Free College Gone?

ballooba

Originally posted by Johnmb
It only occurs in some schools, not all. And they have pretty much said that it is not going to apply to all schools in disadvantaged areas, let alone all schools.

True but hopefully they will increase the amount they spend on this again.

Johnmb

True but hopefully they will increase the amount they spend on this again.

I'd have to disagree. It is the parents responsibility to feed their children. I know of nobody who is not given enough money to feed themselves and their family even if they are long term unemployed, so I'd like to know what makes the people in these areas so special. But then again, I'm not much of a socialist and never will be, so we might as well agree to disagree now and save a discussion that is unlikely to change either of our minds

ballooba

I wouldn't consider myself a socialist either. Even though the views I express here do not represent those of Ballooba.net. Ballooba has nothing to do with student politics.

I just wouldn't like to see kids go hungry. This discussion may be unlikely to change either of our opinions but it may change other people's opinions.

Yes, it should be up to the parents to support their children. The fact remains that some families do not have enough money to spend on food and other essentials. This isn't right in this day and age but that is the situation.

I don't have the statistics at hand to support this but if you add up the cost of sending 3 kids to school and subtract this from the amount of welfare provided to disadvantaged families (children's allowance) you will get a negative figure that will probably be a multiple of the amount of welfare provided.

I would also rather see welfare to these families provided in the form of food (ala school dinners) because food can not be spent on alcohol, drugs etc. as would happen in some of these families

Johnmb

I would also rather see welfare to these families provided in the form of food because food can not be spent on alcohol, drugs etc. as would happen in some of these families

Now that is something I can agree with. If children are going hungry then I personally feel that this is due to bad management of the money that is provided. Admittedly low paid workers or the unemployed don't have much, but they have enough for the essentials, they just have to sacrifice their social lives, which I think is fair. I'm happy to pay taxes to feed and cloth people, but not to pay for them to go down to the pub.

Getting back on topic though, an unemployed family in Crumlin doesn't get any more money than an unemployed family in Finglas, so why do the Finglas family get free food and not the Crumlin family?

There are schools where parents literally struggle to make enough money to keep their kids in school. Clothes, books, transport and meals. These are schools where many parents can't afford to buy food to make breakfast for the kids. There are also schools where uniforms are the only clothes the kids own.

I dunno. I went to a state school, where a large portion of the traveller community went. I never saw them receiving any free food or such. Admittedly, i don't know if they received these free meals and such as part of the money their parents received from welfare. Regardless, I'd love to know where these schools are that the children are starving, or where their uniform is the only clothes they own?

I know theres poor people out there. I know that theres poor kids out there, that go to school. But i do know that there's welfare for such families.

Getting back to the subject of the thread, my opinion on this is, that its a good idea. It makes college a goal worth reaching for, rather than something to do while u waste 4 years of your lives, rather than work.

Now Students might actually care whether they pass or fail their exams, because speaking from personal experience, i know i didn't care.

ballooba

I'm not saying that Ballymun and Finglas are the only schools covered under this. They are just the ones that I know of. Certain City Centre schools are also covered.

True but hopefully they will increase the amount they spend on this again.

Hopefully they will spread this to other schools. I wouldn't like to see it cover only kids whose folks are unemployed in the school because this would lead to slagging, bullying etc. Maybe some other solution could be found for this.

Johnmb

Maybe some other solution could be found for this.

Maybe give the parents some sort of course to help them manage their money better so that they can feed their kids. I don't mean that to sound as bad as it does, I mean it honestly. The amount of people that I know who can't manage their money is amazing. I'm guilty of it at times myself, but I can afford it now. You see it all over the place. If a family is living on the borderline then bad money management is a luxery they can't afford.

Better still, introduce totally free third level education and encourage them to avail of it so that they have a chance of getting a job that pays well and will no longer be relying on state handouts to make ends meet. In this day and age, the government should be trying to make as many people as possible go to college, not giving them reasons to avoid it, otherwise we'll lose out on foreign companies basing here.

ballooba

Originally posted by Johnmb
In this day and age, the government should be trying to make as many people as possible go to college, not giving them reasons to avoid it, otherwise we'll lose out on foreign companies basing here.

