Well Batt O’Keefe has shown his true colours. Despite stating for months that any tuition fees would only affect those that could afford it, the Minister is considering allowing those that can afford to pay for the degree would get a 20% discount on the total cost.
So now, it would appear, that the rich will have to pay, along with those that can’t afford to pay it, the difference being the rich will get a cheaper degree. It is truly disgraceful. Such short sightedness will not yield the €70 million expected by the Dept of Education, this is a truly shocking claim. €350 million is what the government currently pay in lieu of tuition fees, so to imagine that the government would re-coup €70 million, or one fifth of what they currently spend is wrong and only serves to strengthen a weak argument that fees will bring money into the exchequer. Whoever the sources are that think this measure will bring in this amount should be named and shamed.
So Batt stays true to FF mantra. It was always unlikely that the Minister of Education would stay true to his word and only insist on the rich paying for education. The Irish Times are carrying the article today and contains inaccurate information, that if came from the Department of Education should be setting off alarm bells.
“The new regime is set to be introduced next year. However most students will not become liable to repay the cost of their tuition until at least 2013, three years after they graduate. The Government has still to decide on the level at which fees will be set.” http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0325/1224243368792.html
Now the maths do not add up here, the Minister has indicated that current students would not be liable to any change in the fee situation. So it would appear the class of 2013 will be the first to start repaying any type of graduate tax. Given that the article also notes that students will become liable for fees after graduation once their income reaches a certain level, you would wonder what the income level will actually be, and how low it will be if 2013 is the date in which the repayment is expected.
Batt was quoted yesterday as saying “A key consideration from my perspective will be that any scheme implemented does not place an unfair burden on students or their families or act as a disincentive to participation in higher education by those from less well-off backgrounds.”
It is getting much harder to believe the sentiment from this minister. Parents in particular should be worried about what this minister is planning, and parents should be planning for an uncertain future whereby their children may not get the opportunity to attend third level.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
More Hypocrisy
Thursdays (19March) Indo had two pages dedicated to third level issues, one dealt with the multi million Euro pay bonanza for university high flyers (page 10) while further on (page 30) the theme turned to students paying extortionate amounts through a graduate tax scheme.
Interestingly, the stories were kept apart from one another just to ensure that readers would not see the sheer gaul of university presidents stating how much in debt their universities are and therefore students must now pay, yet the 15 staff listed earned between EUR200,000 and EUR500,000. The EUR10million bonanza would require 2,000 students paying fees of EUR5,000 a year just to pay 40 staff! It is no wonder the system is in ‘deficit’ when these ‘top’ earners are earning up to fifteen (yes that’s 15) times the average industrial wage.
No mention of any pay cuts from these elites, despite notice from the Department of Education that they wish to cut staff numbers in the third level sector. It is disgraceful and boarders on the truly shameful, especially as it will, most likely, be the youngest (and sometimes better) junior lecturers will be the first to be targeted.
None of the IT sector staff or directors were written about in the article.
The graduate tax proposed by FG would see some students paying an extra EUR200 per month (if you are an Arts graduate) while if the student has a calling for any laboratory science, medicine, dentistry, veterinary etc the monthly charge will be a whopping EUR1,333. I really hope people don’t expect these students, after graduating, to be able to afford new cars, houses, any type of spending that could fix an ailing economy recover like our own. This short-sighted proposal is a graduate tax (but via PRSI as opposed PAYE).
The FG green paper also included ‘a new national technical university’ which is a term and ideal fed to the joint oireachtas committee on education last week from the heads of the IT sector. So again, no innovation or creativity here.
The education spokesperson Brian Hayes stated that he though it highly unlikely that graduates would leave the country to escape having to repay a graduate tax, which will come on top of higher taxes, a pension levy, an income levy and whatever other scheme the current crowd of incompetents will introduce.
NEWSFLASH - I’d leave. Brian Hayes is out of touch with the younger generation. Students will leave to find employment in countries that will pay the most for their skills, or get paid better within a lower cost economy. Being a young European, I know how easy it is to move across the continent, so Deputy Hayes is wrong.
Again Labour was awarded the bottom of the page and stated that they disagree with FG and that third level should be paid for by general taxation.
USI welcomed the fact that the proposals promote discourse about the third level sector, which is more than the current resident of Malborough Street is promoting.
Interestingly, the stories were kept apart from one another just to ensure that readers would not see the sheer gaul of university presidents stating how much in debt their universities are and therefore students must now pay, yet the 15 staff listed earned between EUR200,000 and EUR500,000. The EUR10million bonanza would require 2,000 students paying fees of EUR5,000 a year just to pay 40 staff! It is no wonder the system is in ‘deficit’ when these ‘top’ earners are earning up to fifteen (yes that’s 15) times the average industrial wage.
No mention of any pay cuts from these elites, despite notice from the Department of Education that they wish to cut staff numbers in the third level sector. It is disgraceful and boarders on the truly shameful, especially as it will, most likely, be the youngest (and sometimes better) junior lecturers will be the first to be targeted.
None of the IT sector staff or directors were written about in the article.
