Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2000

Vol. 527 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Higher Education Grants.

Mr. Enright

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I have furnished details of the name and address of the young person whose case I am raising. The maintenance grant payable to third level students amounts to £49 per week and the income limit for families with four dependants is £20,200. The joint income of the family concerned exceeds the income limit by £3,726 per annum.

On 14 November I outlined in detail as best I could the health problems of the family and it is with regret that it is necessary to repeat them tonight. This young man's father suffers from a tumour in a gland under his brain which has required a number of very serious, life threatening operations. The mother had a stroke, has a problem with a cervical disc in her neck, has a serious weakness on one side and has serious visual impairment. She suffers from diabetes and will be on insulin the rest of her life. Both parents have serious ongoing health problems. Neither has a medical card because they are over the income limit, which is very wrong.

I have discussed the matter with the parents, both of whom have been advised for health reasons not to work. However, they are good, outgoing people who fully enjoy life in spite of their health problems. They are hard working and do not want to draw the dole, sickness benefit or anything else.

I raised this issue on 14 November and was amazed by the prompt reply of the Minister on 17 November saying he was turning down the request. The Minister said the young man was allowed a grant last year because the father had been out of work following his operations. This year, because the father has returned to full time work the young man has been refused the grant. The parents could take the easy option and stay at home in bed, get the grant and also get medical cards. However, they do not want to do that.

I am anxious that the Minister should do what he can and allow them the maintenance grant. We talk about our fine young people and we encourage people to continue their education. This man is most anxious to do that, but given the family's financial difficulties it is placing an enormous strain on the family. I have dealt with the fine people in the Department of Education and Science and I fully respect the Minister and the Minister of State. I appeal to the Ministers to allocate the grant.

I am not sure how far the Minister's discretion runs, but there is something seriously wrong if the Department is to hold a firm line with strict rules and regulations with total rigidity. Surely there is a sense of fair play, justice and right in the country. If the reply tonight is negative I intend taking it up with the Ombudsman and I recommend the family bring it to a court of law. However, they are easy going and good people. This is a matter of common sense and fair play and I appeal to the Minister and the Department to make the payment.

I have been polite in what I have said as the family does not want hassle, and I have refrained from using abusive language. We are talking about treating people fairly and correctly.

Mr. O'Dea

The statutory framework for the maintenance grants scheme, as set out in the Local Authorities (Higher Education Grants) Acts, 1968 to 1992, provides for means tested higher education grants in order to assist students to attend full-time third level education.

Under the terms of the scheme, the candidate's reckonable income for the purposes of the means test is his/her gross income from all sources and the gross income of his/her parents or guardians where applicable. Certain social welfare and health board payments are not taken into account in the calculation of reckonable income.

I understand that, in this case, the candidate's parents suffer from ill-health and that medical expenses have been incurred by the family. I fully sympathise with the family in this regard. However, the terms of the maintenance grants scheme, which are uniformly applied, explicitly provide for assessment on the basis of gross income and do not allow for personal expenses, such as medical expenses, to be deducted from reckonable income when assessing a candidate's application.

Offaly County Council, the body charged with the administration of the scheme in this case, has confirmed to my Department that the reckonable income in this case exceeds the income limits set down in the scheme in order to qualify for a maintenance grant. However, the student to whom the Deputy refers did qualify for a fees only grant and in this regard he will be awarded a grant of £292 in respect of the charge for student services, registration and examinations.

The Department of Education and Science is satisfied that the reckonable income in this case has been correctly assessed. The terms and conditions of the student support scheme are of general application and accordingly it is not possible to make exceptions in individual cases such as this. Regarding reckonable income the Deputy is aware of the rules and what has been happening in the Department in that regard.

In the current financial year expenditure on student support, including free fees, is expected to be about £250 million. In view of the scale of expenditure involved and the representations being made by students and other groups, the Minister, Deputy Woods, announced on 11 November that he was setting up a special project team to carry out a comprehensive review of every aspect of the maintenance grants and other student supports to ensure their relevance to the needs of present day third level students. This review will include the level of grants, the methods by which they are paid, eligibility and income limits, accommodation needs, student support services, the most suitable paying agency, the provision of an appeals system, student loans and taxation measures. The project team is to report to the Minister by the end of March 2001.

Also, there is provision within the national development plan for a third level access fund totalling £95 million over the period of the plan, aimed at tackling under-representation by students from disadvantaged backgrounds, mature students and students with disabilities. The Minister recently established an action group on access to third level education with the aim of tackling under-representation of disadvantaged students.

Deputy Enright raised this matter with me, both in the House and subsequently, and I spoke to the officials in the Department about the case. My understanding is that the Department is still examining the case and has not reached finality. I will make further inquiries tomorrow and will ensure the Deputy is contacted at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. Enright

I appreciate that; there must be fair play.