Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the opportunity to raise the issue of what I consider to be a glaring flaw in our student grant system, namely, the omission of illness benefit from the list of qualifying payments for the special rate student grant. As the Minister for Education and Skills is aware, this issue came to my attention through the case of Robert Kells who is currently enrolled in second year in IT Carlow. He was refused the special rate grant.

I will quickly remind the Minister of State of the details of Robert's case and the difficulties he faces. The family income for 2012 was well under the qualifying limit. SUSI rejected the application on the grounds that the reckonable income of Michael Kells, Robert's father, did not include an eligible social welfare payment as of 31 December 2012. He was on a qualifying payment and was on a community employment scheme up until November 2012 when due to an accident, he had to go on illness benefit. Illness benefit is not on the qualifying list of payments as its currently stands. Every other payment is on the list but not illness benefit. When this was initially queried, I was told that illness benefit was a short-term payment and hence could not be included on this list. Michael Kells has been on this payment since 2012. The most recent reply to me from the Department of Education and Skills again insisted that illness benefit was a short-term payment but it seems particularly perverse when one paragraph later in that particular piece of correspondence, it was confirmed to me in the same letter that Mr. Kells had been on the payment for a period of 18 months. I think it fair to say that 18 months is not short-term in anyone's language.

That particular letter then suggested that Mr. Kells should apply for disability allowance or invalidity pension but it is not good enough to say that this is a matter for the Department of Social Protection, as appears to be the view of the Department of Education and Skills. Mr. Kells cannot apply for disability allowance until his PRSI credits run out. He is effectively being penalised for having gone to work, which is indefensible. If he had never worked a day in his life, he would be fine and his son would qualify without any question for the further education grant. Equally, as I am sure the Minister is aware, it has become increasingly difficult to secure an invalidity pension as the criteria are now quite rigidly and strictly enforced. That, of course, should be the case. To obtain a pension, Mr. Kells would have to seek a medical diagnosis which rules him out of the workforce for the rest of his working life. He does not want and should not be encouraged to do this. Nobody should be written off in that way.

There is a blatant flaw in the system. The Kells family are the victims of a very clear lacuna which must be corrected. I am sure that the Department has prepared the Minister of State with quite a detailed explanation of the rules and regulations as they apply in this particular instance. I already know what the rules are. We already know what the rules are. The problem is that the rules are inherently flawed. Nobody would suggest that two weeks on illness benefit should entitle anybody to a full rate third-level grant. That is not what I am saying but to dismiss the patently obvious fact that illness benefit is sometimes a much longer-term payment than anyone would countenance when they originally acquire an illness or problem is quite frankly ludicrous and an example of officiousness and red tape at its worst. A grave injustice has been done to the Kells family. If the Department does not act, this injustice will undoubtedly be repeated for other families. I will be very disappointed if the Minister of State and his Department cannot find a way to remedy this for the Kells family and the small number of families across the country who may be affected as a result of this flaw.

Ciarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Nash for raising this important matter. As the Deputy will be aware, the Minister for Education and Skills provided him with a detailed response on 19 February 2014 in respect of the application by the student referred to by the Deputy for support under the student grant scheme. I understand that the Deputy has submitted more recent correspondence and the Minister will respond to this.

The student in question qualified for the standard rate of maintenance grant plus a grant of €2,500 for the student contribution charge. The special rate of grant is a targeted access measure to provide specific interventions for the most disadvantaged students recognising their ongoing long-term dependence on welfare support. Under the student grant scheme, the qualifying criteria for the special rate of grant must include one of the listed eligible long-term payments by the Department of Social Protection or a long-term payment for a designated programme.

Illness benefit is considered to be a short-term social welfare payment and, therefore, it is not included as an eligible payment for the purposes of the special rate of maintenance grant. Where a person is incapacitated on a long-term basis, and I agree wholeheartedly with the Deputy when he describes 18 months as long-term because it certainly is, it is a matter for the Department of Social Protection to adjudicate on whether the person should be moved to a long-term payment. Eligibility for the special rate can be reviewed during the academic year if there is a permanent change in circumstances such as when an individual is awarded one of the eligible long-term payments for the special rate by the Department of Social Protection. Should the Department of Social Protection make a backdated award, this date is taken into account for the review. While a student may not be eligible for the special rate of maintenance grant in his or her first year of study, he or she may apply for the special rate in subsequent years of their study if that change in circumstances occurs.

Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am aware of the all of the information provided by the Minister of State on the floor of the House this afternoon. While it addresses some issues and puts on record the situation as it applies in respect of illness benefit and its consideration in terms of the qualification criteria for the special rate grant, it is completely unsatisfactory. I am always reluctant to mention individual cases on the floor of this House but I do so with the express permission of the family because it illustrates a wider problem in terms of the operation of the SUSI system and the lack of discretion that is often applied by it. I know the Minister and Minister of State are fair men.

They have both displayed commitments to fairness during their political life. I am sure that, cutting through the density of the bureaucratic system and the administrative impediments, the Minister of State can see how the system as it is currently constituted lets down families such as the Kells family in this case, but if it is beyond the system's capacity to adapt and take into account the vagaries of this case then I would argue, hopefully convincingly, that SUSI should instead apply some common sense and imagination in dealing with difficult cases like this. I would imagine there are few other cases that bear the hallmarks of this case and, therefore, SUSI really should be encouraged to ensure that some discretion or flexibility is applied.

My warning is that for some young students, if changes are not made to the system for situations such as this that are not necessarily black and white, it could well mean the difference between staying in third level education and dropping out. I want to ensure that students have the kinds of opportunities to which we all should have access. That is my fundamental concern. I make a plea to the Minister to have this case reviewed and appeal to the better nature of the Minister of State and those of officials in the Department of Education and Skills and SUSI to review this and to make provision for Robert Kells to ensure he is permitted to finish his education. That is his ambition and we should be supporting him in it.

Ciarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The report of the action group on access to third level education, which forensically analysed all of the routes to third level education and made detailed recommendations concerning the introduction of special rates of maintenance grant for disadvantaged students, concluded that the target group of those most in need was defined in terms of dependants of persons receiving long-term welfare payments. At present, illness benefit is considered to be a short-term social welfare payment and, as the Deputy mentioned, persons can be on that payment for a period as short as a couple of weeks. Therefore, it is not included as an eligible payment for the purpose of the special rate of maintenance grant.

It is not an issue of SUSI somehow being inflexible in how it applies the conditions of the scheme in the case of this particular family. It is an issue of how exactly the Department of Social Protection deals with those who find themselves moving long beyond that short-term illness benefit period, as the Deputy described, for up to 18 months, and how an individual can easily transition from illness benefit to a more long-term payment which automatically entitles him or her to this extra support from SUSI and the Department of Education and Skills. That is where the issue lies and perhaps the Deputy might engage with the Department of Social Protection to see how that conundrum can be resolved. As it stands, because the illness benefit is considered by this Department to be a short-term payment and not eligible for that special support, it is not proposed to depart from the existing arrangements for the determination of eligibility for the special rate of maintenance grant.