Robbie Gallagher (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Ms Fanning, Ms Fitzpatrick and Mr. Connolly and thank them for their presentation. I am conscious that all the guns seem to be pointed in Mr. Connolly's direction this morning and the two ladies are getting an easy ride. To be fair, it is important to acknowledge that for all its faults, a lot of families would not have experienced third level education without SUSI.

As other speakers have already alluded to, there are serious problems with it.

What seems to be in vogue is a policy of the door being either shut or open. It is the inflexibility of SUSI that frustrates people and numerous examples of that have been given here this morning. I appreciate that Mr. Connolly is just doing his job and implementing the guidelines and criteria given to him. It is important that we acknowledge that as well. What I would like to see, based on the contributions of witnesses and members here today, is for a review of the refusals to be done on an annual basis, in order to learn what policies should be changed or tweaks made so that more people would avail of the grant. Our key goal here is for there to be no barrier to any child wanting to go on to further education, and that is the backdrop to why we are all here today.

For a certain cohort of people there is no help or financial assistance given to them whatsoever for sending their children to college. If one is living in rural Ireland, or does not live close to the cities of Dublin, Cork, or Galway, then the cost of accommodation is a major issue, and it is increasing year on year. It is putting some families under severe financial pressure, so much so that they are having to make do with very little in order for their children to go to college. For that cohort of people whose gross income may be over the threshold, there is absolutely no help available, and that is something that needs to be looked at. The lack of flexibility in the current system is hurting those people more than most. We can all give numerous examples of different people who have come to our constituency offices. A husband and wife came into mine who had 11 children. Their gross income was over the limit, but one can only imagine the costs of having 11 children and having to rear 11 children in a household. Yet no consideration is given for that within the current system. I know another family whose income is over the limit, but what generates their income is loans they have taken out over the years, and the interest on those loans which they are struggling to pay back. Those payments might include mortgage payments on family dwellings, or for people coming from farming backgrounds, they might relate to a farm they have bought for which they are making repayments to the bank. In most cases those repayments are suffocating those people, yet that is not taken into consideration either when it comes to the grant application.

It is important that there are as few barriers as possible put in place for any child wishing to go to college, and some families are suffering seriously in order to make sure that their child goes to college. As I said earlier, I would like to see more flexibility in the system. A number of speakers referred to how the social welfare system adjudicates over an applicant and how there is flexibility given to individual circumstances. There is zero flexibility, from what I can see, within SUSI. It is either lights off or lights on, and there is no halfway house. I would like to see more flexibility there. I would also like to see a review done on an annual basis of those who are refused admission to college, and for us to learn from that review in order to tweak the system to try to cater to as many people who wish to access third level education as possible.