The graduate tax proposed by FG would see some students paying an extra EUR200 per month (if you are an Arts graduate) while if the student has a calling for any laboratory science, medicine, dentistry, veterinary etc the monthly charge will be a whopping EUR1,333. I really hope people don’t expect these students, after graduating, to be able to afford new cars, houses, any type of spending that could fix an ailing economy recover like our own. This short-sighted proposal is a graduate tax (but via PRSI as opposed PAYE).
The FG green paper also included ‘a new national technical university’ which is a term and ideal fed to the joint oireachtas committee on education last week from the heads of the IT sector. So again, no innovation or creativity here.
The education spokesperson Brian Hayes stated that he though it highly unlikely that graduates would leave the country to escape having to repay a graduate tax, which will come on top of higher taxes, a pension levy, an income levy and whatever other scheme the current crowd of incompetents will introduce.
NEWSFLASH - I’d leave. Brian Hayes is out of touch with the younger generation. Students will leave to find employment in countries that will pay the most for their skills, or get paid better within a lower cost economy. Being a young European, I know how easy it is to move across the continent, so Deputy Hayes is wrong.
Again Labour was awarded the bottom of the page and stated that they disagree with FG and that third level should be paid for by general taxation.
USI welcomed the fact that the proposals promote discourse about the third level sector, which is more than the current resident of Malborough Street is promoting.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Presentation to the Oireachtas Education Cmte
here is the presentation I gave to the members of the joint oireachtas committee on education today. Myself and Shane got asked numerous and intelligent questions from the members and i'm sure these will be available online at www.oireacthas.ie.
The education committee agreed to send a letter to the minister asking him to consider putting fees as an agenda item for the new national strategy on education.
USI as an organisation are fundamentally opposed to the return of tuition fees under any guise. Our organisation is opposed to the commoditisation of education and believes fees would act as a barrier to third level education for many
students.
Investing in education is good for the learner and for society as a whole. The only barometer by which one should be measured, is potential, not ones potential to pay.
In 1996 tuition fees were abolished. Since then, Ireland has witnessed a surge in the numbers of students entering third level education. In 1980 this access rate stood at 20% of 17 - 18 year olds while in 2004 it had reached almost 55%. In the college year 2006 - 2007, there were 153,606 individuals in education in the Higher Education sector. The last thirteen years have seen a dramatic rise in the level of participation in tertiary education.
In 2008, the Higher Education Authority produced the National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education 2008 - 2013, designed to dramatically increase the numbers in further and higher education. The plan set a target of 72% for national participation by 2020 and at least 54% in each socio-economic group. Restricting access to third level education through the reintroduction of college fees will result in these ambitious targets not being reached.
It is apparent that a proposal on the re-introduction of college fees will be tabled for cabinet discussions within the next four weeks. We urge the government parties to examine all options of funding the sector before making a decision on student fees. It is our view that all stakeholders should come together and agree a long term funding model that will protect access while ensuring the funding requirement of the sector are met.
The cost of college in Ireland has been put at EUR38,000 for a four year degree, a figure which does not include the EUR600 increase in the registration fee increased in Budget 2009, which will make that average total over €40,000. The argument put forward that only those on higher incomes would pay fees has been proven false. Figures from the Minster of Education & Science’s economist show that, at most, it would raise less than EUR30 million per annum. This is before tax relief on tuition fees of 40% are included. Given the nature of the chronically underfunded tertiary sector, this amount will have no real financial impact and any potential benefit would be lost as thousands of students are forces out of Higher Education. If fees are introduced, they will have to be extended to all learners, as they simply would not raise enough money. This would completely undermine the OECD’s conclusion that Ireland is providing the most equitable access to higher education.
Visit the IDA website and you will see how important an educated Irish workforce is in attracting outside investment. The website boasts that the educational system in Ireland meets the needs of a competitive economy. The figures stated showing a decisive lead over countries that restrict the access of people to education through tuition fees; namely the UK and the US. Also, the organisation promotes Ireland’s higher educational achievement. Using this indicator, Ireland is markedly ahead of countries like the UK and Germany when it comes to the % of population that has attained at least tertiary education, in fact the Irish have double that of Germany.
The source of these figures: IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2008.
Restricting our countries economic competitiveness during a recession would elongate the economic trouble for our country. Due solely to the free fees scheme, the IDA continually promote that the Irish skilled workforce of science and technology graduates in the 20 - 29 age group is twice that of the US and three times that of Germany.
Despite these figures and the obvious economic benefits of tertiary education, Ireland has consistently under spent in tertiary education. The OECD puts the average level of investment per student in tertiary education at $11,512 while in Ireland $10,468 is spent. In 2005, 1.2% of Gross Domestic Product went on further and higher education, down from 1.5% in 2000 and even less than in 1995. Graduates contribute an average of 70% more to the public exchequer through taxation, both direct and indirect, than those who do not attend further or higher
education. By raising our investment to OCED levels, we can stimulate knowledge, innovation and the economy. This can and should be done through progressive taxation, as this is how modern societies funds essential public services.
USI fears that college fees will stifle Ireland’s economic recovery and growth by restricting access and burdening graduates with large debts.
