3rd Level Fee's only 2nd level fee paying should pay

D

dodo

Registered User
Messages
1,350
With all the talk that 3rd level fee's might be coming back,I really think that only students whose parent's decided to send them to 2nd level fee paying school's should have to pay 3rd level.
If they had no issue to pay for 2nd level which they could have got for free then they can't really give out about paying for 3rd level.
 
What if the financial circumstances of the parents change?
What if they just repeated the leaving cert in a private school?
What if they went to a private primary school and a public secondary?
If the child stayed in a private school all the way through second level then the parents saved the state money by sending them there, why penalise them for that?
 
From an ecomonic or financial point of view, that is a very silly suggestion.

I am not defending people who send their children to private schools, but the net effect of what you suggest is that a huge amount of them would move their children to public schools so the number of people paying college fees would be very few and it would bring in very little to the exchequer.

I know that there is no way of introducing college fees to be completely fair, but plenty of people on very high incomes choose non-fee paying schools and plenty of people on incomes which are not too high choose to save for school fees because they think it is worth it. The state choosing this method of deciding who pays college fees is blatantly unfair and, as I said before, very silly.
 
dodo said:
With all the talk that 3rd level fee's might be coming back,I really think that only students whose parent's decided to send them to 2nd level fee paying school's should have to pay 3rd level.
If they had no issue to pay for 2nd level which they could have got for free then they can't really give out about paying for 3rd level.
Click to expand...

The big issue is that most people attending 3rd level are over the age of 18. Therefore it is legally not possible to assess them for anything based on the incomes of their parents. This is the reason that fees were abolished in the first place (dont fall for the PR claptrap circulated at the time, they'd no option).
 
In fairness, dodo, some people make huge sacrifices to send their child to private school because the child is struggling, either academically or socially, in the larger classes in ordinary schools or because the only national school near them is not very good.
 
liaconn said:
In fairness, dodo, some people make huge sacrifices to send their child to private school because the child is struggling, either academically or socially, in the larger classes in ordinary schools or because the only national school near them is not very good.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the support services for children with special needs or learning disabilities in public schools is much better than in private schools. This is particularly true at primary level.
 
csirl said:
The big issue is that most people attending 3rd level are over the age of 18. Therefore it is legally not possible to assess them for anything based on the incomes of their parents. This is the reason that fees were abolished in the first place (dont fall for the PR claptrap circulated at the time, they'd no option).
Click to expand...

Yes they can. People under 24 who are living at home have some of their parents income taken into account when they apply for Job Seekers Allowance. There is nothing illegal about taking parents/spouses/partners income into account when means testing Students to see if they can and should pay fees.
 
Sunny said:
Yes they can. People under 24 who are living at home have some of their parents income taken into account when they apply for Job Seekers Allowance. There is nothing illegal about taking parents/spouses/partners income into account when means testing Students to see if they can and should pay fees.
Click to expand...

Social Welfare allowances are based on households as they recognise that the there are many expenses that are shared between all househould members and so cannot be individually fractioned out. Also, and very importantly, all members of a household get the shared benefit of all these expenses. If someone decides to live in a household, they are doing so on the understanding that they will be sharing with others.

Third level fees are not the same thing. They are an individual expense as a university course is undertaken by an individual (not a household) and only the individual, not the whole household, gets the degree at the end. They are not the same as living expenses.

Dont want to go too much into the legal arguments - which are centered on the illegality of determining one adults fees based on the wealth of another legally unconnected adult(s) who is under no legal obligation to pay the fees. But the abolition of third level fees was one of the fall outs from the nursing home charges fiasco whereby the fees paid by the elderly relatives depended on the wealth of their adult children (i.e. legally unconnected adult(s)) with the adult children expected to make a contribution much in the same way as parents were expected to contribute to adult childrens third level fees.

Advice to the Government at the time was that this type of "means testing" is illegal and would have to be abolished asap. If the Government had continued with the means tested fees arrangement, then they would have had the old peoples homes scandal on an even bigger scale costing the taxpayer billions. They had no option.
 
The best solution then is to give student loans which have to be repaid when they graduate and start earning. Its much fairer than taxpayers footing the bill.
 
I know a family that have two children at 3rd level at present and its costing €9,500.00 per child for accomodation,weekly train fare,registeration(@c.€900) and incidentals.Thats 19k a year and now this year the registeration charge is almost doubled and theres a threat of fees on top of that....
Will means test allow for above expense?
 
upport said:
I know a family that have two children at 3rd level at present and its costing €9,500.00 per child for accomodation,weekly train fare,registeration(@c.€900) and incidentals.Thats 19k a year and now this year the registeration charge is almost doubled and theres a threat of fees on top of that....
Will means test allow for above expense?
Click to expand...

I take it that the children (adults?) work during their long holidays to cover some or all of these expenses?
 
Lots of students work part time and help to fund themselves throughout the whole year,not just the academic year.But my point is the introduction of fees would have a far greater effect on the family that has to pay accomodation costs than the family that is located within commuting distance and this cost should be taken into account.
 
upport said:
the introduction of fees would have a far greater effect on the family that has to pay accomodation costs than the family that is located within commuting distance and this cost should be taken into account.
Click to expand...
(a) this would be too difficult to take into account and (b) families not in commuting distance of a college probably have lower accommodation costs themselves so should this also be taken into account? Where does it stop? My mortgage in Dublin is greater than it would be if I lived 100 miles away - my children probably won't have accommodation costs to pay at college but the total family accommodation costs will still be greater than that of a family living 100 miles away. I can't see your idea working in practice.
 
I agree. It would be very difficult to implement. And where do you draw the line? Can kids from Wicklow or Newbridge get a bigger grant than kids from Dublin because, although they could get a bus/train/lift up every day, they'd prefer the craic of living in a flat with a couple of mates?
 
liaconn said:
The best solution then is to give student loans which have to be repaid when they graduate and start earning. Its much fairer than taxpayers footing the bill.
Click to expand...
Why stop at 3rd level? Why not charge fees/loans for 2nd level students too?
 
liaconn said:
The best solution then is to give student loans which have to be repaid when they graduate and start earning. Its much fairer than taxpayers footing the bill.
Click to expand...

I can't think of anything that would encourage a brain drain more.


Why not just fill out the green card application for them while your at it.
 
Purple said:
The IMF running the country, massive pay cuts and massive unemployment?
Click to expand...

With the loan play the first money the exchequer will see will be 6-8 years from now.

I presume things will be sorted out one way or another by then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top