asked the Minister for Education whether her examination of the two-four honours requirement for higher education grants and vocational education committee scholarships has been completed; if it is her intention to abolish the rule and thus allow all students accepted on a course to apply for grants; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna-Questions. Oral Answers. - Higher Education Grants.
8.
I have asked my Department to examine the attainment requirements under the higher education grant and VEC scholarship schemes with a view to determining what the implications of a change in the present criteria would be. We are at present examining the position.
What is the reason for the delay? There seems to be no argument whatever at this stage for the retention of the two-four honours requirement for grants since that standard has been far exceeded by every entrant to third level colleges. These students have an attainment far in excess of the two honours at leaving certificate level. This is a rule that has been surpassed by present standards in education in all second level schools. It has no meaning at all.
Ceist, le do thoil, a Theachta.
Since the Minister was good enough to set up an interdepartmental review body, would she act on the findings of that body and now introduce the necessary changes to ensure that every person who obtains a place in college is means tested, and otherwise eligible, would get a grant without the waste of time administering a rule of two-four honours which has no meaning in present day conditions?
The Higher Education Grant Act which provides that the grant will be awarded on the basis of leaving certificate attainment would now have to be amended if we wanted to make awards on the basis of a student securing a university place only. It is not open me to do that unilaterally.
Is it the Minister's intention to bring about the necessary and relevant changes? If that was the reason for her setting up an interdepartmental review body in the first instance, it seems that there was no point in doing so if she did not intend making their findings known to the public and to this House and to a upon any recommendation for changes that they might have made.
It is lovely to be in the Deputy's party. She can say all sorts of things but she will not be about to bring them in.
Has the Minister seen the polls?
Would the Deputy just hear me out, please? She is wheeling out her great sceal.
That is definitely some thing from the Minister of the promises.
I am at present looking into the matter. It does, however involve finance. The Deputy's party use to be very hot on finance and I am protecting the economy and keeping straight. I know the Deputy has forgotten that, but we have not. If this change is to be implemented, there will be a hefty price tag. Naturally, I want to make that change, but it has to take its place among many others.
Is the interdepartment review body just a sham——
Not at all.
——if the Minister does not intend to act on its findings?
There are other Deputies offering.
Nothing in our party is a sham.
I call Deputy Birmingham. Can we have brevity, please? I want to make progress on other questions.
First, could I ask the Minister what the cost would be of making the change proposed? Secondly, would the Minister accept that it is impossible to maintain any principled defence of the present system, that there can be no justification in principle for a situation where somebody enters college with two honours if their parents are paying or they themselves are paying for their education and that they require twice that if they are to be supported by the State? Would she accept it cannot be justified in principle?
It was justified for four years and stood over by the Deputy's Government. We are at present engaged in getting data from the CAO with regard to the precise cost. We have not got the precise costing but it appears to us from preliminary figures as if it would be in the region of £2 million at present.
Would the Minister accept, in fairness to those who are excluded by this rule, that the need is to ensure equality of access regardless of the means of the pupils' parents, that the expenditue of this estimated £2 million——
It could be more.
——would bring about fairness in the system of access to third level education and that therefore she is obliged to find the money to do that?
I accept the point made by the Deputy and by Deputy Birmingham. It has always appeared to me that it is a deterrent. If two people obtain places through merit, if what they got in the leaving certificate entitles them to places in a particular course and one can pay and one cannot, of course it is a deterrent that should be overcome. Within my limitations I am endeavouring to address it and when I have precise information and data I will return to the case. The Deputy, who has expressed interest in that matter, can take it I wish to address the issue myself.
No. 9, please.
A Cheann Comhairle——
A very brief question, Deputy.
Will the Minister have some recommendations from the applicants before the start of the next academic year?
There are two matters, one of which requires legislation. It is for future events to decide whether we will have time for any legislation.