A version of tuition fees currently being examined is the Australian model HECS. The Higher Education Contribution Scheme (or HELP as it is known today - it has a better ring to it) is a graduate tax. Students have their fees paid for up front by the government and then pay back through extra taxation the amount owed. The Australian system has grown so complex that it needs circa AUS$5 billion to overhaul and comes as a response to a 272 page review of the system. HECS as a system is broken and flawed. Originally created to increase access, it has had the opposing affect.
The average student finishes university with a $12,000 debt, which takes about a decade to repay. Almost one-third of the multi-billion dollar HECS debt owed by university students has been written off by the Federal Government as a bad or doubtful debt. The figures, supplied through Australian Senate Estimates, predict that $2.9 billion of the $10.2 billion owed through the Higher Education Contribution Scheme for university fees is unlikely to be repaid.
This Tax is indexed at rate equal to the consumer price index. The tax is repaid through automatic deductions taken out using the same system as tax (PAYE) once over the minimum repayment threshold, which is currently just over $38,000 or €19,000 per year. After this threshold, a percentage of your entire salary is automatically deducted; not the amount above the threshold as happens for income tax. Unfortunately, many young Australians have no idea exactly how the repayment of this debt affects them day-to-day. Is this a loan that is easily paid off? How long will it take?
For someone earning $40,000 a year, which happens to be just over the repayment threshold, the “normal” take home pay is $2720 per month or $628 per week. The HECS repayments add up to an extra $133 per month, or $31 per week. The figures are downhill from here. Someone earning $50,000 per year has $229 per month ($53 per week) taken out; a salary of $60,000 means $310 per month or $72 per week is deducted. In other words, a 50% increase in pay means a 130% increase in the amount deducted. This means over a year the average graduate can have anywhere from 23% to 28% more taken out of their pay. The system is inequitable, as built into the system are provisions for those who can afford to pay upfront the cost of tuition fees get an overall reduction of 20% of the total cost, leaving those that cannot afford to pay higher taxes.
Many students will never earn enough to repay their loan. Young Australian graduates are finding it harder and harder to buy a home and start a family because of the very high levels of HECS debt that they have to endure. No research has been carried out to examine the impact that going into a large amount of debt at a young age has in the long term. Also, given the economic outlook, the expected earning potential for future graduates may be less than in the past but a HECS style debt incurred would increase.
Should a graduate tax system be implemented it would be upwards of a decade before any cost would be recouped by the state, so the argument that this system would be able to fund the sector is also flawed.
The model used in the UK is one of student loans, where a government back loans group loans the students the finance to attend college. The figures here are startling; More than 59,000 are in arrears, with bad debts standing at £162.5 million. Another 58,000 are behind with their repayments and are in danger of being considered a credit risk if they slip any further into arrears. 75% of students who default on their loans have dropped out of college and not completed their degree. More than half (53%) of students from families who work in manual jobs or are on benefits chose their university because it was close to home, as the costs associated with third level are too high.
Returning to The Irish case, fees would have a negative impact on student participation. Terri Scott, President of Sligo IT has stated “concern that current lack of information and negative speculation will negatively influence student recruitment and discourage those who have the potential to benefit from a third level education. Any sudden increase in fees would have a serious impact on IT Sligo”.
A recent USI survey showed that one in three students would not be financially able to pay fees. The possibility of summer work has been severely eroded and will leave many students struggling to make enough for the registration fee. Further concern is that the incoming students, who have not been consulted about this process, will effectively be sleepwalking into debt.
At a time of deep recession it is unfair that these students or their parents would not have sufficient time to examine how college fees would affect them or their future earning potential.
If changes were proposed for the senior cycle curriculum at second level, a period of two years notice would be given to ensure that students are accommodated. We ask that government take this into consideration when the proposals come before cabinet. We are also concerned that any decision on fees would undermine the Strategy group, set up by the Minister of Education and Science to investigate the third level sector.
All these systems do not increase participation in third level education but rather curtail it. USI fundamentally believes any return of fees would instigate a chain of events that would prevent potential students from attending college and with the proposed knowledge based economy the option of fees/loans should be dismissed.
Education must be the foundation upon which our future prosperity is built. This will require a focused and strategic plan, one that seeks long term sustainable solutions to solve the funding crisis that we currently face.
A short sighted knee jerk reaction will leave a generation of young people excluded from Higher Education.
The education committee agreed to send a letter to the minister asking him to consider putting fees as an agenda item for the new national strategy on education.
USI as an organisation are fundamentally opposed to the return of tuition fees under any guise. Our organisation is opposed to the commoditisation of education and believes fees would act as a barrier to third level education for many
students.
Investing in education is good for the learner and for society as a whole. The only barometer by which one should be measured, is potential, not ones potential to pay.
In 1996 tuition fees were abolished. Since then, Ireland has witnessed a surge in the numbers of students entering third level education. In 1980 this access rate stood at 20% of 17 - 18 year olds while in 2004 it had reached almost 55%. In the college year 2006 - 2007, there were 153,606 individuals in education in the Higher Education sector. The last thirteen years have seen a dramatic rise in the level of participation in tertiary education.
