has the union come across that problem?

It may have been mentioned, but I did not see a reference to the fact that people taking a year out, for example, to travel, are caught out when they come back because they do not have bills, etc, from a previous residence. Those students are assessed on their parents' income, which seems unfair.

We are told the Bill will be brought forward before Christmas and I hope that is the case. It will give us the chance to discuss all these issues. The Bill will not address all the issues we need to discuss but it will at least give us the chance to debate them. Can the union comment on its dealings with people on the subject of the Bill and the support Bill? What changes does it want?

Career guidance is not mentioned but affects the overall funding of colleges. There seem to be many drop-outs on certain courses, which is the result of bad career guidance at secondary school. People take up places at college and, after six months or a year, do something else. What comments does the union have on that aspect? Do students receive the career guidance they need to choose the right course in the first place?

Deputy Gogarty

I thank the representatives of the USI for attending today. I will start with a contentious issue relating to Seanad reform. Without being facetious, what does Seanad reform have to do with Funding Fairness? Is it not elitist for the union to ask for the franchise to be extended to all students, given that the unemployed have no say in the Upper House? Would it not be better to reform the Seanad properly and allow full franchise whereby the whole populace will have an input, as my party will propose? Rather than extending the vote to the institutes of technology and other institutions, would it not be better to give everyone a vote in the Seanad and reform it properly?

The document is very impressive and has been around for a long time. I have read it a few times and will pick out some salient points. The delegation mentioned that 22% of student assistance funds relates to child care, which is a hidden cost because it is not assessed separately. Is the union calling for an increase in funding simply to cover child care costs or for child care to be considered separately, so that it can be identified? The delegates said the union supported the idea of the Department of Social and Family Affairs providing all the funding. If child care funding was made from that source, it would be very difficult to distinguish as there would still be a block of funding.

I agree with the Minister to a certain extent on the question of the VECs administering funding. What is the union's opinion on that area? I would go further. Local authorities and VECs correlate in most cases so it would make more sense to have a decentralised facility in the Department of Education and Science, located at a local authority office for access reasons. It would then administer a central fund, whether from the Department of Social and Family Affairs or the Department of Education and Science. If the VECs were transfigured slightly and integrated with other departmental regional bodies, it would produce true decentralisation and a mechanism for delivering services very quickly to satisfy local need, where there might be particular colleges in a certain region or particular social issues in specific counties.

Deputy English asked about the over 23s. I discussed education with various people in Drogheda recently and the USI representative for the north east raised this issue. It is not mentioned in the document but is the union saying that every student over 23, if living with his or her parents, should be assessed on his or her own income or that every student over 23 living away from home should be so assessed? If a 35-year-old lives at home, household income is taken into consideration for certain social welfare benefits, such as social welfare assistance and bin tags. Does the union want to change that as well or just the situation for students who do not live at home? I have met students who are over 23 and live elsewhere, but are assessed on their parents' income.

The whole education system needs to be funded. To improve access we must start at primary and pre-school. It would be great if the union were to obtain everything it called for but if something could be implemented in the next 12 months, what specific additional investment would it request? Changing the system of allocating grants and making them more streamlined is one thing but what would be the single most important item? That is not a trick question to induce the delegation to abandon its other requests.

Deputy Crowe

I will probably repeat some of the questions. On the delay in receiving grants, I have come across cases where students wait a couple of months but what, in the union's experience, is the longest somebody has had to wait? I am aware of people having to take out loans, such as from the credit union, while they are waiting for their grant. Are unsolicited loans becoming more of a problem? It is becoming a difficulty for non-students but does it affect students?

The delegates mentioned the millennium partnership fund, the need for new guidelines and the fact that some groups receive funds without being means tested. Can they expand on that aspect? Do they have a breakdown on the different areas involved? How can that happen — is it because there are no guidelines or that the demand does not exist in certain areas?

