College fees and funding the thorny question

APART from cuts to funding and staffing — and their impacts on the country’s 4,000 primary schools — college fees and funding are the real hot potatoes in education for any potential coalition partners.

Any parties trying to agree a programme for government in the first days of March will have to decide how to fund expansion of third-level education and whether students should pay their share.

In its education policy document, Fianna Fáil merely says it would introduce a deferred payment facility, seeing students repaying some or all the cost of their degrees after reaching a certain income level. Based on plans known to be under closest scrutiny by Department of Education officials under Tánaiste Mary Coughlan’s tenure, this could see up to €25,000 being paid back over 10 years by an arts graduate who enters a teaching career.

However, with all the money going on a Fine Gael-Labour coalition, the question will be how the parties can bridge a wide gap in their approaches.

Fine Gael’s graduate tax proposal first outlined in 2008 would mean degree holders paying increased PRSI contributions over a period of up to 10 years after graduation to meet around one-third of their higher education cost to the state.

While Labour’s manifesto says it opposes the reintroduction of third-level fees, education spokesperson Ruairi Quinn has hinted at room for manoeuvre in this area and again last week declined to rule out some kind of ‘study now, pay later’ option. Ensuring there are no barriers at the point of entry looks to be the key to resolving any conflict there.

Sinn Féin’s education policy clearly states the party is committed to “oppose the reintroduction of third level fees through any guise”.

The Greens who endlessly emphasise their protection of education while in government simply say they do not support penal barriers to college entry and take credit for the student contribution for non-holders of maintenance grants not going up any more than the €500 rise to €2,000 announced in Budget 2011.

Labour speak of reversing this hike at the earliest possible opportunity, but cynical voters could regard such language as political speak, rather than an immediate commitment.

The difficulty for all parties is that €500 million extra a year will soon be needed to keep quality in the third level sector from eroding further if recent rises in student numbers is to continue. While most main parties favour retaining the Croke Park deal and not increasing class sizes in schools, concerns remain high among teaching unions about Fine Gael plans to cut public service numbers, even though there is a promise of no compulsory redundancies.

Differences remain between some parties on the payment of almost €100 million a year in teachers’ salaries at fee-paying schools, which is explicitly opposed by Sinn Féin and the United Left Alliance but supported by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. While Labour has questioned the funding in the past, it is not addressed in its education plan also published yesterday, which promises an extra €88 million annually for priority areas.

Fine Gael’s proposal to end Irish as a compulsory Leaving Certificate subject following consultations and a curriculum review has also proved controversial. While far from a new policy, having been first announced by Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny in 2005, it has attracted criticism from Fianna Fáil and from Labour, whose manifesto says the party would keep the language as one of three mandatory subjects for school leavers. A Sinn Féin spokesperson says it also supports keeping Irish compulsory for the Leaving Certificate, but most mainstream parties look to be agreed on the need to reform approaches to the subject’s place and how it is taught in schools from primary level.

Like most aspects of education of the past decade or more, it will be like trying to squeeze more out of a creaking system that produces increasingly moderate results without being able to significantly increase the inputs.

The real challenge to the next government may be to begin a long-needed re-assessment of the entire education system, what its purpose is and, crucially, how well and by who it should be funded.