Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Nov 2009

Vol. 198 No. 7

Third Level Charges.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran. I welcomed the opportunity to hear the previous matter on the Adjournment. Some issues were raised on which Senator O'Malley and I could have interesting discussions in due course.

My topic is the student services charges and the need for the Minister to clarify whether a significant proportion of the €1,500 student services charge is being used to fund aspects of higher education institutions other than student services. As recently as 3 July 2008, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, spoke about the student services charge, paid each year by students in college, that does not come under the heading "tuition fees". He stated the charge was to defray costs of examination, registration and student services. Unfortunately, it is a long way from being a student services charge in that sense. Although the Government states the no-fees system remains in place, the reality is that tuition fees have returned by the back door. Has there been any honest announcement on the matter or any debate before such an announcement was made that there would be roll-back on the free fees scheme? Has there been any conscientious redesignation of the term since it can no longer fairly be called a student service charge if it is being used to effectively return money to the Exchequer and where students are paying moneys that are in fact used in lieu of tuition fees?

The history of the issue is interesting. When free third level education was phased in over two years in the 1990s leaflets at the time made the point that students would not pay any tuition fees, just the charge as it was then of £150 for student services, registration and examinations. I have a copy of such a leaflet from Trinity College.

What happened in 2002 is that a letter issued from the Higher Education Authority, HEA, specifying the increases in the student charge at that time from €396 to €670, which was a massive increase. Apart from the 6% hike in the student services charge it made it clear that the extra hike over and above the 6%, which amounted to €250, was intended "to secure savings to the Exchequer in 2002 and subsequent financial years". In effect, what happened is that the block grant to the colleges in respect of each student was reduced by X amount and the fees that the individual student and his or her parents and family had to pay went up by the same amount. In other words, the Government was removing a section of its funding for third level education and putting it back on to the students to pay.

That bad practice continued in 2008 when the student services charge was increased from €825 to €900. Here again we saw the fite fuaite nature of this where we were told by the HEA that the block grant was to be reduced by three quarters of the amount of the increase of the student services grant. In other words, the student was paying €75 more for student services but €56.25 of that was being cut from the amount the Government was paying to the college in order to education students. Again, in effect, three quarters of the increase was going back to the Exchequer.

A memo from the financial resources manager of Trinity College Dublin to the finance committee of that university earlier this year shows where this sleight of hand has led. I calculated that students were being hit for approximately €12.5 million in total. When adding up the amount being spent on student services I got as far as €10 million. When one factors in some of the headings under which the student services portion was being spent, €1.5 million was being allocated for so-called space costs in regard to the provision of student services and €1.4 million was being spent on registration costs. One got the impression that the university was basically trying to bulk up its expenditure under academic or commercial-type headings so as to give the impression that the student services charge was being spent on student services when in fact it was not. What people understand by student services are counselling services, student health facilities and a career guidance office. The capitation grant goes to fund valuable student union activities and the activities of clubs and societies.

We have dishonesty at the heart of Government. Has there been an announcement that free fees are gone and that part of the tuition fee is now to be paid by students? That is what has been happening since as far back as 2003, despite the fact that as recently as 2008 the Minister for Education and Science was characterising the student services fee as being there to defray the costs of examinations, registration and student services. There was no mention of space costs or the subtraction from the block grant and that being replaced by the addition of ever-increasing charges to the student services fee.

This year we had an addition of €600 to the student services fee bringing it to €1,500 from €900. That is a direct tax on college students. Not one cent of that money is being spent on student services. It is coming off the block grant, which is being paid to universities in respect of each student.

A letter from the president of the student's union of Trinity College, Cónán Ó Broin to Deputy Gogarty, the Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science, with accompanying documentation, outlines that of the €1,500 students are paying they receive at most €537.25 worth of services. Barely more than one third of what they are paying under the so-called heading of a student services charge is being disbursed on student services.

It is time for the Government to level with people and to tell them whether it has reintroduced fees by the back door. If that is the case what does the Green Party, which made so much of having talked down and negotiated out any possible reintroduction of third level fees, make of the fact that the reality is that third level fees have already re-entered by the back door and that the Government has not admitted that fact? What is the Government's position on the issue? Will it level with people and does it propose to mitigate the situation in any way?

I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, who is unavoidably absent and is not in a position to attend tonight. I thank Senator Mullen for raising this matter.

As the Senator will be aware the student services charge is levied by third level institutions to defray the cost of examinations, registration and students services. Those services may include on-campus medical and counselling facilities for students, access and disability services, careers advisory service, student facilities and student clubs and societies such as sports and recreation.

The Government accepted increases in the level of that charge for the current academic year to bring it to a limit of €1,500, from €900, in individual higher education institutions. Prior to this academic year the level of the charge did not represent the total allocation made by institutions towards student services from institutions' budgets and therefore such services were subsidised from the funding grant allocated by the Higher Education Authority. The increase in the charge for this academic year would have the effect of bringing the amount contributed by students more into line with the cost of providing student services in the institutions with funding then being freed up within the funding grant. The increase of up to €600 was agreed on the understanding that the revenue generated by the level of increase to be adopted by each institution is required to defray the cost of items that fall to be funded by this charge.

All students who are eligible for means-tested student grants have the student services charge paid on their behalf by the relevant local authority or VEC, in addition to any maintenance or tuition fee grant to which they are entitled. The Higher Education Authority issued a framework of good practice for the provision of student services to the publicly funded higher education institutions in 1998. Particular reference was made to the principles of transparency and accountability. The framework consists of guidelines to establish an appropriate system of consultation with students on the allocation of funding from the charge and in the determination of student services to be funded from this source. The HEA has periodically written to all institutions to ensure that correct procedures are in place, and to remind them of their function in regard to the student services charge, in accordance with the framework of good practice. I thank the Senator for affording me the opportunity to respond to the House on this matter.

My comments are not directed at the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran. I am sorry to have to criticise the Department of Education and Science twice in one day but it is ironic to refer to the framework of good practice and to principles of transparency when there is little transparency evident in the reply. The word that comes to mind is "spin" when I consider the allegation that colleges are spending more on student services than they have been receiving by way of the student services charge and that the increase of up to €600 is somehow necessary to defray the costs of student services.

Would the Minister be willing to establish an investigation into the matter? I have figures from Trinity College that show clearly that the amount being spent on student services falls far short of what students are being charged by way of a student services charge even when——

There is no provision for a more than a brief question.

——extraordinarily large figures are put in for registration costs and space costs associated with student facilities and other such strange designations.

If Senator Mullen wishes he can either give the document to me or I will arrange for it to be given to the Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe.

Barr
Roinn