Few would argue with the premise that strategically planned, high-quality third-level education has the ability to transform Irish society within a short period and provide the opportunities, the capabilities and confidence that young people need to reach their full potential. However, access to higher education in Ireland remains unfair and unequal.
Applications for the renewal of Student Universal Support Ireland (Susi) grants for the next academic year have commenced, while fresh applications will open on April 28th.
However, the need for a student grant scheme that is actually fit for purpose remains unmet. The financial support that students receive from Susi remains grossly inadequate and there is still no financial assistance for squeezed middle-income households.
The Country Analysis of the European Commission’s Education and Training Monitor 2019 found that, despite increased public spending on education, investment in higher education in Ireland has not kept up with rising student numbers and that the number of low-skilled adults in the population remains sizeable. Unfortunately, the children of a significant proportion of these same low-skilled adults are being denied Susi grants due to marginal increases in household incomes.
One of the major problems with the eligibility criteria for Susi grants is that the income threshold is based on gross income
As someone who originally studied in a country where tuition is free when you attend public university and the majority of the student population is offered on-campus accommodation for a token fee, it is inconceivable for me that Ireland’s third-level students are not similarly protected from the vagaries of commercial rents; and that successive governments have been so sluggish in remedying this situation.
Eligibility criteria
It is not that the Government does not know what to do. The Cassells Report published in 2016 provided workable recommendations for achieving appropriate funding for third-level education in a sustainable way but it is still on the shelf, gathering dust.
One of the major problems with the eligibility criteria for Susi grants is that the income threshold is based on gross income. This means that large numbers of households are deemed ineligible for grants due to income they never actually received.
Is it too much for the Government to consider disposable income (gross income net of tax and social insurance) as the basis for grant eligibility? Why cut households off because of income they never even received?
The €1,000 reckonable income increase for the 2022 fiscal year is noted, but it is too small an increase and it is inconsequential for the squeezed middle-income households that now need urgent relief.
A family of two adults with up to three dependent children and a household income above €55,240 do not qualify for Susi grants at all. These are not rich people by any standard, especially given the myriad of household expenses they have to deal with and the rising cost of living.
It gets more interesting when one notes that, coincidentally, middle-income households of two adults with one to three children paid the most nominal, per capita and per adult income tax and social insurance compared to all other categories. They are net contributors to the exchequer and no doubt deserve more favourable policy attention.
Public goods
We live in a country that ranks 10th highest in the world on Numbeo’s index in terms of household cost of living and rent. If it is recognised that education is a public good, why are the squeezed-middle households excluded from free-tuition, third-level education?
Based on the CSO household income scale, the squeezed middle occupies the 50th-60th percentile, and their disposable incomes and household expenditures are almost at par. This means they were “living on the edge” as far back as five years ago and I personally know a few who have been tipped over by the increases in the cost of living since then.
Economically disadvantaged groups need to be given fair support to upskill and access employment with a decent living wage
The Government should also consider the wider implications of this negative trend in terms of health and quality of life.
Why does the Government do so little to alleviate suffering that concerns its own citizens on a personal level, most especially issues that involve students, the economically disadvantaged and the squeezed middle-income worker?
Our students are the nation’s future leaders. To reach their full potential, they require fair and equitable access to high-quality education and vocations.
In particular, economically disadvantaged groups need to be given fair support to upskill and access employment with a decent living wage.
Middle-income households are being used as the exchequer’s beasts of burden, a huge source of revenue but they are getting very little back by way of reasonable supports. We need targeted policy attention to address these policy shortcomings urgently.
Ade Oluborode is a barrister