Introduction of University Fees

somethingwitty

I have heard over the past 2 days from a few people that we will have to start paying for our 3rd level education again...
I have looked it up on Google and I cant really find much information about it. I was wondering if anybody here has heard anything and what are your opinions on the issue.

It worries me because I have decided to take a gap year, and I am worried that the fees will have been reintroduced by next year. My parents are certainly not in a financial position to send my brother and I to University the same year, if these fees are brought in.
Personally I believe that education should be free for everyone, and if there's one luxury allowed to society, that should be it.
If it is reintroduced, many families will be hit hard; bye bye college for some people throughout the country. People can argue this next comment as much as they want, but anyone with common sense can predict that fees will segregate, and will cause inequality.

Many would not be comfortable taking out a student loan, why would anyone want to be in debt before even getting a job.
Is this really a result of the 'recession', or is it just an excuse? Is this really a reality we are facing?...

IrishKnight

Not matter how hard times get tution fees will not come back. What people might be telling you is that University Fees are going up. That is the registration fee which is about €800/900 or so.

Cokehead Mother

It probably won't happen anytime soon, and when/if it does, it'll probably be similiar to the UK system, where people only pay something like £3000 a year and that's almost entirely covered by a student loan which doesn't need to be repaid until you reach a certain income level.

I really wouldn't worry about it.

somethingwitty

Only £3000? That is a lot for some people.
And like I said a lot of people wouldnt be comfortable taking out student loans. I know you dont have to pay back until you reach a certain level of income but maybe I dont just wanna go out and have to work anytime soon after I get my degree, same with a lot of people.
Apparently the new costs announced was on the radio the other day... Ireland is one of the most inexpensive countries in which to attend University. Its only a matter of time before the cost goes up.

PrivateEye

Its a terrible idea. My mam grew up on the same road as that Joe Duffy bloke, and apparently when he got accepted into college there was a huge street party to celebrate the first local lad going on to third level education :rolleyes:

The education system is one thing we generally have got right in this country. It's open to people of all classes, which is very important. Fair enough there are some fees, but there are grants out there and compared to other states- education here is far more accesible.

Think it was Yeats who said in the senate we should be able to give the children of the poor as good an education as the children of the rich. That idea has been there since the foundation of the state, it's very important we live up to it. I hate the idea of everyone who goes to college being lumped into some 'upper middle class' social grouping, you can actually get to college in this country regardless of your background- that's something the country can be proud of.

If College became 'exclusive' to the well off, in the long term the counry would suffer with regards employment to give just one example. Bad, bad, bad idea. I worry about public services in the European economy in the long-term, not least when we're a bit short on the yoyos, but I'm sure our education system is safe- because we stand by it so firmly and now the benefits of it.

And eh...bring on college :pac:

Mark200

I heard you can get the registration fee back too from taxes or something?

fh041205

Cokehead Mother wrote: »

It probably won't happen anytime soon, and when/if it does, it'll probably be similiar to the UK system, where people only pay something like £3000 a year and that's almost entirely covered by a student loan which doesn't need to be repaid until you reach a certain income level.

I really wouldn't worry about it.

I went to my bank (Ulster Bank) the other day to ask about student loans and they said the maximum they can loan me over the 4 year course is 4000!!! Thats only 1000 a year. And i'd still have to pay the interest off every month. There is no way you could afford fees with that kind of loan.

KnifeWRENCH

Mark200 wrote: »

I heard you can get the registration fee back too from taxes or something?

If you apply to your Local Authority (i.e. County or City Council) you might get a Higher Education Grant. If you get that, then you can claim back your registration fee.

I doubt fees will be brought back, but if they are it should be on a means-tested basis, whereby people from a working class background won't have to pay as much as one from an upper class background.

karlr42

I'm totally against bringing back fees, many people now in college would not be there if not for the Free Fees scheme, myself included. But it is quite possible that we may see a return of fees- our course director here in college is of the opinion they are almost inevitable.

fh041205

karlr42 wrote: »

I'm totally against bringing back fees, many people now in college would not be there if not for the Free Fees scheme, myself included. But it is quite possible that we may see a return of fees- our course director here in college is of the opinion they are almost inevitable.