I'll state what my point is basically.

This scheme should not dissuade people from going to college. The only thing that should dissuade people from availing of this scheme is their lack in confidence (or lack in confidence in their application) of their abilities to make more money by going to college.

If people want to work/make money and they have confidence in their abilities to do so then they should have the confidence to invest in their futures. They are already investing 3 and upwards years of their lives to go to college so why not re-affirm their committment by investing financially in their futures.

[edit]
Have a look here for the figures on how much families are entitled to.http://families.welfare.ie/publications/sw22.xml#hmcyg

Figures for back to school allowance:
[/edit]http://families.welfare.ie/publications/sw75.xml#all

Johnmb

Okay, answer me this. Why are my taxes being spent to pay for someone to sit at home doing nothing, thus providing absolutely no return, yet my taxes will not be spent to encourage that person to go to college, get a good education thereby attracting more companies to Ireland, and going on to pay taxes along with me which will not only ease the burden on me of financing others, but will help pay for others to go to college as well. As a tax payer I consider dole payments to be wasted money, whereas money spent on education is an investment in the future. Asking people to go into debt in order to have the privilage of paying taxes and buying petrol for ministerial planes is hardly encouraging them to go to college.

ballooba

Unemployment benefit is a huge issue on its own. It is one which i don't think is fully relevant to this thread and one which we could discuss for days. A lot of people (by no means a majority, but a lot) on the dole are unemployable or too lazy to work.

For the uneployable ones, they are probably undeducatable too or you wouldn't wnat to see them in your lecture thaatre.

For the lazy ones. Would you rather pay for them to go be lazy in college or enrol in courses that they don't attend?

For the unemployed who wan't to work. I feel sorry for them. it would be impossible to find a solution that suits everyone, if it was possible then the world would be perfect and everything would be hunky-dory. it is about finding the fairest solution possible.

If these people had the opportunity to borrow money off the government when they finished their second level education then they could have gone to third level.

The proposed system is not all that different from the current one except that instead of paying a contribution to everyones education, you are paying proportionally to the level of education you personally receive.

therecklessone

It always intrigues me to hear people argue in favour of the reintroduction of college fees by asking why should they pay for somebody else to go to college, through general taxation. Why not ask why you should pay for a health care system, when you've never been sick for a day in your life? Or why you pay for a fire service, when your house has never caught fire?

Usually the old chestnuts appear, masquerading as reasoned debate. Its either the offspring of Tony O'Reilly or Ben Dunne who have benefitted most from the abolition of fees we are told. Yeah right. Basically folks, taxation is levied to raise funds to provide a range of services and facilities to the citizens of a state. Notice I didn't say taxpayers. So that means that some people who pay no taxes, and never have, receive benefits from the state, which is effectively you, the taxpayer. Not ideal, but that is how it is. God forbid any of you should be unfortunate enough to lose your job and find yourself relying on social welfare to make ends meet...

I'm getting slightly off topic here, so back to college fees. I'm in favour of a student loan system, but with some consideration to be given to people who are subsequently employed in certain areas of public service or private industry. For example, as an incentive to attract, and retain, teaching staff, the possibility of a reduction in a persons student loan, or its complete cancellation, should be considered. Likewise with nursing. Private industry could benefit from this as well, to encourage students to study subjects which are considered important for industry, such as science.

Regardless of this, access to 3rd level education for people from disadvantaged backgrounds will not improve unless the government starts to address the problems affecting our primary and secondary schools. The level of access is dependant on decent education up to 3rd level entry, not money spent to encourage participation at 3rd level. It is doubtful that the current government is serious about dealing with this problem however, as the results can not be seen for at least ten years, and as such would hardly help with the re-election...

sunbeam

Originally posted by therecklessone
Regardless of this, access to 3rd level education for people from disadvantaged backgrounds will not improve unless the government starts to address the problems affecting our primary and secondary schools. The level of access is dependant on decent education up to 3rd level entry, not money spent to encourage participation at 3rd level.

In fairness it is dependent on both. I went to a rural school on the western seaboard where about 95 percent of kids would have been classed as 'disadvantaged'. Quite a number went on to college, but none of us would have had the maintenance grant not been available, paltry as it was. This was the early 90s and part-time work was not quite so easily available as in recent years-and yes, I did work summers and in later years during term.

