Vol. 1 No. 7
We are here to discuss a presentation by the Union of Students in Ireland on the back to education allowance. The delegation is made up of Mr. Colm Jordan, the president of the USI, Mr. Gareth Keogh, the education officer and Ms Brighid Breathnach, the education officer elect.
I remind the three visitors that, while the comments of members are protected by parliamentary privilege, those of visitors are not. Perhaps Mr. Jordan might begin his presentation.
I thank the committee for the chance to address it today on the issue of the back to education allowance. It goes without saying that the Union of Students in Ireland is extremely concerned at the decision to cut the allowance from 12 months to nine months and to abolish the allowance for postgraduate students.
The amendments made to this allowance will undoubtedly have profound implications on the number of learners, or students, in the Irish education system, but especially on postgraduates, mature students and - the cause of most concern - second-chance learners returning to education. During my brief presentation, I will highlight the importance of reinstating the 12-month back to education allowance. I will also refer to two case studies of students currently in receipt of the allowance from among the 400 telephone calls made to our office. I know thousands of students have been affected by the decision. By mentioning the two case studies, I hope to highlight the significance of the payment and illustrate how the recent changes will negatively affect many prospective and current participants in second and third level education in Ireland. I will argue that such individuals are the most likely to suffer from the recent cuts in the back to education allowance because of the inherent unemployment trap being created.
No doubt members are all aware of the terms and conditions of the back to education allowance. The BTEA, as we will call it, is a payment administered by the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The original idea behind the BTEA was to provide a range of second-chance education programmes to help unemployed people, lone parents and people with disabilities improve their skills and qualifications. It is available to groups in receipt of social welfare payments or payments from that Department. The programme provides for a range of educational courses from basic foundation courses to third level undergraduate courses. The BTEA, since its inception in 1993, has proved to be a great success in a number of areas.
One of the main amendments is the reduction of payment of the BTEA from 12 to nine months per annum, essentially reducing its value by 25%. Undoubtedly that affects recipients of the allowance and puts the onus on them to work during the summer months to support themselves. Another concern is the abolition of the BTEA for postgraduate students. People are being told that they may go as far as undergraduate level but that the line will be drawn at fourth level education, a matter of great concern to us. Although we welcome the Minister's recent announcement in the Dáil that the BTEA will still be available to graduates who pursue a higher diploma in education or graduate diploma in education, we urge her to reconsider the decision to abolish payments for graduates seeking to pursue postgraduate studies which show progression and enhance their employment prospects.
As matters currently stand, those in receipt of the BTEA are no longer able to receive a BTEA payment during the summer months, the only exception to the rule being work forming an integral part of a course of education as confirmed by the educational institution. I ask if repeating an exam is integral. Is getting involved in something that would help one's academic studies part of that? We must see leadership on those questions and have answers to them.
We subsequently learned that the Department had sent letters to BTEA participants informing them of that fact. The letter clearly states:
If you are unemployed and unable to find work during the summer period, you may qualify for an unemployment payment. To be entitled to such a payment, you must be capable of work, available for work and genuinely seeking work.
It is a three month period. One could reasonably be asked to seek work actively for that time, but we must ask ourselves whether we wish people returning to education - the mature and second-chance people - and entering their first State exams in years to be applying for jobs and sending out CVs at the same time. They are under enough stress as it is simply returning to college and sitting the exams without our asking them to send out their CVs as well. As someone who will be sending out his CV in a few months, I can say that things are currently pretty stressful, and I am not facing what those concerned are facing.
The USI is extremely concerned about how "genuinely seeking work" guidelines would be interpreted and applied by deciding officers when BTEA participants apply for an unemployment payment. Apparently the Department is currently in the process of compiling a circular to be distributed to local social welfare officers advising how claims for unemployment payments from persons on "academic holiday" from the BTEA are to be dealt with.
