college fees

Gaillimh1990

are they bak??

GuanYin

It seems... no.

li@mo

registration fee has risen from €900 to €1500 per year as announced before christmas.

Xavi6

No but they should be in the form of means testing.

AckwelFoley

not touched on this budget

banquo

He didn't mention them. Had he said 'We will not be introducing 3rd Level fees' I'd say that they're not coming back. But since he didn't mention them at all I'm not counting my chickens.

KittyeeTrix

li@mo wrote: »

registration fee has risen from €900 to €1500 per year as announced before christmas.

Does this mean everyone has to pay the new registration fee irrespective of income or is it means tested?

Snowaddict

Very surprised that third level fees were not introduced, was expecting them in this budget, particularly with reference to Batt O' Keeffe's comments in the past few weeks.

If you are entitled to grants, then as far as I know the €1500 is covered, but if not, you have to pay full whack up front.

K4t

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Does this mean everyone has to pay the new registration fee irrespective of income or is it means tested?

Everyone pays it as far as I know. It should be reduced significantly if fees are re-introduced.

Xavi6 wrote: »

No but they should be in the form of means testing.

No they shouldn't.

fluffyorganic1

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Does this mean everyone has to pay the new registration fee irrespective of income or is it means tested?

The fee is only if you don't qualify for the grant.

samsemtex

Xavi6 wrote: »

No but they should be in the form of means testing.

Why? No fees is the best thing that ever happened this country.

Ron DMC

It'll be a disaster if they bring in fees now that they've cut job-seekers allowance in half.

How are people supposed to afford to go and learn if they're charged through the nose for it. That's their intention by cutting the social welfare.

Léan

li@mo wrote: »

registration fee has risen from €900 to €1500 per year as announced before christmas.

Most registration fees are already around that afaik? My one this year was around €1400.

Xavi6

samsemtex wrote: »

Why? No fees is the best thing that ever happened this country.

To stop wasters taking courses they don't really want/need to do, and end up dropping a semester in. There are a lot of people who take a course because that's what their mates are doing (Arts in Maynooth from personal experience). It pushes up the points and rules out people who actually want to do the course.

Doesn't have to a massive fee, but just something to make the wasters think twice when filling out their CAO.

Ronny Mitchell wrote: »

It'll be a disaster if they bring in fees now that they've cut job-seekers allowance in half.

How are people supposed to afford to go and learn if they're charged through the nose for it. That's their intention by cutting the social welfare.

Implement a loan system similar to that in the UK and Australia. You pay it back when you start earning a proper wage.

PeakOutput

K4t wrote: »

Everyone pays it as far as I know. It should be reduced significantly if fees are re-introduced.

if you get a grant you dnt pay registration fees and presumably they will be abolished if fees are introduced

No they shouldn't.

yes they should even if its only for the top 5% earners in the country that have to pay completely free 3rd level with the state the economy is in right now is stupid

Vegeta

Xavi6 wrote: »

To stop wasters taking courses they don't really want/need to do, and end up dropping a semester in. There are a lot of people who take a course because that's what their mates are doing (Arts in Maynooth from personal experience). It pushes up the points and rules out people who actually want to do the course.

Doesn't have to a massive fee, but just something to make the wasters think twice when filling out their CAO.



Implement a loan system similar to that in the UK and Australia. You pay it back when you start earning a proper wage.

Cant say I agree,

The current system does deter wasters, if you start a course and don't like it you can drop out. The government don't pay for first year again though, you have to.

K4t

PeakOutput wrote: »

if you get a grant you dnt pay registration fees and presumably they will be abolished if fees are introduced

I won't hold my breath.

PeakOutput wrote: »

yes they should even if its only for the top 5% earners in the country that have to pay completely free 3rd level with the state the economy is in right now is stupid

If fees were going to be re-introduced it should have been 10 years ago. It's not fair now to bring in third level fees when families are just about struggling to get by with income levies et al. You can not be serious!