Interestingly enough from the Irish Times article it seems that students would not be asked to repay the full cost of their education under the proposed loans sytem. The full economic fees which non EU students usually pay are on average three times those theoretically charged to Irish students. For example the full economic fee per year for Medicine in UCD is €20,316, €13,350 for Science and €9,920 for Arts/Comerce/Law. So even if the loans system did go ahead in that form Irish students would still be highly subsidised by the government. (I wouldn't be an advocate of students paying full economic fees-just pointing it out!)

ballooba

Originally posted by therecklessone
It always intrigues me to hear people argue in favour of the reintroduction of college fees by asking why should they pay for somebody else to go to college, through general taxation. Why not ask why you should pay for a health care system, when you've never been sick for a day in your life? Or why you pay for a fire service, when your house has never caught fire?

People do pay for fire services, used to be in the region of £500 for non-fatal fires (they obviously didn't ask you to pay if someone died). People also have to pay for health services through health insurance like BUPA and VHI.

mada999

Looks like my local Sinn Fein TD from Louth supports the student have a read, every1 should be supporting sinn fein they rock!




A chara

I am writing to confirm my support for the USI campaign. Our party's
spokesperon
on Education, Seán Crowe TD, has written to Colm Jordan, the
President of USI,
to state on the record that when students take to the streets they
do so with
the full backing of Sinn Féin and to remind him of our absolute
commitment to
the principle of free education for all.

The more aggressive and high profile protest actions of USI this year
have been
a refreshing and welcome development and I have no doubt it will play a
key role
in advancing the agenda of all who advocate a fair and inclusive
education
system.

The introduction of free fees was not the solution the government
of the day
represented it as. It has done little for many of the young people
attempting to
enter university from some of the poorest parts of this state, while
making it
easier for some. But it was a step in the right direction. It was a
move towards
a fair and open system of education. It cannot be expected to be
the sole
solution to tackling inequality in Irish education.

We need massive increases in state support for students to bring the
grant in
line with social welfare levels and we need purpose built and
state funded
student accommodation to tackle the ongoing student accommodation
crisis. These
are all problems that were identified years ago and about which the
government
has done little.

Students are expected to live on the poverty line while this government
refuses
point blank to consider a fairer taxation system and a more just
redistribution
of wealth. When students take to the streets on the 5th they will do so
with the
full support of Sinn Féin and, I am sure, the support of hundreds of
thousands
of people across the state who support the development of a fair and
inclusive
education system.

Is mise Arthur Morgan

ballooba

Deadly:rolleyes:

therecklessone

Originally posted by ballooba
People do pay for fire services, used to be in the region of £500 for non-fatal fires (they obviously didn't ask you to pay if someone died). People also have to pay for health services through health insurance like BUPA and VHI.

Yes, but the fire service is also funded through taxation, no? So if I never need to call on their services, do I get my money back? Of course not...

As for health services, not everyone has VHI or BUPA, and there is a public health service, bad and all as it is. Should my money (tax paid) be used to pay for a smoker who has lung cancer to receive oncology treatment for instance???

I'm not arguing that taxation should only be spent on those services which I make use of and nothing else, far from it. I'm pointing out how absurd it is to argue against free 3rd level education on the grounds that you, or somebody else, didn't go to college, so "why should I pay fo somebody else's 3rd level education?" What about non-nationals who were educated outside the country, but now work and pay tax in this state...should their taxes subsidise free 2nd level education?

ballooba

recklessone, ferdi, sunbeam:: It is blatantly obvious that the current system is not working.

USI have given up the idea of running around shouting about whats wrong with the system and have started to try and think of a better solution.

What solution do you propose that is fairer than the current situation and also fairer than the proposed scheme? (that is a serious question which i'd like to hear your answers to).

therecklessone

Originally posted by sunbeam
In fairness it is dependent on both. I went to a rural school on the western seaboard where about 95 percent of kids would have been classed as 'disadvantaged'. Quite a number went on to college, but none of us would have had the maintenance grant not been available, paltry as it was. This was the early 90s and part-time work was not quite so easily available as in recent years-and yes, I did work summers and in later years during term.

