Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As a member of the Select Sub-Committee on Finance, I believe it is the wrong way to gather the €9 million. I am fully aware of what the sum is worth and I do not think making education more expensive is a good way to recoup €9 million. Education has elements of public good and private good and there is a clear policy rationale for tax incentives in education, just as there is in research and development. Where there is a public good as well as a private good, there is a rationale for such measures. In normal times, this would not be such a major issue but these are not normal times. Many parents with medium gross incomes may find their children do not qualify for any of the grants.

Due to the high level of private debt, mortgage repayments and all of those things that we discuss on an ongoing basis their net income could be incredibly low. There was an opportunity to offset some of the additional burden, mainly on parents and for students who pay for their education, by not introducing the section. It might be at the margin, and it is only €9 million this year, but the section explicitly makes education more expensive. It was a good opportunity to do something about that and the Minister is going to implement the measure. For what it is worth, I do not believe that in the cost benefit world of where we can find €9 million that this is a sensible place to find it. Making education more expensive at this time is not a good idea. In the context of the huge cuts that the third level system must take it is a particularly bad idea.

Earlier I asked the Minister a question. Did his Department conduct an impact analysis? Obviously there is a marginal behavioural change to any change in price. This measure increases the price of education so inevitably there are parents and students who will now not go to university because of the section. Did his Department analyse how many students will now not go to university because of the increased price of their education due to the section?