Essentially, the BTEA affords many individuals the opportunity to become educated and empowered with the knowledge and skills to participate actively in society - economically, socially and culturally. The chance to pursue a second level vocational course often provides those with negative experiences of school and the formal education sector with skills that they can bring to the labour market. Many of those individuals have been unemployed for years and have consequently developed low self-esteem and self-confidence. Often they are socially excluded on many levels because of their unemployed status. They become dependent on unemployment assistance, and their outlook on life and prospects become grim.
The allowance offers them a chance to become actively involved in second-chance education, and in many instances their experience results in their growing in self-confidence and learning new skills with currency in the workforce. Many eventually break the cycle of unemployment and become active members of the labour market. It is important to remember that, when the head of a family goes through college, taking a second chance, that person is massively increasing the prospects of his or her children and their children's children in education. That cultural leadership within the family has massive implications. The cessation of the payment of the BTEA during the summer months will act as a disincentive for those individuals. Although there is a clause which states that one may still be eligible for unemployment assistance if one is seen to be actively seeking work and cannot access employment, that is very much at the discretion of the social welfare officer. Many individuals may be deterred from signing off the live register in the first place if they feel there is a risk of their not being able to sign back on again without going through a rigorous form-filling process, and that is the key factor for us. People will be extremely worried, asking themselves what will happen to them if they take the opportunity and have the courage to go back. What will happen to their benefits? What is their future? If the individual has children, how will he or she survive?
I will now discuss our concerns about availing of employment during the summer. The USI is concerned about the cessation of payments over the summer period for many reasons. First, it is important to acknowledge the cost of going to college for the nine months of the academic year, excluding the additional registration fee, which has increased, is significant. The USI's cost of college survey, which it carried out in 2002, revealed that students spent more than €6,148.08 over the nine month academic year on a range of items, and that is roughly in line with the Higher Education Authority's recent report on student expenditure. Our own research was carried out within very specific guidelines - I believe ISO 9002. Given that the cost of unemployment assistance for a recipient of the BTEA is €124 per week, we have calculated that it equates to nearly £5,000 or €9,000 for a nine month period, leaving a deficit of nearly €1,500 for students to acquire somehow.
Recipients of the allowance are expected to pay for their accommodation and other living costs for three months of the summer without any State aid, placing them in a very precarious position. Considering that they could not access work before their participation in the BTEA scheme, it seems unlikely that they will have any great prospect of gaining employment in the summer until they have completed their education. Furthermore, the Department has abolished the student summer jobs scheme, which provided students with a paid summer job placement. Those placements were a joke, for one earned only €600 for three months. If that happened in any other country, we would be manning protests and signing petitions. I thought it was scandalous.
The economy is becoming increasingly unstable, and the employment rate has risen marginally in the last year. The Economic and Social Research Institute's most recent quarterly bulletin revealed that the rate of unemployment is expected to increase continuously in the forthcoming year, with prospects of further increases in unemployment predicted into 2004. The USI argues that, in accordance with the ESRI's economic projections, the prospect of finding employment in the months and years ahead will be increasingly difficult, particularly for seasonal workers such as students. Tens of thousands of secondary school students and hundreds of thousands of third level students will be seeking employment during the summer, yet we are asking people who have found it impossible to find employment to join the large numbers seeking seasonal jobs. They cannot offer to continue working for their employer, for they want to go back to college, but we are asking them to go out and actively seek employment.