I'm in the same situation as you. However I don't see why it would be inevitable. The college still get paid by the government so what difference does it make to them where the tuition fees are coming from. Seems a bit unnecessary to me.

philologos

fh041205 wrote: »

I went to my bank (Ulster Bank) the other day to ask about student loans and they said the maximum they can loan me over the 4 year course is 4000!!! Thats only 1000 a year. And i'd still have to pay the interest off every month. There is no way you could afford fees with that kind of loan.

Yes at present they can only offer you 4,000 as there is no such thing as university fees at the same level as in Britain. If there was the banks would arrange to be able to loan more if they could ensure repayments and had security of some form.

fh041205

Jakkass wrote: »

If there was the banks would arrange to be able to loan more if they could ensure repayments and had security of some form.

Surely thats the definition of a bank loan no??? Personally I thought it was pretty poor because no student could survive on that much a year unless they worked constantly and lived next door to the college.

somethingwitty

It was in the Irish INdependant this morning. Apparently it really only is a matter of time, and possible we will have to pay a bit extra on entering university this year....

IrishKnight

You'll always have to "pay a bit extra" the next year...

KeyLimePie

don't be stupid, i doubt fees are gonna come in within the next year and even then just defer ur palce, problem sorted

PurpleFistMixer

Making people pay for education is ridiculous. I'm not an economist but I'm pretty sure an educated population is a good thing. If they bring back university fees I'm sailing into the Atlantic to start my own country.

karlr42

fh041205 wrote: »

The college still get paid by the government so what difference does it make to them where the tuition fees are coming from.

AFAIK, the colleges claim they're under financial pressure and that if they go back to fees, they can set them to suit themselves. Basically it's because they can make more money from fees than they can from the government, IMHO.

smemon

I think it's just talk with this recession and 3% cutbacks and the rest of it...

Colleges claim they're skinned as it is without having to make cut backs... it's probably an idea that was floated around but i can't see it happening - it would do long term damage to the country if it did and only idiots would back that suggestion.

I'd imagine initial fees will go up from ~€800 to €1k, grant allowances will be cut back or remain static and that'll be that. It's the sensible solution.

A fees system creates social divide and instant hatred and jealousy. It doesn't/won't work in Ireland - everyone has to be even or be seen to be even - it's embedded in our culture.

smemon

smemon wrote: »

I think it's just talk with this recession and 3% cutbacks and the rest of it...

I'm fairly sure that this has been talked about coming back in every year since fees were 'abolished'.

And if fees were to come back in it would be a couple of thousand a year. It costs the exchequer a huge amount to put a person through college, and I'd imagine if fees were reintroduced it would be full fees or not at all (excluding reg fee). Plus €800 - €1000 is what the Registration Fee costs at the moment!

genericgoon

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

Making people pay for education is ridiculous. I'm not an economist but I'm pretty sure an educated population is a good thing. If they bring back university fees I'm sailing into the Atlantic to start my own country.

The Universiteis say that the quality of education is lowered by a lack of funds and point to our mediocre positioning in terms of third level excellence. In search of new funds, Universities are now putting much more money into R&D programmes, some sponsored by private companies, which are more profitable to the University. Of course this pulls away the best individuals away from the teaching areas of University which can only be bad for students.

PurpleFistMixer

But at least this, even if it is slightly diminished, level of education is open to everyone, regardless of the size of their wallet. I certainly think the universities should be properly funded... by the government.

Cokehead Mother

So put a system in place that allows the student to pay the fees...

PurpleFistMixer

... I thought we were already discussing students paying university fees?

Cokehead Mother

"open to everyone regardless of the size of their wallet"

Most 17/18 year olds have about the same earning power, so if paying fees wasn't dependant on parents' income, university would be open to everyone regardless of the size of their wallets upon entry.

I don't think smemon's point about social divide needs to be an issue with the introduction of fees.

Time Magazine

Can anyone give me a good reason why somebody whose parents are on €200,000 a year should have his fees paid by government revenue, for which there are far greater uses?

Overheal

even IF university fees were approved tomorrow, theres no way that it will have an impact for at least another year: hopefully a few.

somethingwitty

Cokehead Mother wrote: »

Most 17/18 year olds have about the same earning power, so if paying fees wasn't dependant on parents' income, university would be open to everyone regardless of the size of their wallets upon entry.