In 2008, the Higher Education Authority produced the National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education 2008 - 2013, designed to dramatically increase the numbers in further and higher education. The plan set a target of 72% for national participation by 2020 and at least 54% in each socio-economic group. Restricting access to third level education through the reintroduction of college fees will result in these ambitious targets not being reached.
It is apparent that a proposal on the re-introduction of college fees will be tabled for cabinet discussions within the next four weeks. We urge the government parties to examine all options of funding the sector before making a decision on student fees. It is our view that all stakeholders should come together and agree a long term funding model that will protect access while ensuring the funding requirement of the sector are met.
The cost of college in Ireland has been put at EUR38,000 for a four year degree, a figure which does not include the EUR600 increase in the registration fee increased in Budget 2009, which will make that average total over €40,000. The argument put forward that only those on higher incomes would pay fees has been proven false. Figures from the Minster of Education & Science’s economist show that, at most, it would raise less than EUR30 million per annum. This is before tax relief on tuition fees of 40% are included. Given the nature of the chronically underfunded tertiary sector, this amount will have no real financial impact and any potential benefit would be lost as thousands of students are forces out of Higher Education. If fees are introduced, they will have to be extended to all learners, as they simply would not raise enough money. This would completely undermine the OECD’s conclusion that Ireland is providing the most equitable access to higher education.
Visit the IDA website and you will see how important an educated Irish workforce is in attracting outside investment. The website boasts that the educational system in Ireland meets the needs of a competitive economy. The figures stated showing a decisive lead over countries that restrict the access of people to education through tuition fees; namely the UK and the US. Also, the organisation promotes Ireland’s higher educational achievement. Using this indicator, Ireland is markedly ahead of countries like the UK and Germany when it comes to the % of population that has attained at least tertiary education, in fact the Irish have double that of Germany.
The source of these figures: IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2008.
Restricting our countries economic competitiveness during a recession would elongate the economic trouble for our country. Due solely to the free fees scheme, the IDA continually promote that the Irish skilled workforce of science and technology graduates in the 20 - 29 age group is twice that of the US and three times that of Germany.
Despite these figures and the obvious economic benefits of tertiary education, Ireland has consistently under spent in tertiary education. The OECD puts the average level of investment per student in tertiary education at $11,512 while in Ireland $10,468 is spent. In 2005, 1.2% of Gross Domestic Product went on further and higher education, down from 1.5% in 2000 and even less than in 1995. Graduates contribute an average of 70% more to the public exchequer through taxation, both direct and indirect, than those who do not attend further or higher
education. By raising our investment to OCED levels, we can stimulate knowledge, innovation and the economy. This can and should be done through progressive taxation, as this is how modern societies funds essential public services.
USI fears that college fees will stifle Ireland’s economic recovery and growth by restricting access and burdening graduates with large debts.
A version of tuition fees currently being examined is the Australian model HECS. The Higher Education Contribution Scheme (or HELP as it is known today - it has a better ring to it) is a graduate tax. Students have their fees paid for up front by the government and then pay back through extra taxation the amount owed. The Australian system has grown so complex that it needs circa AUS$5 billion to overhaul and comes as a response to a 272 page review of the system. HECS as a system is broken and flawed. Originally created to increase access, it has had the opposing affect.
The average student finishes university with a $12,000 debt, which takes about a decade to repay. Almost one-third of the multi-billion dollar HECS debt owed by university students has been written off by the Federal Government as a bad or doubtful debt. The figures, supplied through Australian Senate Estimates, predict that $2.9 billion of the $10.2 billion owed through the Higher Education Contribution Scheme for university fees is unlikely to be repaid.
This Tax is indexed at rate equal to the consumer price index. The tax is repaid through automatic deductions taken out using the same system as tax (PAYE) once over the minimum repayment threshold, which is currently just over $38,000 or €19,000 per year. After this threshold, a percentage of your entire salary is automatically deducted; not the amount above the threshold as happens for income tax. Unfortunately, many young Australians have no idea exactly how the repayment of this debt affects them day-to-day. Is this a loan that is easily paid off? How long will it take?
For someone earning $40,000 a year, which happens to be just over the repayment threshold, the “normal” take home pay is $2720 per month or $628 per week. The HECS repayments add up to an extra $133 per month, or $31 per week. The figures are downhill from here. Someone earning $50,000 per year has $229 per month ($53 per week) taken out; a salary of $60,000 means $310 per month or $72 per week is deducted. In other words, a 50% increase in pay means a 130% increase in the amount deducted. This means over a year the average graduate can have anywhere from 23% to 28% more taken out of their pay. The system is inequitable, as built into the system are provisions for those who can afford to pay upfront the cost of tuition fees get an overall reduction of 20% of the total cost, leaving those that cannot afford to pay higher taxes.
Many students will never earn enough to repay their loan. Young Australian graduates are finding it harder and harder to buy a home and start a family because of the very high levels of HECS debt that they have to endure. No research has been carried out to examine the impact that going into a large amount of debt at a young age has in the long term. Also, given the economic outlook, the expected earning potential for future graduates may be less than in the past but a HECS style debt incurred would increase.