Even if members of the committee disagree with me today, I am sure that we can all agree that the lack of information is particularly worrying. As the case studies support, there is a lack of information being disseminated from the Department on the issue of the BTEA. We are concerned about the underhand manner in which the Department has gone about conducting its affairs regarding the allowance. The Minister quietly introduced amendments to the payment without any form of consultation or negotiation with the USI. The lack of clear, coherent information on the payment in the public domain is abhorrent. The Department has only recently updated the section on the BTEA on its website with details of the current situation. Under the "payment of the allowance" section there is a brief reference to the fact that the payment will not be made during the summer months. The dissemination of information on the BTEA and its dissolution has become piecemeal, giving rise to inaccurate reporting about the payment. As members can imagine, that has been extremely frustrating for a number of our members who are dependent on the allowance to pursue a second or third level education or further studies at postgraduate level. We have documents to back up that. I was told there was a press release knocking about. I rang the Department asking to see a press release relating to the back-to-education allowance. I was told that no such release exists. I asked if I could see any and all releases referring to the allowance but the person on the end of the line told me there were none. However, this is being referred to in parliamentary questions and there has since been a publication. I do not know if that person was unable to find it on that particular day, but it is very worrying. Students were telling us that there were rumours going around. They contacted us, we checked things out on the website and there was no information there. It is really worrying. If we can have a discussion on the cut in the payment and still find some agreement, I think the committee will be in agreement with that particular statement.
Let us move on to the third of our four points and talk about lifelong learning, which means continuing to upgrade people's education and their employment prospects and indeed their inclusion within society. Many mature students on the BTEA experience many obstacles while attending college. The decision to return to education after a number of years or perhaps after a negative experience of school is a very courageous one, which has to be commended. Many mature students experience difficulty writing essays and preparing for exams and many colleges have provisions to take account of these problems. There are, however, many students who utilise the summer to keep up with their studies and re-take exams that they may have failed during the academic year. Having to work during the summer places more pressure on these students and may cause them to drop out.
As regards the principle of lifelong learning, there is no denying that Ireland, like the rest of Europe, needs to increase the participation rate of mature students in higher education. Lifelong learning is becoming more important as Ireland enters into a change in demographics. Mature students are becoming an integral component of higher education as the number of school leavers entering third level begins to decline.
Although lone parents and those with disabilities in receipt of BTEA will not be directly affected by the cut in BTEA for the summer months, mature students will. The pressure to work during the summer, coupled with family responsibilities and other financial commitments such as a mortgage and supporting a family, may cause mature students to reconsider returning to education in the first place and stay on the dole or alternatively fail to complete their course. Failure to complete a course as we know can often have profound and damaging repercussions on one's confidence and self-esteem, more so than if people had never pursued an educational course in the first place. They literally have a piece of paper that says they are failures and it can be very damaging. As someone who failed the odd exam myself in college, it really is a blow to how one feels and regarding the work being put in to the course.
What then is the impact of cutting the summer payments and what will happen those second-chance learners who are most at risk - the people we want to target? The cut in State support during the summer months will undoubtedly act as a catalyst in reducing the number of long-term unemployed individuals seeking to return to education if it means they jeopardise their unemployment assistance during the summer months. Undoubtedly the Department of Education and Science is creating an unemployment trap by virtue of the fact that recipients will opt to continue signing on the live register and refrain from returning to education because of the difficulty in qualifying for State support during the summer months.
The following case studies document the stories of two students, Shane and Joyce, who are currently in receipt of the BTEA, because the cases reflect the tremendous impact education has made on their lives. The aim of the case studies is to support the argument that adequately funding education, through initiatives like the BTEA, is vital in combating social exclusion and educational disadvantage and breaking the cycle of disadvantage and unemployment. As we all know, education tends to a have a trickle-down effect and a child whose parents have completed secondary school or third level education is more likely to succeed in the education system than a child whose parents have not done so, thus reinforcing the argument that investment in education greatly enhances the process of combating educational disadvantage, a stated objective of the State's education policy. The Government's commitment to tackling educational disadvantage was reaffirmed in the 2001 report of the action group on access to third level education, which acknowledged the importance of education in this respect. It stated that education makes a fundamentally important contribution to the quality and well-being of Irish society, that education plays a crucial role in the social, intellectual, cultural, economic and political life of the country, and that the State's role in education is underpinned by the principles of pluralism and diversity of individual needs for education, of equality and the elimination of educational disadvantage, and of partnership between all interests in the development of new policies.
I could list the countless benefits that funding education has for the State, such as returns in revenue and the creation of a highly educated and skilled workforce, but I have no doubt that members are well aware of these. I just want members to listen to the stories of Shane and Joyce. It may take away from the talking heads that surround education, if we actually just listen to the people and their own points of view.