Well, actually, they really dont. Jobs for students are few and far between. Ive been looking for a month and still nothing. People do need help from their parents.

PurpleFistMixer

What is the purpose of basing an argument on an "if" statement? Paying fees is dependent on parents' spending powers. Teenagers are not isolated financial units, provided they have any family to live with/off, which is a fair generalisation to make. Anyway... who has more spending power... someone whose parents are unemployed and all of their self-earned cash goes to paying for rent/food, or someone whose parents are on six-figure salaries and whose only personal expense is new clothes/makeup/discretionary items?

Antithetic: because tax taken from that 200,000 euro income has gone towards paying for fees, just as it has in part gone towards paying for someone else's fees. We're all in this together. If it makes you feel any better, if you've got that kind of income you can probably send your kids to private colleges quite easily, and then you get to pay fees.

SerialComplaint

Antithetic wrote: »

Can anyone give me a good reason why somebody whose parents are on 200,000 a year should have his fees paid by government revenue, for which there are far greater uses?

Because the parent has already paid the State for this service (and all other public services) via taxation .

Time Magazine

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Because the parent has already paid the State for this service (and all other public services) via taxation .

I said a good reason, not one that fails to distinguish the differences between single-payer systems from user-payer systems.

regob

fh041205 wrote: »

I went to my bank (Ulster Bank) the other day to ask about student loans and they said the maximum they can loan me over the 4 year course is 4000!!! Thats only 1000 a year. And i'd still have to pay the interest off every month. There is no way you could afford fees with that kind of loan.

a bank isnt the place where ya wo0uld get your fee loan there is companies who just specialise in this, i.e. they loan ya the fee amount every year, they pay it straight to the uni, your hands wouldnt touch the money.

SerialComplaint

Antithetic wrote: »

I said a good reason, not one that fails to distinguish the differences between single-payer systems from user-payer systems.

Perhaps you'd like to come out from behind the cloak of jargon and explain in simple terms why you don't believe that someone earning €200k has already paid enough tax to cover college fees?

philologos

If they were going to introduce university fees before September they would have definitely made an official announcement by now.

cocoa

Antithetic wrote: »

Can anyone give me a good reason why somebody whose parents are on €200,000 a year should have his fees paid by government revenue, for which there are far greater uses?

I think the assumption that parents should pay for university fees is interesting, despite the fact that the person in question is more than likely over 18 and in every other aspect of life recognized as an adult, any and all attempts to get a grant or extra funding will be based off their parents earnings, whether the parents feel inclined to share these earnings or not.

Simply put, he should have his fees paid by government revenue because so does everyone else and it would be unfair to single him out simply because of where he came from.

And to be honest I don't like the sound of this 'far greater uses', sounds an awful lot like you're simply looking down on students and feel your money is being wasted, awfully elitist for someone talking about equality in fees...

JC 2K3

If colleges feel they are underfunded, then the solution is simple: charge fees to those who fail to achieve high enough grades in college.

There are far too many wasters in college who do little or no work and scrape though each year with a low pass grade.

Newaglish

Antithetic is correct - surely a household with an income of €100,000 or €200,000 or €50,000,000 can afford to pay fees.

While you are all correct in saying the person will have already paid for their education in the form of other taxes, a progressive tax system would require a higher level of tax to be levied on those with a greater income.

In essence, reintroduction of fees would be in the following format:

If your family can afford to pay fees, they do
If your family can't afford to pay fees, they get a means-tested grant to cover it

Nobody would suggest charging a low income family €10,000 in fees per annum, it wouldn't work.

The_Conductor

The abolition of fees 11 years ago was an attempt to bring more equality into universities- as tuition fees were seen as a stumbling block for the lesser advantaged (those with a household income of below the average industrial wage). Prior to the abolition of tuition fees- fees varied considerably from college to college, and from faculty to faculty- those courses which involved a large degree of laboratory or studio work were far and away the most expensive.

It was tough for families- particularly when there were several kids in college simultaneously. Almost everyone worked part-time, sometimes multiple jobs. We all managed somehow. It was difficult- very very hard- even for those who would have been considered reasonably well off.

What did the abolition of fees achieve- not an awful lot actually. Did the demographic profile at 3rd level change? Were more people from disadvantaged backgrounds encouraged into college? Nope. Its remained pretty constant. Inclusion programmes did result in many more disabled students attending college for the first time- but disadvantaged- pretty constant levels.......