I agree with the point about child care facilities. On the one hand we say we want a group from disadvantaged backgrounds to benefit from further education, but child care facilities are necessary to achieve it. Students at the IT in Tallaght must go to the student union for a grant to help them through that difficult period. There is no funding available for many students in that situation and greater access cannot be achieved without the money.

Has the union carried out any study on the basic needs to which the witnesses referred, such as canteens, etc? Is any information available on specific colleges in that regard?

Mr. Hamrogue

I thank members of the committee for their questions. To answer Deputy Crowe's question, the information is available in the McIver report, which details the facts and figures of everything that is being lost in that regard. As an example of how long people were waiting for grants, I was sitting my final examinations in first year in college when I received my full grant payment. I thought my parents had given me money for doing my examinations but it was my grant, in the penultimate week of term. It is just a matter of how late they come.

I will deal with these questions as well as I can. Some local students' unions have hardship funds and they may allocate a portion of their own budget to that and administer it themselves. We are talking about systems not being in place and money not getting to the people who need it. Many places would then direct people to the students' unions for help.

Systems are put in place by the State, such as the student support fund and the millennium partnership fund. The problem is that the grant is very small and it is eating into the rest of these funds, which are not being utilised in their totality for what they were originally put there for. People can then start dropping out of the system.

Ms Mackey

One of the first points made by members related to child care, the facilities available and the overarching question of the minimum standard of child care facilities or subsidies on campus. There is simply no minimum requirement, and some colleges still have no child care facilities. Some have small subsidies to cover crèche costs. This is not restricted to students alone, it is a national problem. Student parents are competing in commercial crèches for child care facilities, and they do not have the income for it.

I dealt with students and gave out €69 per week in the college I was based in before I was in USI, towards payment of €350 per child per week. It simply did not go far enough. Unfortunately that is very much commonplace in many colleges currently.

Deputy Andrews

With regard to the €350 per week per child for child care, where was that? I never heard of anything like that.

Ms Mackey

It is the figure per week. It was in the Dún Laoghaire area.

Deputy Andrews

I should not have asked.

Mr. Hamrogue

On the student support Bill, to an extent, we are as much in the dark as the rest of the committee with regard to what magic potion will be conjured to solve the issue this time. Deputy Gogarty made a point on the VECs. As far as I am aware there is an embargo on staff employment in the VECs at this point. That raises a concern with the Union of Students in Ireland about who will do this work if there is an embargo on the employment of new staff. If it is given to the VECs and new staff members are not appointed, will we just transfer the problem from having it in 66 local authorities to 33 local authorities? That question should be asked with regard to the student support Bill.

With regard to the details of the Bill, I believe there will be an element of a customer service agreement which VECs will have to adhere to for timely processing of the grant. One of the main problems is getting the threshold income limits out on time, in order to give people enough time to process the applications. People will not then have to fill out forms in a rush and make mistakes in filling out a 12-page form and be asked to re-send forms that have already been sent in and so on.

Deputy Crowe

There is no receipt issued.

Mr. Hamrogue

Exactly, and that is the problem which holds up the process. An application may be made and two months later one will be told that one does not qualify because something is missing.

With regard to the reform of the Seanad, we as an organisation have been mandated to lobby for it to be opened up to all third level students and for it to be restructured. Now would be a great time to reform the Seanad, with the integration of the institutes of technology under the HEA. The two sectors of higher education, the institutions of technology and the universities, are all represented by the Higher Education Authority now.

Ms Mackey

With regard to Seanad reform, there have been ten reports in recent years on Seanad reform, yet not one suggestion has been implemented. I am sure there is a lobby for removing third level representation altogether. However, third level representation in the Seanad brings its own benefits. There is a vocational diversity there that would not otherwise be conceivably possible in the Seanad. There is a full range of experience and skills in courses and backgrounds. Even more socio-economic backgrounds would be better represented.