Shane is the eldest of nine siblings and the first to attend higher education. He is 35 years old and a mature student. He is a final year student in TCD and is completing a degree in sociology. Shane was participating in a vocational training opportunities scheme, VTOS, programme when a careers adviser suggested he apply to the access programme in TCD.
Shane describes the opportunity to study on the programme as life-changing, fantastic, and a realisation of his dreams. Shane is from a disadvantaged area of Dublin and had a negative experience in school. He suffers from dyslexia and failed his leaving certificate. He spoke of how it took a lot of courage to re-enter the education system and how he had to use his summer holidays to keep up with the others in his class. One has to remember those aged 17 and 18 who have gone through the mill of the leaving certificate, who can produce 1,000 words at the click of a finger, who are used to studying, who know about exam techniques, about going into libraries and using them. People on the back-to-education allowance do not have this, they need to catch up in some other ways, and often they do that during the summer.
Shane also revealed how many of his peers on the BTEA would save money from part-time work during the summer to supplement their studies during the academic year. He feels that money saved during the summer helps many of his peers on the BTEA to avoid working during the academic year and consequently they can concentrate 100% on their studies.
Shane also spoke about coming from a disadvantaged area and the lack of expectation in the community that anyone would go to college. He feels he has broken the cycle of unemployment in his family and is a role model to other children in the community. He spoke at length about how other children were now considering college and asking him about the experience. He argued that the way the Government has addressed the issue of economic cutbacks in the education budget has been most underhand and has effectively denigrated the idea of an education system that is accessible to everyone irrespective of age or socio-economic background.
He also reiterated the problem of the lack of adequate, clear information available from the Department of Education and Science. He said he found out by chance that the cuts in the BTEA had been made and that much later in the year he received a very unpleasant letter from the Department informing him of the change. He feels cheated by the way the Government has not engaged in any form of consultation or negotiation with student representatives on the matter or with students themselves.
Shane argued that the cut in the allowance for postgraduate students has thwarted his plans to progress on to a masters degree. He stated that without further study he would be unemployable in the field he wishes to pursue.
That summarises our case, but we might take a look at Joyce. Joyce is a single mother. She is in her final year of an arts degree in NUI, Galway. The allowance represented to her a chance to return to formal education. Having previously attended university, she dropped out of the course when she became pregnant and spent four years in receipt of the one-parent family payment and working in what she described as a dead-end job trying to make ends meet.
Eventually she decided to return to college and to finish her degree. Without the allowance she would not have been able to complete her degree. As a mother and someone in receipt of the one-parent family payment she will not have to work during the summer months. However, Joyce is extremely concerned about the decision to cut the allowance for postgraduate students. She feels that an arts degree will not necessarily assure her employability in the labour market and that in an increasingly competitive labour market there is a growing need to pursue postgraduate study in order to attain the skills and specialised training to gain employment.
She feels that by cutting the BTEA for postgraduate students, the Minister is effectively reducing the chances of many students, hindering their progression and preventing them reaching their full potential.
I reiterate our extreme frustration with the Minister regarding recent announcements on the BTEA. It is worth pointing out that my colleague, Mr. Keogh, contacted the Minister some seven months ago to ask how we could help in promoting the BTEA. It is very rare that we as an organisation would write to Ministers offering our help, but when we did, we were rebuffed. When we sought clarification, we were still waiting to meet representatives. Some seven months later we are waiting to sit down with the Minister. When I stood up on the back of a truck outside Leinster House and talked about the BTEA, and that subsequently appeared in some of the papers, the Department was on the phone to us the next day, offering Mr. Keogh a meeting with civil servants. When he went in, they were unable to provide him with any answers because obviously that is a political matter - that is an issue for the Minister. Why are we still waiting? In the latest letter we received, we were told it was because of the many commitments within the Dáil. While I understand the very busy lives that most of our political leaders would lead, we would feel that the interests of 250,000 people, which I and my colleagues represent, would be of some interest to the people who are making these decisions. It would appear the decisions being made about the future of the BTEA are being made in an ad hoc manner, without careful consideration of the consequences. Under the Freedom of Information Act we found a five line summation for the Department which stated that it could save €12.5 million by making this cut. That is the only paper trail we can find that leads to a reason for this cut. That is very worrying. It was no more than a paragraph long.