Point taken. However, what I was getting at was that there is little point in ploughing money into access programmes for the disadvantaged if, as a result of poor primary and secondary education, they lack basic skills such as literacy and numeracy, no? Free fees were never going to address the real problems at the heart of Irish education, and the failure of successive governments, from all side of the Dail, to face up to their responsibilities and develop a primary and scondary education framework that this country can be proud of is the reason why that remains the case today. If the government chooses to reintroduce fees as an attempt to raise revenue to be spent on purely on 3rd level, then they will not be doing anything near enough to increase access levels.

Plough the savings into a school building program, so that kids don't end up going to freezing cold school buildings, unfit for human habitation. Don't waste it on press release friendly schemes that deliver little in the way of increased access for the disadvantaged.

therecklessone

Originally posted by ballooba
recklessone, ferdi, sunbeam:: It is blatantly obvious that the current system is not working.


What solution do you propose that is fairer than the current situation and also fairer than the proposed scheme? (that is a serious question which i'd like to hear your answers to).

Did you bother reading my original post at all? If not, try reading it now...in its entirity.

Typedef

Why should people who have never gone to colllege have to pay for your education?

Because it benefits the Irish economy, to have graduates who will work cheaply and attract foreign investment.

A better educated and better paid workforce, raises the prospects for continuity of high tech and (other) investment in this economy and the more money those people get paid and pay to the State in taxes, exponenciates the State's ability to provide services.

Think of it as a an investment in your future, by providing prosperity to your fellow citizen, you increase the likelyhood of the same in kind.

Quid pro quo Agent Starling.

troll.

ballooba

Apologies recklessone, I made a hurried post this afternoon and didn't read the whole thread.

Originally posted by Typedef
Why should people who have never gone to colllege have to pay for your education?

I'd suggest you take recklessone's advice too. Read the thread. Fully.

Originally posted by Typedef
Think of it as a an investment in your future, by providing prosperity to your fellow citizen, you increase the likelyhood of the same in kind.

Current system is an investment in other people's futures. proposed system is investing in yourself.

Annasopra

who are the groups who oppose fees etc?

http://www.freeeducation.cjb.net/

Plough the savings into a school building program, so that kids don't end up going to freezing cold school buildings, unfit for human habitation. Don't waste it on press release friendly schemes that deliver little in the way of increased access for the disadvantaged.

I don't know which schools you're talking about, considering the majority of schools are in very decent condition. I'm not talking palaces, but there is heating, seating etc. Hell most schools will have a nurse of some sort, and in some cases a teacher that has received psych training.

I know the state of the school system, at least outside of Dublin, cause my mother is a principle of a State run school, and my dad is a vice principal. The simple fact is that compared to the sixties, our schools are wonderful. Gone are the days whereby kids are sitting in freezing cold rooms, and have to pack a lunch because they can't receive anything at the school. Yes, they have to pay for their lunches etc, but its there so they don't have to walk 4 miles.

As things stand our school system is reasonable. The condition of schools is reasonable considering we are not an economic superpower with loads of free cash to spread around. In fact, from listenng to my parents conversations, money should be spent on wages, the hiring of utility staff, and books.

Free college? no way. I agree with sunbeam, I went thru college at abt the same time, and we had to work for it. For the money to drink, the money for education, and the money for living. At the time i went to college, my parents could not afford to put me thru college, so i put myself thru college. Especially since even though i was paying my own way, i could not receive the Grant since my parents worked for the government.

So why give out free college now? I learnt from that era of my life to work hard, since nothing was for free. Admittedly i still pissed my college life away, but it was my money i was wasting, not other peoples.

ballooba

Originally posted by klaz
I don't know which schools you're talking about, considering the majority of schools are in very decent condition. I'm not talking palaces, but there is heating, seating etc. Hell most schools will have a nurse of some sort, and in some cases a teacher that has received psych training.

What frickin Ireland are you living on?

What frickin Ireland are you living on?

Nice constructive argument. Nice of you to post an opinion, and your reasoning.

Are you going to tell me that the schools do not have heating? or the students have to stand while taking a class? Come on, you know you can do it, post your thoughts, at least then i can know what exactly you're objecting to.