Should a graduate tax system be implemented it would be upwards of a decade before any cost would be recouped by the state, so the argument that this system would be able to fund the sector is also flawed.
The model used in the UK is one of student loans, where a government back loans group loans the students the finance to attend college. The figures here are startling; More than 59,000 are in arrears, with bad debts standing at £162.5 million. Another 58,000 are behind with their repayments and are in danger of being considered a credit risk if they slip any further into arrears. 75% of students who default on their loans have dropped out of college and not completed their degree. More than half (53%) of students from families who work in manual jobs or are on benefits chose their university because it was close to home, as the costs associated with third level are too high.
Returning to The Irish case, fees would have a negative impact on student participation. Terri Scott, President of Sligo IT has stated “concern that current lack of information and negative speculation will negatively influence student recruitment and discourage those who have the potential to benefit from a third level education. Any sudden increase in fees would have a serious impact on IT Sligo”.
A recent USI survey showed that one in three students would not be financially able to pay fees. The possibility of summer work has been severely eroded and will leave many students struggling to make enough for the registration fee. Further concern is that the incoming students, who have not been consulted about this process, will effectively be sleepwalking into debt.
At a time of deep recession it is unfair that these students or their parents would not have sufficient time to examine how college fees would affect them or their future earning potential.
If changes were proposed for the senior cycle curriculum at second level, a period of two years notice would be given to ensure that students are accommodated. We ask that government take this into consideration when the proposals come before cabinet. We are also concerned that any decision on fees would undermine the Strategy group, set up by the Minister of Education and Science to investigate the third level sector.
All these systems do not increase participation in third level education but rather curtail it. USI fundamentally believes any return of fees would instigate a chain of events that would prevent potential students from attending college and with the proposed knowledge based economy the option of fees/loans should be dismissed.
Education must be the foundation upon which our future prosperity is built. This will require a focused and strategic plan, one that seeks long term sustainable solutions to solve the funding crisis that we currently face.
A short sighted knee jerk reaction will leave a generation of young people excluded from Higher Education.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Greens Vote to Reject Fees
At the Green Party conference held at the weekend the Green Party rejected a motion that would support the re-introduction of fees with an indexed linked grant system and decided to support the motion calling for the Greens to reject the possible return of tuition fees. This reaffirms their pre election promises that third level fees was not going to have Green Party support.
According to Saturdays Indo, an apparent cabinet clash was on the cards over college fees. The Greens have insisted there is nothing in the agreed Programme for Government on bringing back fees, despite former Education Minister Mary Hanafin recently conceding that third level fees were now “firmly back on the agenda”. And to top the weekend off, Paul Gogarty has stepped down from his position as the Green Party education spokesman.
Fees are due before the cabinet in early April, it is allegedly going to be a single recommendation, with all indications that the Australian system is still being considered as a template.
It is time to rally as an organisation and as a group to state that we will not accept the re-introduction of college fees. Over the next few weeks, USI and local Student Unions will have to ensure our message reaches as many people as possible.
Education is the key to success. Our press maintains a slow and sustained push towards college fees by indicating that the fees are inevitable. I reject this wholeheartedly. USI has a seat on the new national strategy group for the sector and any decision brought about fees would completely undermine the group.
To finish - here are some interesting numbers and quotes about fees and fee related issues from around the globe:
Ireland, which as of 1996 no longer charges tuition fees, requires non-EU students to pay up to EUR 36,000 p.a., the highest in Europe.
In Australia, the average student finishes university with a $12,000 debt, which takes about a decade to repay, however the wealthy students who can afford to pay off the price of the cost of their course prior to starting it get a 20% reduction on the price.
In the UK, more than 59,000 students are in arrears in repaying their student loans, with bad debts standing at £162.5 million. Another 58,000 are behind with their repayments and are in danger of being considered a credit risk if they slip any further into arrears. 75% of students who default on their loans have dropped out of college and not completed their degree. More than half (53%) of students from families who work in manual jobs or are on benefits chose their university because it was close to home, as the costs associated with third level are too high.
In the US, numbers taking courses in sciences and engineering have nosedived due to the associated higher cost of these courses, leaving Richard W. Lariviere, provost and executive vice chancellor for the University of Kansas to state “We are seeing at this point purely anecdotal evidence. The price sensitivity of poor students is causing them to forgo majoring, for example, in business or engineering, and rather sticking with something like history.”
48. Placing of University of Copenhagen on 2008 THE-QS Worlds Top Universities list. €0. Price for Danish to attend the University. Ranked ahead of renowned and fee paying institutes like the University of Aukland, London School of Economics, Darthmouth College and the Universities of Washington and California.
55%. The rise in pay for Irish University presidents granted in 2007.
According to Saturdays Indo, an apparent cabinet clash was on the cards over college fees. The Greens have insisted there is nothing in the agreed Programme for Government on bringing back fees, despite former Education Minister Mary Hanafin recently conceding that third level fees were now “firmly back on the agenda”. And to top the weekend off, Paul Gogarty has stepped down from his position as the Green Party education spokesman.