As we understand it, the Government miscalculated its spending potential prior to the general election and now needs to engage in the process of retrenchment. By cutting back the education budget, which let us face it is a discontinuation of a service - I am not spinning this - and a cutback, it will no doubt be able to conceal the holes being created in the public finances, but at whose expense? A number of important issues need to be raised, discussed and addressed regarding the BTEA, and I hope to hear today about the problem of students accessing employment during the summer; what process will be in place to deal with students who do not find employment during the summer months; and what controls and regulations will be put in place to monitor discretionary payments that may be made to allowance recipients actively in pursuit of work, but unable to access employment.
Aside from these issues, it is also worth considering the repercussions of the cuts in the BTEA for recipients, such as the creation of an unemployment trap in the social welfare system and a possible reduction in the number of unemployed people availing of educational opportunities. Will the BTEA as it currently exists really achieve its intended objective of reducing the number of individuals dependent on the State and enhance the employment rate or will the measures serve to reverse the welfare to work ideology? The cuts in the BTEA provide neither a hand up nor a hand out, they simply give with one hand and take away with the other.
To briefly recap the main points I have raised during the presentation, the Union of Students in Ireland is seeking from the Department of Social and Family Affairs an assurance that it will conduct the following measures: Review the decision to abolish the payment of the BTEA for the summer months; review the decision to abolish the payment of the BTEA for graduates seeking to pursue a postgraduate course which shows progression and which the student can prove will enhance his or her prospects of employment; and ensure that information about the BTEA and other funding is made widely available to the public and especially to those in receipt of benefits, through TV advertisements and advertisements in national newspapers.
I thank members for their attention. Before I finish, it is worth pointing out that it is probably ironic that I sat in this very chair a couple of weeks ago to engage in a debate about fees and so on with Government representatives. They highlighted to me that we needed to talk about targeting the most disadvantaged and putting resources where they were needed. We had the resources where they were needed, for the long-term unemployed. If we are seriously talking about helping the disadvantaged, taking money from the long-term unemployed is not the way to do it. I read recently that Ireland can no longer trade as a low wage economy or as a tax haven. The only way it can trade is through innovation. How do we get innovation? We get it through postgraduates, through people finding research and through bringing industry into Ireland and saying we are excellent in our field of research. Now we are saying that research is purely for those people who can afford it. We have drawn a line and said so-called fourth level education is not for some people. I am very worried about what is going on. It is an issue of very serious concern.
I urge committee members to consider the points raised in this presentation and I would be happy to answer any of their questions now or at a later date.
I compliment Mr. Jordan on the very clear and coherent case he has made for the restoration of the back-to-education allowance. We have seen an appalling attack on the student population, taking into consideration the abolition of the students' summer scheme and the 25% cut in this scheme. As he has rightly pointed out, it calls into account and questions the Government's commitment to tackling educational disadvantage. He also made the point that this scheme actually increases the job prospects of the children of people who take up this allowance, and the cuts will eventually negatively affect the unemployment rates. It is an appalling cutback. That is my view and that of my party.
The two case studies clearly emphasise the need for restoring the full grant and possibly increasing it because the people who are disadvantaged are benefiting from this back-to-education allowance. The fact that the USI found out about it by chance is a concern. The lack of consultation is also very serious. Are there plans for any further meetings with the Department to discuss the cuts in question and the restoration of the summer job scheme? Have there been any negotiations or are any planned for the future with the Minister? Has the Minister agreed to meet the USI as a result of its meeting with the civil servants in question?
