Ms Laura Harmon:

I thank members for giving us the opportunity to address them. It is good to be here. I will discuss another key issue in our pre-budget submission, namely, mature students' access to education. While access rates are at just over 15%, they fall short of the Higher Education Authority's 2013 target of 20%. The back-to-education allowance is an important scheme for students wishing to upskill or reskill. It is also an important scheme in terms of social inclusion for those who are economically disadvantaged.

Many of the changes introduced via budgets in the past number of years have affected mature students, including the reduction of the back-to-education allowance from €500 to €300 in one budget, followed by abolition of that allowance in the last budget; changes in the rates for people under 25 years of age and the equalisation of rates for those over 25 years of age - it is estimated that savings this year in respect of the back-to-education scheme will be in the region of 5.1%; the fact that people in receipt of the back-to-education allowance no longer qualify for the grant; and changes to the distance rates, which means people must now reside 45 kilometres rather than 24 kilometres from their place of study in order to qualify for a grant, which in the main affects mature students, many of whom are commuters.

A national survey undertaken by Mature Students Ireland prior to budget 2012, to which more than 2,000 people responded, found that 43% of mature students were in precarious economic circumstances and 94% were okay or just getting by. This issue is affecting not only individuals but also families. Some 44% of respondents to the survey had at least one dependent child, 25% had two or more dependent children and 46% had at least one dependent adult. There is a need, when considering cuts to schemes such as the back to school clothing and footwear allowance, to look at the broader picture. These are issues that are severely affecting families and students.

The USI advocates that there should be no more changes to the rate of the back-to-education allowance. However, we do acknowledge that improvements can be made to the scheme. For example, while in 2005, 63% of people in the back-to-education scheme went on to part- or full-time employment and 9% went on to further education, some 60% are now returning to the live register. This is not necessarily indicative of the scheme not working; rather, it is more the economic situation in which we as a country find ourselves.

We believe there is a need for a more consultative approach. Because the back-to-education scheme is a self-selecting scheme, participants could be directed to courses that might be better suited to them. Also, in terms of the requirement for a person to be progressing to a higher level of education, it should be possible for a case manager to waive that requirement if he or she believes the person would benefit from a course which would help return him or her to employment more quickly. We also propose the introduction of a national skills map, which Mr. O'Connor will speak about later.