Fees are due before the cabinet in early April, it is allegedly going to be a single recommendation, with all indications that the Australian system is still being considered as a template.
It is time to rally as an organisation and as a group to state that we will not accept the re-introduction of college fees. Over the next few weeks, USI and local Student Unions will have to ensure our message reaches as many people as possible.
Education is the key to success. Our press maintains a slow and sustained push towards college fees by indicating that the fees are inevitable. I reject this wholeheartedly. USI has a seat on the new national strategy group for the sector and any decision brought about fees would completely undermine the group.
To finish - here are some interesting numbers and quotes about fees and fee related issues from around the globe:
Ireland, which as of 1996 no longer charges tuition fees, requires non-EU students to pay up to EUR 36,000 p.a., the highest in Europe.
In Australia, the average student finishes university with a $12,000 debt, which takes about a decade to repay, however the wealthy students who can afford to pay off the price of the cost of their course prior to starting it get a 20% reduction on the price.
In the UK, more than 59,000 students are in arrears in repaying their student loans, with bad debts standing at £162.5 million. Another 58,000 are behind with their repayments and are in danger of being considered a credit risk if they slip any further into arrears. 75% of students who default on their loans have dropped out of college and not completed their degree. More than half (53%) of students from families who work in manual jobs or are on benefits chose their university because it was close to home, as the costs associated with third level are too high.
In the US, numbers taking courses in sciences and engineering have nosedived due to the associated higher cost of these courses, leaving Richard W. Lariviere, provost and executive vice chancellor for the University of Kansas to state “We are seeing at this point purely anecdotal evidence. The price sensitivity of poor students is causing them to forgo majoring, for example, in business or engineering, and rather sticking with something like history.”
48. Placing of University of Copenhagen on 2008 THE-QS Worlds Top Universities list. €0. Price for Danish to attend the University. Ranked ahead of renowned and fee paying institutes like the University of Aukland, London School of Economics, Darthmouth College and the Universities of Washington and California.
55%. The rise in pay for Irish University presidents granted in 2007.
Friday, March 6, 2009
NUIG students Vote
NUIG has voted! The college is the only one in the country which has put the question of the next president of USI to its students via popular vote. I was overjoyed that the college decided to back myself and feel that given the students decided who should get NUIG’s votes makes these votes special.
It was a vote for positively and positive campaigning. It was a vote for a better future of USI. It was a vote for their union. Most importantly they decided who was best to lead the organisation. Over 2,000 students now have had some interaction with USI via this election. This is a wonderful achievement and despite a long day, the interaction with the students was, as usual, fruitful!
Asking the question ‘do you know USI?’ may sometimes be wrong standalone question. Rather, I found, it is more important to see whether the students have had any involvement with any of USI organised events or campaigns. The students may not know who organises them but if they have attended or at least heard of them means USI have a starting position. USI is on campus via campaigns and events, so it is important that the organisation creates a better image for itself so that students make the link. We are mandated to seek advice from media specialists to achieve this and, if I become president, this will be amongst the very first tasks I will achieve. It is important that the other students who didn’t vote yesterday are also asked why they didn’t vote. It is only when we start communicating with all sectors of the student population will we get a unified union. Unity is strength after all!
Strength is needed to fight / stop / halt Minister O’Keefe’s proposal to cabinet. As I have noted, this will take place during the first week of April and I fear it will coincide with the ‘mini budget’ that is also to take place around the same time. USI have asked the Minister for a round table (and I’m sure frank) discussion on fees before then. I have already talked about the graduate tax system - which I think is a farce and will not see any revenue for at least a decade after it is brought in. Student loans, another system I’m sure the department are looking at, has not done any favours to the British exchequer. According to yesterdays Telegraph paper the British system of loans has also failed to recoup many millions of pounds from students from students who now are abroad. We are talking in the region of £130 million pounds. Seems like an awful lot. Seems like even more during a recession.
It is this nonsense that USI and all Student Unions need to bring to the media’s attention.
Over the next few weeks the colleges in the West will be flooding the media with opinion pieces, letters and articles about fees. Our MAFs organisation will be running in two weeks time. We are holding mini style lobbys of TD’s in the Western region.
Tempus Fugit
It was a vote for positively and positive campaigning. It was a vote for a better future of USI. It was a vote for their union. Most importantly they decided who was best to lead the organisation. Over 2,000 students now have had some interaction with USI via this election. This is a wonderful achievement and despite a long day, the interaction with the students was, as usual, fruitful!
Asking the question ‘do you know USI?’ may sometimes be wrong standalone question. Rather, I found, it is more important to see whether the students have had any involvement with any of USI organised events or campaigns. The students may not know who organises them but if they have attended or at least heard of them means USI have a starting position. USI is on campus via campaigns and events, so it is important that the organisation creates a better image for itself so that students make the link. We are mandated to seek advice from media specialists to achieve this and, if I become president, this will be amongst the very first tasks I will achieve. It is important that the other students who didn’t vote yesterday are also asked why they didn’t vote. It is only when we start communicating with all sectors of the student population will we get a unified union. Unity is strength after all!