First, I welcome the members of the delegation and thank them for their presentation which was well and strongly put. I have been talking to a few people who availed of this allowance under a great scheme through which many underprivileged people got jobs. The main problem most people had was not so much the three months of the summer because quite a few of them were able to get work, but the abolition of the postgraduate grant. This should be looked at closely because it is not a good idea to educate a person to a certain point and then stop.
Are the postgraduate students in this category entitled to the higher education grant by right or was there a duplication there? The summer gap could probably be overcome. Many of the people I spoke to said their biggest fear was the postgraduate issue because they were excited about the education they had received and wanted to continue in education. They asked me whether they would be entitled to the higher education grant to bring them that step further.
Like other speakers, I welcome the members of the delegation who have put their points across very well and highlighted grievances in an articulate manner. What happened to the idea of students working all summer? When I was a student I worked all summer long to support myself going back into college because my parents could not have afforded to do that. Throughout the presentation, Mr. Jordan spoke about the need for students not to be troubled with summer work and that they needed to have that time off. I had to smile at the case studies. I am delighted the Government had a scheme that enabled Joyce to find her way to going back and getting a BA. God knows there is sufficient employment for primary degree graduates. What is to stop Joyce earning the money to pursue postgraduate work? I am not having a go at the USI; I am simply asking for answers to those questions.
I agree with Senator Cummins that it was a shock to find out by chance. Gareth Keogh will answer the question on further meetings. Deputies from the Senator's party were at a loss to raise parliamentary questions on the matter. It turned out that that was the only way we began to get some information. With regard to the summer payments, people who are on the BTEA now and have come so far will probably do anything to finish their studies.
The big issue regarding summer payments concerns people who are coming on to the scheme. An individual may have been on the dole for 15 years, may have a family to support and may be thinking about going back to education. Suddenly such people find themselves having to sell candy floss at a summer fair to try to support the family. This may act as a disincentive to these individuals. They will not get a job in which they will be employed for 15 to 20 years. Instead, they will be employed for three months. The employer may not necessarily be willing to turn around and offer them the best job and sufficient remuneration. An individual may also actively search for a job for three months and not find one. The Senator referred to people who told him they were not concerned about summer payments, but the reason is that such people are half way there. However, two, five or ten years down the line this will be a colossal issue. The key question is why was the scheme established in the first place.
I agree that the postgraduate case is a fundamental one. Educationalists speak about the currency of education. My father is in his 60s and his leaving certificate is directly comparable to a master's degree. When he was employed by a bank, the level at which he entered is the same level a master's graduate will achieve today. I have asked people to pick up a newspaper as I have being doing recently and look around for a job. One sees some of the levels quoted for graduates. Most employers will state that degree level is fine, but will require five years' experience. When I began in the USI, employers looked for three years' experience.
With regard to Senator Feeney's comments on working during the summer, that is an old chestnut. At the first meeting I had with the Department of Education and Science in 1997, the Secretary General turned around and said "Would you not go out and get a job?". I suppose the big difference between when the Senator and many of the Members were in college and now is that the cost of accommodation between 1997 and 2000 went up by 97%; the general cost of living has spiralled; and the cost of books has increased. Our survey on the cost of going to college reveals a cost of some €6,000.
I want members to imagine a scenario where I work every hour God sends this summer. I am not repeating any exam. I am not taking any holidays. I am working all of the days available to me. I work an eight hour day, 40 hours a week. In order to earn the money I would need to get through college, I would have to earn in the region of €10 an hour, not taking into account eating, transport to work or buying a newspaper. If I was putting away every cent during the summer months for college, I would have to earn €10.70 an hour. Costs have increased significantly. Of course, people are willing to work and see it as a boost to their self-confidence. However, how does one go out and get a job?
