Ms Annie Hoey:

On behalf of USI I thank the Chairman and committee members for inviting us to set out our proposals for grant reform within the grant scheme legislation. As the Chairman said, my name is Annie Hoey and I am the vice president for equality and citizenship. I am joined by my colleague, Mr. Conor Stitt, who is the vice president for the Border, midlands and western region.

This paper has been in formation for the past two years. Reform of SUSI and the grant system is a key issue for USI. It is no secret that there were some teething problems with SUSI in the beginning. However, since then things have vastly improved and USI has a very good and positive working relationship with SUSI. However, there are still many flaws and students continue to fall through the cracks. At last year's annual USI congress the then Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, challenged USI to formulate papers offering solutions to the issues about which we were concerned. We did this with our NERI paper on publicly funded education and we are here today with our paper and proposals for reform of the grant scheme legislation.

Access to higher education is a core component of USI's work. Based on our work on the ground we can say that the present financial support structure is not working optimally. The student maintenance grant has been cut significantly over the past decade at a time when the cost of living has increased and rental accommodation costs have risen by an average 10% nationally over the past 12 months. The proposals in this paper seek to rectify some of the inequalities and problems that exist within the current requirements for the student maintenance grant. What we describe to the committee today, as outlined in our grant reform paper, are issues many members of the committee have come across in their constituency offices. From studying the replies to parliamentary questions and the minutes of previous meetings here we can see that the issues we outline come up repeatedly and are dealt with on a case by case basis. We are proposing a structural reform for many of these areas rather than continuing down the arduous road of solving each issue as it comes up.

The issue of main concern to students and the USI is that of the adjacency rate regulations. To receive the non-adjacent rate applicants must have a home address more than 45 km as the crow flies from their place of study. This distance was extended from 24 km to 45 km in budget 2011. The extension of the adjacency rate has had a profound impact on those not living in the greater Dublin area or the east coast of Ireland where incomes are lower and grant dependency is higher. In rural areas distances as the crow flies rarely equate to a consistent travel experience between locations.

For example, Dungloe in County Donegal falls within the 45 km of Letterkenny as the crow flies but the distance travelled is nearly 80 km. Those who dwell on islands are not automatically allocated the non-adjacent rate. For example the Aran Islands are considered adjacent to Galway city even though it requires a ferry journey.

To tackle these issues we propose: a full reinstatement of the old 24 km rate; changing the 45 km to travel distance, not geographical distance; the entitlement of non-adjacent rate to those living on islands; and the reinstatement of the entitlement of mature students to the non-adjacent rate which was also cut in budget 2011.

On the issue of independence and estrangement, currently, a student must have turned 23 years old on 1 January preceding the start of the course to be considered as an independently supported student. Students must provide evidence of their independence to the satisfaction of the grant authority. The problem lies with the standard of evidence SUSI requires. Students applying as estranged from their parents, must evidence it by documentation such as letters and-or reports from the Garda, social workers, the HSE or a court order. The number of students affected by estrangement is low, but seeking out excessive verifications of this often distressing period in their life can have a profound effect on them and their studies.

At a meeting between with the HEA and USI, SUSI accepted that the standards for approving estrangement are too high. We propose that the Minister for Education and Skills send out clear guidelines to grant authorities which could give more allowances to applicants trying to evidence estrangement.

Proving independence can be an onerous task, particularly for mature students. In the current legislation anyone living in the parental home is assessed on his or her parents' income as a dependent student. This does not take into account a number of issues such as lone parents going through a separation who may move into their parents' home for a short period in order to tide them over during their marital relationship breakdown. Nor does it take into account that some people live at home as carers.

USI recommends that students over the age of 23 who are classed as mature students should be assessed on their personal income and not that of their parents or have their community welfare officer determine independent living.

Postgraduate fees and supports have already been mentioned at the committee today. At a time when we are building a knowledge and skills-based economy that can compete internationally, postgraduate qualifications are becoming the norm in many sectors. Unfortunately the postgraduate maintenance grant was abolished in budget 2012 and the following year postgraduate applications by 15% to 20%. The reduction was 19% in NUIG and approximately 13% in UCD. There are different income limits for those in undergraduate study from those pursuing a postgraduate qualification. USI recommends that these income limits be brought in line with each other and be the same as the undergraduate limit.

Our document outlines further issues regarding social welfare payments and cut-off rates.

The loss of a parent's support through death or marital breakdown can have a significant detrimental impact on a student's ability to continue with studies. Students who suffer the death of a parent must account for all incomes, including a widow's pension during reassessment. USI recommends that extra payments and one-off payments such as a widow's pension should not be included in the reassessment of a student.

In one case in my institution, UCC, a student was asked to provide a coroner's report in order to prove the death of her father. The distress this caused her and her family eventually led to her dropping out of her course. The only evidence a student should ever be required to produce is a death certificate. The grant scheme has no guidelines on marital breakdown. This can be a particularly stressful time for students. We request that the Minister for Education and Skills should issue guidelines to SUSI on how to evidence separation.

On assets as a possible route of determining means-based eligibility, USI has cautioned against proceeding with this without first setting up a feasibility group of relevant stakeholders. Assets should not be assessed if they are the primary source of income for a family.

What I have outlined here is only a summary of what committee members got in the paper. It is quite long so I will not continue for much longer. I wish to thank the Chairperson and other committee members for giving us a chance to talk to them today. We look forward to answering any questions they may have.