Strength is needed to fight / stop / halt Minister O’Keefe’s proposal to cabinet. As I have noted, this will take place during the first week of April and I fear it will coincide with the ‘mini budget’ that is also to take place around the same time. USI have asked the Minister for a round table (and I’m sure frank) discussion on fees before then. I have already talked about the graduate tax system - which I think is a farce and will not see any revenue for at least a decade after it is brought in. Student loans, another system I’m sure the department are looking at, has not done any favours to the British exchequer. According to yesterdays Telegraph paper the British system of loans has also failed to recoup many millions of pounds from students from students who now are abroad. We are talking in the region of £130 million pounds. Seems like an awful lot. Seems like even more during a recession.
It is this nonsense that USI and all Student Unions need to bring to the media’s attention.
Over the next few weeks the colleges in the West will be flooding the media with opinion pieces, letters and articles about fees. Our MAFs organisation will be running in two weeks time. We are holding mini style lobbys of TD’s in the Western region.
Tempus Fugit
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Unity is Strength
Unity is strength or so the USI motto goes! Hustings is over in NUIG and with the small turnout remaining to see the USI hustings, this motto came to mind.
Where USI falls down is the lack communication with our members. It is only when USI is united will our government really take our concerns to heart. Why do we never ask the question ‘why was the student who didn’t turn up for a meeting/march/occupation not here’? At the hustings we were asked about non-affiliates. With this question I asked myself ‘what about re-affiliating or re-energising our own members, especially the ones who do not engage with us?’
One in three students in the West will not be able to afford college if fees are brought in. One in three versus unity is strength. Unless the student base is sufficiently energised enough by our union, the apathy which has eroded student involvement threatens to dismantle our union. We must connect with these students, these students must be informed of any issue which may affect them.
In the interests of being fair, I can say that for the first few years of my college experience at NUIG I was ignorant to many of the issues. I had a life outside of the traditional college life and I saw no need to engage in anything on campus. I feel USI must broaden its message into the cities and regions of our members. This can be done by hosting events like the upcoming MAFS (mammies against fees) meetings in the western region or like the grant information evening that I co-ordinated in Galway city in late August. This was a massive success with hundreds of people turning up making myself and the sabbaticals from NUIG and GMIT work very hard for a couple of hours. These are a number of ways to get out and connect with students in a different manner. Our union is big enough to come up with other ways too.
Only when USI gets its important message out to our students will it have unity and it is in this unity that the organisation will find strength. Student marches across the country over the past number of months have been ‘well attended’. We need to ask ourselves why about 2000 students came to the march in Galway City (apart from the rain and all associated misery) or why the National march was not significantly bigger than the Dublin march. USI claims to have hundreds of thousands of members. Re-energising this base would create a stronger student movement and is something USI must address. It is on a parity with our other serious issue - the re-introduction of third level fees.
Perhaps a way forward is USI running a campus wide week long meet and greet session, whereby the officers go in to as many class addresses as possible and give a short statement on USI and why the students should care (I.e. because they pay for it) - hitting the biggest classes in as many colleges with as many USI officers as possible also has the potential for us to say to the media, politicians and other lobby groups ‘USI has consulted with 100,000 members this week’. The possible bang from this statement should not be underestimated.
We can do this - but we must start now. Apathy is eroding our power with students and it is something I feel we must counter. Unity is strength. One in three students. If the one third who are lost because they never engaged, never fought then we have failed as a union.
Where USI falls down is the lack communication with our members. It is only when USI is united will our government really take our concerns to heart. Why do we never ask the question ‘why was the student who didn’t turn up for a meeting/march/occupation not here’? At the hustings we were asked about non-affiliates. With this question I asked myself ‘what about re-affiliating or re-energising our own members, especially the ones who do not engage with us?’
One in three students in the West will not be able to afford college if fees are brought in. One in three versus unity is strength. Unless the student base is sufficiently energised enough by our union, the apathy which has eroded student involvement threatens to dismantle our union. We must connect with these students, these students must be informed of any issue which may affect them.
In the interests of being fair, I can say that for the first few years of my college experience at NUIG I was ignorant to many of the issues. I had a life outside of the traditional college life and I saw no need to engage in anything on campus. I feel USI must broaden its message into the cities and regions of our members. This can be done by hosting events like the upcoming MAFS (mammies against fees) meetings in the western region or like the grant information evening that I co-ordinated in Galway city in late August. This was a massive success with hundreds of people turning up making myself and the sabbaticals from NUIG and GMIT work very hard for a couple of hours. These are a number of ways to get out and connect with students in a different manner. Our union is big enough to come up with other ways too.
Only when USI gets its important message out to our students will it have unity and it is in this unity that the organisation will find strength. Student marches across the country over the past number of months have been ‘well attended’. We need to ask ourselves why about 2000 students came to the march in Galway City (apart from the rain and all associated misery) or why the National march was not significantly bigger than the Dublin march. USI claims to have hundreds of thousands of members. Re-energising this base would create a stronger student movement and is something USI must address. It is on a parity with our other serious issue - the re-introduction of third level fees.