Let us imagine examinations are coming up and I am job hunting. I could be going into a three hour maths exam, before which I have been telephoning people. A prospective employer asks me to come into a shop on a particular date. I have to reply that I must sit my final exams on that date. A prospective employer tells me that he will want me to continue working after the summer months and I reply that I am returning to college. If members were employers, would they take on someone for three months? When I was in college I worked the summer months but also worked part-time throughout the winter - 12 hours on a Wednesday, Saturday and Sunday. The employer had no interest in paying the related tax of hiring me, solely for three months. Those are the difficulties we face.
I see the picture Mr. Jordan is painting. However, there is another side to that. I am speaking from experience as I have children who are in third level education. They start looking for their summer employment at Halloween or Christmas. They, and all their friends, earn sufficient money to put them through college. They earn €10 to €12 on factory floors. They can still go out at the weekend and have a good time and can still enjoy bank holidays off.
We are talking about people who would have dependants and continual outgoings such as mortgages. This is a different age group to that to which Senator Feeney is referring. Those type of factory jobs are the type a 16, 17 or 18 year old might be well able to do. The people to whom we are referring have been long-term unemployed. There was a reason they were unable to find this type of casual employment. While I accept the evidence the Senator has drawn from her personal circumstances, if we take the survey conducted by the research department of the USI or a State survey, one will find a third of the people who work during the summer are not earning a minimum wage and the remaining two thirds are just earning above the threshold. There are very few casual jobs that can be secured for three months. There are very few jobs out there where one would earn €12 an hour.
I first contacted the Department of Education and Science in October to help advertise the back to education allowance. I got a frosty reception and it was very difficult to contact Department officials. We then heard through the grapevine that the back to education allowance was to be cut during the summer. No approach was made to me as education officer of the Union of Students of Ireland. In early January, I wrote a letter to the Department and eventually received a reply on 24 January stating that there were no problems and the Department would get back to us. I wrote a subsequent letter and received a reply on 7 February, two days after USI had 10,000 students protesting on the streets. It stated that due to a hectic schedule, the Minister for Education and Science was unable to meet with us, but that senior civil servants would. One of the main reasons given to me for the cut in the funding was the current low unemployment level. It was a strange excuse because that week unemployment rose by 0.5%. The senior civil servants said they were writing a report for the Minister for Education and Science and would get back to me. I met four civil servants, one of whom scribbled on a notepad, in a cluttered office. I stated at the meeting that there was no acceptable outcome from the meeting and I needed to meet with the Minister as a matter of urgency. That day I wrote to the Minister and received a letter dated 14 April, stating he would get back to me in due course. We are now coming up to the third month since the correspondence began.
This paper has been very revealing and highlights the problems students face. A number of issues arise regarding third level education. I would like to address the issue of summer work and J1 visas, but will not do so today.
What type of take-up is there from rural Ireland for the back to education programme? It strikes me that for a person in rural Ireland aged 30 years or over, a lone parent or an unemployed or lowly paid person, it is impossible to try to get back into education. I do not think it is possible for those people to move to and work in Dublin. The allowance would not attract them. Are there any statistics on the take-up of the programme?
What type of drop-out level is there across the education spectrum? Do most of the people who get back into those schemes intend to stay in education? The issue of the unemployment trap and being afraid to sign off the live register to return to education can be seen in many other areas of life. Is it worthwhile to take up a job with the loss of welfare benefits? This fear in people who wish to return to education is well expressed in the paper presented to the committee.
Some 6,000 individuals are in receipt of the allowance. Unfortunately, there are no rural breakdown figures for Connacht-Ulster or the BMW region. I cannot answer the Deputy's question but the issue of rural educational disadvantage is an interesting one. I would be interested to find out what kind of part-time jobs one could get in rural areas which would pay €12 an hour, never mind in Dublin city or other urban areas.
The drop-out rate is approximately 40% in the institute of technology sector and 20% in the university sector. We have no detailed empirical evidence for the drop-out rate for those involved in the back to education initiatives. On anecdotal evidence, and speaking from my experience at a local level, the rate is phenomenally low. The people involved are highly committed and tend to be more mature. They have had a long period of consultation to consider which course to choose. Of course, the supports were there for them. In the few institutions in which I have worked, the number of BTEA drop-outs has been in single figures.
