asked the Minister for Education if her Department have assessed the implication, in terms of decreased participation in education, of her proposals to abolish the £300 maintenance grants for students taking vocational training and preparation courses at second level.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Student Maintenance Grants.
40.
The Government have given careful consideration to the maintenance grants for students taking vocational training preparation courses at second level and are of the opinion that the range and diversity of the course content is much more important to the student than the actual allowance being paid.
It may be pointed out, that the vocational preparation and training programme represents a significant contribution by the education system to the training needs of young people. Since its inception in 1984 it has evoked an enthusiastic response from educational authorities and the sustained high level of participation by trainees is a clear indication of its success. A good deal of thought has been given to the preparation of challenging and stimulating courses containing a solid grounding in skills which offer good prospects of employment in a wide range of occupations. I am convinced that the basic quality of the vocational preparation and training programme will ensure its continuance.
I wish to ask the Minister two very simple questions. Do the alternative courses of which the Minister speaks not involve moving such provision outside of education altogether? Is the Minister speaking about money which will be spent from the lottery through FÁS programmes or courses or how does she envisage the new programmes as being accountable within her own Department? Secondly, the question asks about the implication in terms of decreased participation. Is it not a fact that those involved in the courses have made representations to the Minister saying that the £30 per month enabled people to continue in education who would otherwise have dropped out?
Naturally they have made representations but my answer was based on the fact that the content and the diversity of these courses is of enormous attraction to the young person. I do not think that the appeal of the courses will be lessened because of that. I do not think that the intrinsic value of the course that is the Vocational Preparation and Training Programme, to which the Government contribute to the extent of £14 million — the figure for the last year for which we have details — to match the £14 million which comes from the EC, will be so affected. The Deputy asked me another point which has no relation to the question so I will not be answering it.
The question was to ask the Minister if her Department have assessed the implications of the removal of the £30 grant. Would she not agree that, while to a middle-class family, range and diversity are very important, as they are indeed to all families, for families in the lower socio-economic group £30 per month might make a difference as to whether they attend the courses? Is she simply saying that it does not matter to lower-income families that they will have £30 less per child per month for these courses?
I am not saying that at all. What I am saying is that the scope and the attractions of the course and the preparation for work skills which the course provides is of enormous benefit to anybody from any section of society and that the commitment of the Government in giving £14 million to match the £14 million from Europe is an enormous contribution to such courses.