Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran. I welcomed the opportunity to hear the previous matter on the Adjournment. Some issues were raised on which Senator O'Malley and I could have interesting discussions in due course.

My topic is the student services charges and the need for the Minister to clarify whether a significant proportion of the €1,500 student services charge is being used to fund aspects of higher education institutions other than student services. As recently as 3 July 2008, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, spoke about the student services charge, paid each year by students in college, that does not come under the heading "tuition fees". He stated the charge was to defray costs of examination, registration and student services. Unfortunately, it is a long way from being a student services charge in that sense. Although the Government states the no-fees system remains in place, the reality is that tuition fees have returned by the back door. Has there been any honest announcement on the matter or any debate before such an announcement was made that there would be roll-back on the free fees scheme? Has there been any conscientious redesignation of the term since it can no longer fairly be called a student service charge if it is being used to effectively return money to the Exchequer and where students are paying moneys that are in fact used in lieu of tuition fees?

The history of the issue is interesting. When free third level education was phased in over two years in the 1990s leaflets at the time made the point that students would not pay any tuition fees, just the charge as it was then of £150 for student services, registration and examinations. I have a copy of such a leaflet from Trinity College.

What happened in 2002 is that a letter issued from the Higher Education Authority, HEA, specifying the increases in the student charge at that time from €396 to €670, which was a massive increase. Apart from the 6% hike in the student services charge it made it clear that the extra hike over and above the 6%, which amounted to €250, was intended "to secure savings to the Exchequer in 2002 and subsequent financial years". In effect, what happened is that the block grant to the colleges in respect of each student was reduced by X amount and the fees that the individual student and his or her parents and family had to pay went up by the same amount. In other words, the Government was removing a section of its funding for third level education and putting it back on to the students to pay.

That bad practice continued in 2008 when the student services charge was increased from €825 to €900. Here again we saw the fite fuaite nature of this where we were told by the HEA that the block grant was to be reduced by three quarters of the amount of the increase of the student services grant. In other words, the student was paying €75 more for student services but €56.25 of that was being cut from the amount the Government was paying to the college in order to education students. Again, in effect, three quarters of the increase was going back to the Exchequer.

A memo from the financial resources manager of Trinity College Dublin to the finance committee of that university earlier this year shows where this sleight of hand has led. I calculated that students were being hit for approximately €12.5 million in total. When adding up the amount being spent on student services I got as far as €10 million. When one factors in some of the headings under which the student services portion was being spent, €1.5 million was being allocated for so-called space costs in regard to the provision of student services and €1.4 million was being spent on registration costs. One got the impression that the university was basically trying to bulk up its expenditure under academic or commercial-type headings so as to give the impression that the student services charge was being spent on student services when in fact it was not. What people understand by student services are counselling services, student health facilities and a career guidance office. The capitation grant goes to fund valuable student union activities and the activities of clubs and societies.

We have dishonesty at the heart of Government. Has there been an announcement that free fees are gone and that part of the tuition fee is now to be paid by students? That is what has been happening since as far back as 2003, despite the fact that as recently as 2008 the Minister for Education and Science was characterising the student services fee as being there to defray the costs of examinations, registration and student services. There was no mention of space costs or the subtraction from the block grant and that being replaced by the addition of ever-increasing charges to the student services fee.

This year we had an addition of €600 to the student services fee bringing it to €1,500 from €900. That is a direct tax on college students. Not one cent of that money is being spent on student services. It is coming off the block grant, which is being paid to universities in respect of each student.

A letter from the president of the student's union of Trinity College, Cónán Ó Broin to Deputy Gogarty, the Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science, with accompanying documentation, outlines that of the €1,500 students are paying they receive at most €537.25 worth of services. Barely more than one third of what they are paying under the so-called heading of a student services charge is being disbursed on student services.

It is time for the Government to level with people and to tell them whether it has reintroduced fees by the back door. If that is the case what does the Green Party, which made so much of having talked down and negotiated out any possible reintroduction of third level fees, make of the fact that the reality is that third level fees have already re-entered by the back door and that the Government has not admitted that fact? What is the Government's position on the issue? Will it level with people and does it propose to mitigate the situation in any way?