Now that tuition didn't have to be paid by students (other than postgrads or those who enrolled in a subsequent undergrad degree)- colleges were free to compete against each other- for the most part in research programmes. They actually became quite vulturous- poaching staff and denigrating each other's research- TCD and UCD were attrocious towards each other in particular.

Decisions- such as the setting up of the Vice-Presidents Fund, the Offices of Postgraduate Research, Presidents for Innovation etc- served to add red tape to the whole shenanigans. Scientific research which earned vital funds for colleges and universities was appropriated by authorities to cross fund non-finance generating research for postgrads particularly in the arts arena...... Faculties lost all enthusiasm for actively chasing research- why would they- when they didn't see any direct benefit? Look at UCD.....

What would the reintroduction of tuition fees mean- it would mean the 3rd level institutions regaining control of their own finances. It would mean students having to pay fees of between 3,500 and 10,000 depending on their faculties and chosen courses of study. It would not discourage those on lower incomes from college- they would continue to have their fees waived and their grants paid.

Education is a public service- yes, but to imagine that all public services are free is simply not true- even those that there is not a financial cost associated with often have opportunity costs vastly exceeding any monetary value that might be associated with them.

Should fees be re-introduced? Personally I think they should be. First and foremost they would put new responsibilities on students to actually accept some of the burden associated with their decision to undertake a particular course of study. It would encourage universities to actually compete on a level playing field- and allow the individual faculties, particularly in the humanities, to generate their own income and stop leeching off the other faculties.

Will people have to take out loans? Yes. Did we in the past? Yes. Did we survive- yes, we did.......

SerialComplaint

Newaglish wrote: »

Antithetic is correct - surely a household with an income of €100,000 or €200,000 or €50,000,000 can afford to pay fees.

While you are all correct in saying the person will have already paid for their education in the form of other taxes, a progressive tax system would require a higher level of tax to be levied on those with a greater income.

In essence, reintroduction of fees would be in the following format:

If your family can afford to pay fees, they do
If your family can't afford to pay fees, they get a means-tested grant to cover it

Nobody would suggest charging a low income family €10,000 in fees per annum, it wouldn't work.

So why stop at university fees? If this approach makes sense, then we should be charging some people for secondary fees too -right? [Let's just ignore the overwhelming evidence that free secondary schooling transformed Ireland] And the same principle would apply to primary schools too? And why stop at education - let's charge some people for joining their library, or for taking a walk in Stephen's Green.

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

If colleges feel they are underfunded, then the solution is simple: charge fees to those who fail to achieve high enough grades in college.

There are far too many wasters in college who do little or no work and scrape though each year with a low pass grade.

Some people genuinely struggle in college, and as such I don't see this as a reasonable or fair solution.

The_Conductor

SerialComplaint wrote: »

So why stop at university fees? If this approach makes sense, then we should be charging some people for secondary fees too -right? [Let's just ignore the overwhelming evidence that free secondary schooling transformed Ireland] And the same principle would apply to primary schools too? And why stop at education - let's charge some people for joining their library, or for taking a walk in Stephen's Green.

Funny that you should say just that. Private schools are making a massive resurgence in the country- and it is the middle classes who are at the front of the brigade extolling their virtues. While there may not be fee paying primary schools- the ridiculous lengths people must go to, to ensure their kids can attend particular schools means they may as well be private. Look at St. Killians in Clonskeagh as an example- if I have kids I'd be thrilled if they were admitted there- and would drive for hours a day to facilitate it. Thats as good as paying extremely high fees. As for joining the library- while there are all the public libraries- there are also a number of private libraries which do have annual membership fees. I've paid fees to use the libraries at UCD and Trinity- and undertook low-level postgraduate research in another institute just to gain access to their library- which is as good as paying. As for walking in Stephen's Green- its not going to happen- but just remember that Dartry Square isn't all that far away.........

SerialComplaint

smccarrick wrote: »

Private schools are making a massive resurgence in the country- and it is the middle classes who are at the front of the brigade extolling their virtues.