Deputy Gogarty

Would there be problems with the general population voting for that vocational element?

Ms Mackey

No.

Mr. Hamrogue

Deputy Crowe referred to loans. When we called, in The Irish Times, for the Department of Education and Science to issue the income limits late on in the summer, financial institutions came out the day after offering 0% financial loans.

Financial institutions are offering more attractive packages to students to get them into their organisation. The grant system is there for people who need it and loans should not be a factor. It should be delivered on time. If it was handled in the private sector, or if it was a consumer or other person availing of a service, lateness would not be tolerated. There is acceptance in Irish society that we can deliver such things late. Enough is enough. This has been going since 1960, as I said when I attended the conference. Now is the time for reform. We want the system improved. The Department of Education and Science made a 22.5% increase in the top-up grant this year, yet this increase was not a true reflection of the whole grant when it was sent out. The normal grant did not even increase by the rate of inflation. The headlines may have given a figure of 22.5%, but the normal grant did not even rise with inflation. We should be mindful of these factors in considering this issue.

I hope the Joint Committee on Education and Science will put forward recommendations to state enough is enough, and that the system really needs to be reformed.

Ms Mackey

Deputy Crowe asked if unsolicited loans were a widespread problem. Is the Deputy referring to unsolicited or pre-approved credit? It was a very big problem and it is something student unions were encountering when dealing with students. They were being approached and awarded unsolicited credit, such as increases in credit card limits or credit cards in the first place, which they did not want. It was a big problem, but the consumer protection guidelines have gone a long way to ruling out of order that type of behaviour by financial institutions.

I expected that to be an end to that kind of behaviour, but I have experienced a couple of individual cases with students contacting us indicating they have been awarded unsolicited credit ratings and so on not specifically requested from the financial institution. As far as I know it is illegal behaviour but unfortunately it still takes place.

Deputy Crowe

The difficulty is that everybody knows there is a problem, and the Minister accepts there is a problem. Some of the delays are down to people not filling in the form correctly, and some are down to the incompetence of the local authority and so on. Is there a league table listing those incompetent local authorities? We have heard about the difficulties encountered but what caused the delay in that case? Things seem to disappear into a black hole and nobody knows what causes these delays. One wonders if it is the fault of incompetent staff or a lost form, or any number of things. We are discussing changing the system, but will there be any difference?

Mr. Hamrogue

There are many hard-working members of staff in local authorities and it is more accurate to use the term underresourced than incompetent. As Deputy Crowe indicated, the problem is that nobody can get answers. I know of a local issuing authority in the south of Ireland where staff do not answer the phones and have not done so for two months. This is simply because they are inundated with applications and are trying to process them. This situation has arisen because the threshold income limits were set late by the Department of Education and Science and were not signed off by the Department of Finance.

This scenario is not surprising. People know the grant dates are approaching and the Departments could have dealt with the matter earlier in the year and set the grant application dates earlier. The Department of Education and Science will say one can apply for the grants anyway, but that is not the case. One cannot make such an application until one knows the threshold income limits that have been set as there would be no point. The limits could go up or down and it is not fair to ask people to make applications in such circumstances.

On Deputy Andrews's point regarding research and development in universities, more and more graduate schools are opening. The institutes of technology are also undertaking research and, with delegated authority, many are awarding PhDs through research. Universities are, predominantly, pursuing research in Ireland.

The Union of Students in Ireland feels strongly about fourth level education in a knowledge-based economy, to use the popular term. If we want to see this implemented properly in Ireland, we must ensure investment is made and the Kelly report is implemented to create physical infrastructure, college buildings and services that will allow higher education institutions, HEIs, expand as necessary to cater for the growing area of postgraduate studies. This will make Ireland a knowledge-based economy with a world-class standard of fourth level education.

Chairman

I thank the delegation, including Mr. Hamrogue and Ms Mackey, for the presentation and I thank the members.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.45 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 16 November 2006.