Also i'd love to know where these schools are that are in such a bad state? Perhaps you're mixing up Ireland with the Sudan?

ballooba

Apologies, but you surely watch the 6.1 news and read the at least one national newspaper?
[edit]

1. http://www.into.ie/html/publications/press/release_index/13012003JC.htm
2. http://sinnfein.ie/releases/03/pr031202.html
3. http://www.unison.ie/sligo_champion/index.php3?ti=52&issue_id=8450

[/edit]

actually i do occasionally. But i must admit i'm drawing my info from my own experience, and that of my parents comments. Hardly countrywide conditions i know.

However, from the links you've provided only sligo is having the problem whereby the schools are screwed for heating. I know i'm being picky, but Irish schools that i've seen tend to be fairly ok for this sort of thing. And believe me, i hear enough about what goes on, with four teachers in my family.

But, yes, you're correct, the standard is crappier than i thought. My apologies.

ballooba

Just in case anyone else is unaware her is some more examples::

Kerry
Cork
Limerick
Cork

GuanYin

Originally posted by klaz
However, from the links you've provided only sligo is having the problem whereby the schools are screwed for heating.
<snip>
But, yes, you're correct, the standard is crappier than i thought. My apologies.

To be fair the problems with the Irish education system run right from first to third level and are many and varied.

I will say that I went to school in Dublin and we had poor heating, plumbing, facilities and furnishing, we had no on-site medical aide. In the end the school was shut down. These problems are not uncommon at all, especially in older ex-CBS schools.

As for the matter of fees, I do think that fees aren't a bad thing as long as appropriate grants and fees reduction systems are brought in to ensure that EVERYONE has an equal chance of attending college (and if that means lower income families pay less to go to college, which is what I am suggesting, so be it).


At present we have pseudo free education anyway as even after tuition fees the cost of going to college is out of alot of peoples reach. However, the free education has and will again benefit this country, in terms of foreign investors and revenue generated. The system currently proposed by the governement will, I believe, reduce college attendance in this country. It will take a year or two but I can see applications dropping. As it is, I teach in a 3rd level institute on a "high-points" course, and you can see the backgrounds the students come from is biased towards higher income families. Whether you want to accept it or not, the arguement regarding "paying for other peoples education" is seriously flawed from an community infrastructure and national econemy viewpoint. Your taxes are being used to pay for things that don't apply to you at this very moment. Why should those who go to college (and may well be taxed at a higher rate as a result) be paying even more? If were truely free for all, then it would be your CHOICE not to attend, you are paying taxes to ensure that at some stage you could attend if you wished.


Going back to the whole education system, one of the biggest problems economically is the amount of college places that are abandoned. One thing seriously missing from most 2nd level schools is professional career guidance. VEry few undergraduates seem to know much about the nature of their course or their job prospects in it. Its akin to entering a 4 year job contract on the job title alone. I think one way of reducing costs and improving the education system would be to take an approach closer to UCAS, add professional guidance and college application interviews to the mix.

Finally, I'm sorry to say that having been involved in SU's in the past, I think some people have a very short memory on USI. USI was in the very recent past an ineffective and unprofessional rabble. They spent so much time pursuing wild gooses and making basic mistakes (the boter registration issue) that it was inevitable and understandable that many institutes tried to escape. The fact that they seem to have pulled together at a time of crises is commendable, but does not excuse past mistakes and I would say the whole setup there needs to be professionally reviewed before people will trust them again.

Finally, I'm sorry to say that having been involved in SU's in the past, I think some people have a very short memory on USI. USI was in the very recent past an ineffective and unprofessional rabble. They spent so much time pursuing wild gooses and making basic mistakes (the boter registration issue) that it was inevitable and understandable that many institutes tried to escape. The fact that they seem to have pulled together at a time of crises is commendable, but does not excuse past mistakes and I would say the whole setup there needs to be professionally reviewed before people will trust them again.

I have to agree with you on this one. When i was in college, there was a case whereby the SU president did a runner with cash in the region of 5 grand. SU's tend to be downright unrealiable, and dodgy in some cases. There are exceptions out there, of course.