It strikes me that the people from rural areas are at a disadvantage when it comes to the back to education scheme. The people who would tend to go back to education would have their families reared and would not put too much value on their education. As they state themselves, they just want the chance and the opportunity to educate themselves, whether they put it to any use within the economy or not. Very few people in the BMW region can afford to return to education. The 30 year old, the lone parent or the over-40 year old cannot avail of this opportunity to return to third level education.
The position for rural-based students is really startling and shocking. Many institutions do everything they can to service their catchment areas. For instance, institutes of technology, such as Sligo and Letterkenny, do everything they can for people in the north-west region. However, there is only so much they can do. If one is outside the catchment area in County Monaghan or County Cavan where there are no higher education institutions, one can be at much more of a disadvantage.
It is very easy to tell students to get a job. We have to realise, however, that these type of individuals, who are risking much by signing off the live register and going back to education, will be walking into a room filled with 18 to 19 year olds. They will be walking in as a much older person into an alien environment. These are not work shy individuals who are afraid of going back and giving as good as they can and doing an honest day's work. These are the most incredibly courageous people I have ever had the privilege to meet. The people from rural disadvantaged areas are some of the most courageous people I have ever met.
Are postgraduate students entitled to the higher education grant?
Basically, people get one or the other. One can have either the higher education grant or the back to education grant. One cannot have both. It must be remembered that there is no grant for postgraduate study. If one qualified for a grant at undergraduate level, one would qualify to have some of the fees paid at postgraduate level. One can either opt for the State grant to pay fees or the back to education allowance that would pay fees and offer support.
Yes. Is there some fallback for individuals there?
The fallback would be going from getting in the region of €100 a week to getting from between €7 to €70 a week. It is a very regressive situation that would not take into account the particular position of back to education students, such as their having dependants.
Strict qualifying criteria apply to the back to education allowance. One has to be unemployed for a certain period of time to receive one of the qualifying payments. The age criteria is also employed. These people may be the first in their family to attend college and have set out on a route that will bring them to a fulfilling job in the longer term. These people have made valiant and strenuous efforts to extricate themselves from their circumstances. Has the USI discussed the matter with these people, in so far as they may have had a legitimate expectation that the scheme would continue? Is it the interruption and disappointment that derives from that expectation being shattered that is the major cause of complaint? There is the other aspect of people who anticipated they might make a breakthrough in the future now finding that the opportunity to pursue an educational course no longer exists. Has the USI evaluated the matter in those terms?
There is some real concern among these people. We still firmly believe that there are people on the BTEA who do not know the current position. The research department within the USI learned that a letter had been sent to students. Unfortunately, if one is living away from home, there can be problems receiving letters. The letter could be sitting in a parent's home. We are seeking legal advice to see whether this payment could be continued because people had a legitimate expectation. People going into their fourth year at college would have a serious expectation, having received the allowance for the previous three years.
Senator Feeney pointed out that some people would look for jobs over Halloween and we were very concerned that some people were not able to do that because they simply did not know this allowance would be discontinued. People feel very let down. They are in the middle of playing a match and the goal posts are suddenly moved 10,000 yards.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the USI representatives for coming here today and making a very comprehensive and detailed presentation on the back to education allowance and the implications of its discontinuance for the people involved. We will certainly consider the matter and will send on the details of our meeting and consideration to the Minister for Education and Science. I am sure the representatives will be coming back to us on other issues but we take this opportunity to thank them very sincerely for attending today and answering so fully the various questions posed by committee members.
Thank you very much.
Under Any Other Business, I explained that the advertisement for submissions on carers will be going to the provincial newspapers this week, with a closing date of 30 May. I think that should be adequate, giving about three weeks. Some 18 submissions have been received to date and we will hopefully be able to continue our work in that regard. Our next meeting is scheduled for 20 May when we will meet the prize winners from the Combat Poverty competition.
