EDDIE PUNCH,
Madam, - The report in your edition of January 2nd that changes in the higher education grants system will effectively prevent many farmers' children from qualifying for third-level grants is most disturbing. In effect, a begrudgers' charter is being put in place to provide a smokescreen over the very real deficiencies which are the root cause of inequitable third-level access.
Low farm incomes are a fact. While a small proportion of farmers have incomes above the cut-off point for third-level grants, the recent annual Teagasc national farm survey demonstrates that in 2001, only 21 per cent of all farms had an income in excess of €25,000. And in 2002, farm incomes are down 12 per cent on 2001. This is why agricultural colleges are closing down and why the children of farmers are opting to go to third-level college. Forcing farmers to engage in asset-stripping will not improve their incomes; it will simply mean that they will very shortly become even more eligible.
Low third-level participation among deprived communities is also a fact and, moreover, a deeply rooted social problem. For example, Prof Patrick Clancy of UCD has produced figures showing that third-level participation is lower than 10 per cent in parts of north and west Dublin compared with over 70 per cent in affluent parts of south Dublin. Rural participation rates, even in counties such as Leitrim, which are especially disadvantaged in terms of both location and farm incomes, are remarkably high. Low participation rates have also been observed in London's inner city.
The point is that the rate of participation has far more to do with the way in which we segregate the poor from the better-off in urban areas, than with the fact that farmers' children happen to qualify for third-level grants.
Therefore the solution to the problem is far more complex than simply adjusting the grants system and it doesn't serve any useful purpose to simply discriminate against farmers' children. First, we need better integration of social classes in terms of housing and schooling in urban areas. In rural areas, people of all socio-economic groups live in the same communities and attend the same schools, and this undoubtedly helps participation rates.
Second, we need to put more resources into tackling the culture of non-participation in deprived inner-city areas. This begins at primary and continues at secondary level. Whatever about grants, the fact is that if you don't sit the Leaving Certificate you don't get to third level. There is also a need for higher financial support for students in targeted disadvantaged areas.
Third, the cut-off point for eligibility is far too low and this puts extreme pressure on middle-income parents.
Finally, the support for families in rural areas needs to reflect the cost of remoteness.
Issues such as these need to be tackled in a meaningful and coherent way. Not one extra disadvantaged child will end up in third level by keeping farmers' children out. What is being proposed seems to lack any sense of purpose or desire to achieve real results. It does, however, seem to coincide with a general Government scramble to save money at all costs. - Yours, etc.,
EDDIE PUNCH,
General Secretary,
Irish Cattle and Sheep
Farmers' Association,
Portlaoise,
Co Laois.