Perhaps a way forward is USI running a campus wide week long meet and greet session, whereby the officers go in to as many class addresses as possible and give a short statement on USI and why the students should care (I.e. because they pay for it) - hitting the biggest classes in as many colleges with as many USI officers as possible also has the potential for us to say to the media, politicians and other lobby groups ‘USI has consulted with 100,000 members this week’. The possible bang from this statement should not be underestimated.
We can do this - but we must start now. Apathy is eroding our power with students and it is something I feel we must counter. Unity is strength. One in three students. If the one third who are lost because they never engaged, never fought then we have failed as a union.
Student Fees still in the melting pot
According to todays Irish indo the department of education are still researching the student fees issue. They have some new research from Australia. According to the article "It is generally believed that the new third level fees structure in Ireland will be sculpted along the lines of the Australian model of 'deferred' loans, which allows students to delay repayment of their loans until they are employed and earning a certain level of income" - so according to the Indo the decision has been made - i better tell the cabinet they are off the hook!
Seriously, this development of an 'Irish model which is being tailored to Irish circumstances' amounts to nothing more than an extra tax, a graduate tax. The Australian model is widely believed to have created more problems for the Aussie government than ever anticipated. Our shower here have recieved a new report which, over the course of 272 pages, requests a whopping 46 new recommendations for a major overhaul of this loans scheme. This is the system we are trying to copy?!! Am I the only one seeing a major problem with this?
Yesterday, the government released poor fiscal figures for the first two months of the year, we are €2bn behind where we were envisaged to be. Enda Kenny on RTE's Morning Ireland stated that the figures he recieved from the Department of Finance this morning, the Government would need to find €5bn in spending cuts and tax increases. The overhaul of the Australian system that appears to be the favoured approach for student fees will cost the Australian Government an estimated $5.7 billion!
For anyone saying that this form of student fees / tax is there to get us out of an economic blackspot is naive and needs to think it through. If this system is brought back - current students are unlikely to be affected (afterall our current free education costs €1500 to access) but rather the incoming second level students. Given that the majority of college courses take 4 years to run and given the poor chances of graduates getting employment strainght after graduating - why aren't people asking - when will we get a return from this system? Its very basis is flawed. Students, as they do in Australia, will leave the country after graduation to find work in other coutries where having a degree does not penalise you.
Batt O'Keefe and his department do not give me any reasoning to believe that anything they will produce will be fair and just, take a look at the savage cuts they have made to the primary level education in this country. The cabinet must defer any decision on fees when it is brought to the cabinet table. Any snap decision by cabinet would end up hurting our 'knowledge based economy'. The government has been well served by the graduates who have graduated under the free fees scheme. It is time for the government to bail out the knowledge bank in this country i.e. us - the young people, who undoubtedly will be left with a high tax regieme for the rest of their working lives due to the incompetence of the government.
Seriously, this development of an 'Irish model which is being tailored to Irish circumstances' amounts to nothing more than an extra tax, a graduate tax. The Australian model is widely believed to have created more problems for the Aussie government than ever anticipated. Our shower here have recieved a new report which, over the course of 272 pages, requests a whopping 46 new recommendations for a major overhaul of this loans scheme. This is the system we are trying to copy?!! Am I the only one seeing a major problem with this?
Yesterday, the government released poor fiscal figures for the first two months of the year, we are €2bn behind where we were envisaged to be. Enda Kenny on RTE's Morning Ireland stated that the figures he recieved from the Department of Finance this morning, the Government would need to find €5bn in spending cuts and tax increases. The overhaul of the Australian system that appears to be the favoured approach for student fees will cost the Australian Government an estimated $5.7 billion!
For anyone saying that this form of student fees / tax is there to get us out of an economic blackspot is naive and needs to think it through. If this system is brought back - current students are unlikely to be affected (afterall our current free education costs €1500 to access) but rather the incoming second level students. Given that the majority of college courses take 4 years to run and given the poor chances of graduates getting employment strainght after graduating - why aren't people asking - when will we get a return from this system? Its very basis is flawed. Students, as they do in Australia, will leave the country after graduation to find work in other coutries where having a degree does not penalise you.
Batt O'Keefe and his department do not give me any reasoning to believe that anything they will produce will be fair and just, take a look at the savage cuts they have made to the primary level education in this country. The cabinet must defer any decision on fees when it is brought to the cabinet table. Any snap decision by cabinet would end up hurting our 'knowledge based economy'. The government has been well served by the graduates who have graduated under the free fees scheme. It is time for the government to bail out the knowledge bank in this country i.e. us - the young people, who undoubtedly will be left with a high tax regieme for the rest of their working lives due to the incompetence of the government.
Starting up the campaign!
How ye!
The campaign has duly started and here is my blog! Basically what i want to do is flesh out the ideas behing my manifesto and give an idea as to how the Union can progress while giving an idea of how i would work the organisation to get results!
Stay tuned!
The campaign has duly started and here is my blog! Basically what i want to do is flesh out the ideas behing my manifesto and give an idea as to how the Union can progress while giving an idea of how i would work the organisation to get results!
Stay tuned!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)