Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 106: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Education and Skills if she has altered the 2010 rules governing the higher education grants scheme which resulted in mature students becoming unable to re-enter college until a three year period has elapsed since their study; the date and location at which this decision was announced to the public; if she will consider reversing this change in view of the way it has been introduced and the level of disappointment by mature students who have only now discovered that they cannot continue their studies; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [33488/10]

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The student support schemes for 2010 were published in May of this year. Changes to the 2010 schemes were announced in advance by the former Minister when he published last year's grant schemes in July 2009. The Minister gave advance notice of certain planned 2010 changes at that time by way of a press release on 29 July 2009 in order that students and their families would be aware of them in good time.

The specific issue to which the Deputy refers relates to how students re-entering higher education after a break in studies are classified for the purposes of assessing them for a student grant. This issue is governed by the break in studies clause in the student grant schemes. The break in studies clause generally applies to students who take a year or more out after completing an undergraduate course and return subsequently to take up further third level studies. This clause provides for the reclassification of such students allowing them to be means tested on their own income and that of their spouse, where appropriate, rather than being means tested on the basis of their parents' income.

My Department increased the duration of the studies break requirement in the 2010 schemes from one year to three years. This was done because in some cases students who would not otherwise have qualified for a grant on the basis of parental income were availing of a gap year which had the effect of creating a break in studies. The break in studies clause, as it stood, allowed these students to be re-classified as independent mature students and to qualify for grants and fees based on their own, rather than their parents' income. This was not the intention of the provision. The intention of the clause was to focus resources on genuine second chance and mature students. The increase to three years will ensure that the emphasis is, as intended, on facilitating such students to return to education.

This change will not, as suggested by the Deputy, prevent continuing students from re-entering college for three years. On the contrary, students who are already qualified for a grant based on a means test of their parents' income in previous years are likely

to continue to qualify for a grant on the same basis, unless a favourable change of circumstances arose in the intervening period. In that regard that the income thresholds to qualify for student grants and payment of the student services charge and-or fees remain unchanged for this year, despite the downward trend in average earnings.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not sure if the Minister of State is making much sense of my query. I would like him to read his reply again and explain it to me.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In Irish.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not think the Minister of State should read the entire reply again.

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is easily explained.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My understanding of Government policy, which Deputy Haughey's previous answer would seem to indicate, is that we should give people as much chance as possible to go back to education and re-skill where necessary. In 2009, the scheme allowed that, all other things being equal, re-entry meant entering as a mature student following a break of at least one year. Under the 2010 rules, re-entry must follow a break of at least three years. This is forcing someone to stay out of the education system for an extra two years, all other things being equal. What is the logic behind it? Is it a cost saving measure? Was there a loophole somewhere that was enabling people who did not otherwise qualify to get in?

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I think I explained things reasonably well in my reply.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State read it out very clearly but he did not explain it.

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will try to explain it to the Deputy, particularly to a Deputy from the Labour Party. The ultimate purpose of this change is to prioritise resources to those who are in genuine need. Anecdotal evidence was brought to the attention of the Department that the scheme was being abused in certain cases. People deliberately took a gap period in their education in order to qualify for the grant. If these people had continued their education consecutively, they would not have qualified for the grant because they would have been assessed on their parents' incomes. In some cases, people deliberately frustrated the intentions of the scheme solely in order to qualify for a grant. Arising out of my response, I hope the Deputy will appreciate that the change was signalled well in advance. Its purpose was to prioritise resources and to focus them on genuine second chance and mature students.