Indeed. One of the unexpected side-effects of the cutting of 3rd level fees was the diversion of funds into paying for private secondary schools. The obvious solution to this is to cut the subsidy paid to private secondary schools which is paid as teachers salaries. We don't expect the state to pay the salaries of staff in Mount Carmel Hospital, or the Beacon Clinic, or Griffith College, so why does the state pay the staff in Belvo or 'Rock?

Cutting this subsidy would make those who want a private secondary education pay the full economic cost. This will presumably put private secondary schools beyond the reach of many of their current customers, so the state can pay those salaries to additional teachers in the public schools instead. There will still be a net saving to the state on the assumption that some will still be prepared to fork out to ensure that their little darlings mix with the 'right' sort of people.

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

Some people genuinely struggle in college

Well there has to be a point where you have to say they shouldn't really be there....

regob

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Well there has to be a point where you have to say they shouldn't really be there....

thats not true, you might not be good at something, but because you arnt do you think you should give up?

The_Conductor

regob wrote: »

thats not true, you might not be good at something, but because you arnt do you think you should give up?

Yes- and move onto something you have an aptitude for- do you really advocate struggling with something, just for the sake of not giving up? Life is full of struggles- its up to people to make choices that make their passage through life more easy. We're not all into masachism........

genericgoon

JC 2K3 wrote: »

If colleges feel they are underfunded, then the solution is simple: charge fees to those who fail to achieve high enough grades in college.

There are far too many wasters in college who do little or no work and scrape though each year with a low pass grade.

Well that kind of happens already since you have to pay if you fail your exams. Thus all you really need to do is raise the grades needed to pass or just make exams harder. Of course, since Universitie's funding criteria take the number of students they have into account, they're hardly going to shut out large swathes of students by doing that.

RuggieBear

i think fees should be reintroduced with a complete overhaul of the grants system (actually making the grant decent money).

My parents saved for years for a college fund for me but once fees were abolished they then spent that money buying a Mercedes instead.

If fees were reintroduced the vast majority of those who were going to go would still go....and those few who would genuinely be put off by the costs could benefit from a proper scholarship/grant system (using just a fraction of the present fees money)

SerialComplaint

RuggieBear wrote: »

i think fees should be reintroduced with a complete overhaul of the grants system (actually making the grant decent money).

My parents saved for years for a college fund for me but once fees were abolished they then spent that money buying a Mercedes instead.

If fees were reintroduced the vast majority of those who were going to go would still go....and those few who would genuinely be put off by the costs could benefit from a proper scholarship/grant system (using just a fraction of the present fees money)

There is no doubt that the grant system needs improvement, and indeed the failure to even inflation-proof the grant means that it has effectively been cut this year.

However, there is no reason to reintroduce fees to support this. The govt has many, many other opportunities to raise income without creating barriers to education, such as eliminating the subsidies to private secondary schools, and the subsidies to private medical clinics, and the subsidies to horseracing, and the subsidies to the building industry etc etc.

Education was one of the basic building blocks of the Celtic Tiger, and you won't get us out of recession by putting up barriers to education.

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Well there has to be a point where you have to say they shouldn't really be there....

Just because someone struggles does not mean that they cannot continue to do it and achieve better grades the next year. Do you think charging fees to them is really going to make them want to finish their degree course? It would be a deterrent rather than a help.

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

Just because someone struggles does not mean that they cannot continue to do it and achieve better grades the next year. Do you think charging fees to them is really going to make them want to finish their degree course? It would be a deterrent rather than a help.

More often than not, "struggles" means "doesn't work hard enough". Unless of course they have a learning difficulty, which would be a different situation altogether.

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

More often than not, "struggles" means "doesn't work hard enough". Unless of course they have a learning difficulty, which would be a different situation altogether.

That's irrelevant if people are genuinely having a bit of difficulty. No, I'm not referring to a "learning difficulty", people can have issues in understanding elements of their course etc, I think it's highly unfair to suggest they all don't work "hard enough".

Roxy.Randrome

I have to say that there are some interesting points in this thread on the subject of re-instating fees.

I must say I completely disagree with the idea. If the government can waste tons of money housing completely useless e-voting machines year after year, surely money could be found somewhere to properly fund third level education and the atrocious health system in this country.

Either way, all I can gather is that the government are hiking the registration fee for colleges by €70 this year using a stealth tax which means the money will go straight to the government not the colleges.