Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 27 October 2004
116 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science the content of the proposed Third-Level Student Support Bill; when it will be brought forward; if she proposes to alter the way in which students are means-tested for maintenance grants; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26298/04]
View answer324 Ms Burton asked the Minister for Education and Science the assistance she has sought from the Department of Social and Family Affairs in respect of assessment of income and means for the purpose of awarding higher education grants. [26157/04]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 116 and 324 together.
My Department funds three means-tested maintenance grant schemes for third level students. The higher education grants scheme operates on a statutory basis, while the vocational educational committees' scholarship scheme and the third level maintenance grants scheme for trainees operate on an administrative basis. The statutory framework for maintenance grants under the higher education grants scheme is set out in the Local Authorities (Higher Education Grants) Acts 1968 to 1992.
The report, Supporting Equity in Higher Education, published in 2003 identified the fairness of the means assessment on which student support is based as being a vitally important issue in promoting equity. It noted that the current system is widely regarded as being inequitable and, in line with earlier reports, concluded that the introduction of a capital test would remove a significant perceived inequity in the system. The report also concluded, in this context, that the administration of the student support schemes needs to be reformed.
In accordance with the commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government, I propose to introduce a single unified scheme. I also intend to put in place a more coherent administration system to facilitate the introduction of more sophisticated means testing arrangements and ensure consistency of application and client accessibility, which are identified as necessary in the report, Supporting Equity in Higher Education.
My Department is engaged in ongoing consultations with the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Office of the Revenue Commissioners as well as other stakeholders in relation to the streamlining of the administration of the planned single unified scheme, which I intend to establish on a statutory basis to replace existing arrangements. These discussions relate to their possible contribution to the future shape and administration of the student support schemes.
I intend to provide a new statutory basis through a new student support Bill. This Bill will have as its objective the promotion of equality of access by providing a new system for awarding grants to assist qualifying persons to attend courses of further and higher education. It will address arrangements for the future administration of the schemes including an appropriate assessment system. A key objective underpinning legislative proposals in this area will be to ensure that the grants system is fair and equitable, and that the resources are allocated accordingly to achieve the Government's objective of supporting and facilitating greater participation in further and higher education from hitherto under-represented socio-economic groups.
There are major implications in any proposals to change the administration of the maintenance grants schemes, and it is for that reason there is ongoing consultation with the key stakeholders. When these are concluded, I will be in a position to make a final determination as to the most efficient, effective and equitable arrangements for the future administration of the schemes.
Will the Minister give an indication of the timescale as to when she expects to implement these proposals? Is it her intention to have a Department, for example the Department of Social and Family Affairs, do this work or does she intend to set up, as stated in the proposed legislation, an appropriate awarding authority, and if so, is it likely to be a separate body or a Department? Is the Minister concerned that, according to the most recent figures from 2000-01 released to my colleague Deputy Burton, twice as many students from professional, management, self-employed and farming backgrounds received grants as those from the lower socio-economic groups such as skilled manual, semi-skilled manual and unskilled manual workers? The figure is quite shocking.
Why has the Department not gathered the information in order to publish figures for 2001-02 or 2002-03? Does the Minister intend to introduce a capital or asset test as part of this proposal?
The Deputy will be aware that a number of reports have been undertaken on the third level grants sector. We will spend €184.9 million this year, which represents substantial expenditure and, although we do not yet have the figures for this year, I understand that between 2003 and 2004, some 56,000 students benefited from the scheme. It is of concern that people do not have confidence in the assessment system and feel it is unfair. It is not for me to state which sectors are gaining more than others but it is true to state that people believe they are not getting a fair share. The issue must be addressed which is why it is being examined in consultation with the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of Social and Family Affairs and others.
It is crucial that the assessment system is seen to be fair and commands public confidence, which important message is set out by the de Butléir and Supporting Equity in Higher Education reports. We must also have an amalgamation of all the schemes, which we have worked towards. After maintenance grants were made available for post-leaving certificate course students in 1999 a more aligned system was put in place with one common application form. It has also been proposed that there should be one group of agencies or one body to implement it but I am more concerned that we have a unified scheme rather than an authority to implement it. We are not yet far enough along the road to decide which should be the implementing body and I am not sure of the value of proceeding with a separate central authority in any event. However, I see the value of one body comprised of groups of people being responsible for it such as, for example, local authorities or the Irish Vocational Education Association.
There has been convergence of the schemes but there is a lack of public confidence in the assessment. We will continue to invest in the system and ensure that people can qualify for the grant or other schemes such as top-up grants, which have been of huge benefit to the 11,500 students who received them last year as a result of the movement of thresholds in recent years. It is important that no student suffers as a result of any changes in this regard. Rather, our aim will be to ensure that the system is equitable and fair.