PeakOutput

Vegeta wrote: »

Cant say I agree,

The current system does deter wasters, if you start a course and don't like it you can drop out. The government don't pay for first year again though, you have to.

it does not deter waster it deters the very bottom of the barrel

it is not difficult to scrape by for 4 years getting cs(or d's if you know how to play the different compensation systems)

fees deters in two ways. parents will be more likely to take an interest in the results of tiernan and labhaoise in orts in ucd if they are paying 4/5K a year for it

and for people who are funding themselves they will have to think very carefully about what they want to do before committing financially to college

i think at the very least any family earning less than 100K a year should not have to pay but means tested fees are definitely not a bad idea

finally they wont affect anyone who has already started college or anyone who starts college in september so they are at least 18 months in the future

Isaac702

A loan system would completely defeat the point of re-introducing collage fees however. Our *brilliant* government needs funds now not in 5+ years when graduates get a job that can pay back the loans.

Our country needs to be stimulated by creating jobs and graduates to fill those positions. Taxing our way out of the recession is not a good idea. Collage Fees would just limit the availability of education which would hurt us in the long term.

PeakOutput

K4t wrote: »

I won't hold my breath.

If fees were going to be re-introduced it should have been 10 years ago. It's not fair now to bring in third level fees when families are just about struggling to get by with income levies et al. You can not be serious!

what families are you refering to exactly?

snubbleste

K4t wrote: »

If fees were going to be re-introduced it should have been 10 years ago. It's not fair now to bring in third level fees when families are just about struggling to get by with income levies et al. You can not be serious!

Free fees were only introduced in 1996

Sully

Fees will more then likely come in but doing so now would have been far to unpopular decision for them. Plus, I believe OKeffe has not finished his report on fees.

Fees wont cut out wasters who do a course and drop out. Its nothing to do with "friends" as most people split up and do different things anyway. People do the course they *think* they are interested in and drop out when they find out its 1) very hard, or 2) crap. Course information, at least on IT Courses, is very sketchy. Iv been to the open days and the information can be vague. Plus, the registration fees are expensive - drop out, you wont get paid again.

Entirely different topic but the grants situation in Ireland is appalling. Both applying for and actually waiting for it.

Fine Gael seems to have the better plan for this whole debate.

MarlboroMan

The top 5% of earners are being taxed an extra 4% on top of the already high income rate so I wouldn’t see how it would be fair on them if only their children had to pay fees.their parents spend their whole life getting to the position they have only to be brought back down...

the victims of any ressesion are always the workingclass in my opinion, a registration fee €1500 is just another stress to the endless list around us......


from rte.ie/money/budget2009

16:21: The income levy thresholds have been lowered, with the 2% rate kicking in at €15,000, 4% at €75,000 and 6% at €175,000.
16:21: The income levy rates announced in last October's Budget will be doubled to 2%, 4% and 6%.

invincibleirish

You're showing your age there K4T, 'free fees' were only introduced in the mid 1990s. There was a time when fees were the norm.

Fees should be reintroduced, there are too many people who's parents can afford to send them to expensive grind schools and fund their college lifestyle. If your parents own additional properties outside of their family home then they can afford to send their kid to college, if they can't have both then they'll have to pick & choose.

Handsome Bob

Xavi6 wrote: »

To stop wasters taking courses they don't really want/need to do, and end up dropping a semester in. There are a lot of people who take a course because that's what their mates are doing (Arts in Maynooth from personal experience). It pushes up the points and rules out people who actually want to do the course.

I agree with you in a sense, it would encourage people to take their courses more seriously. Then again, that is going by the assumption that they'd be paying the fees themselves. Unfortunately, for a lot of them Mammy and Daddy would still be paying the fees, so I'm not sure if reintroducing fees would make them think twice anyway.

I'd be concerned about the reintroduction of fees as from personal experience I think the government would be quite rigid in their means testing due to the current grant system. I didn't qualify for a grant in 1st or 2nd year even though my family are not well off, my dad is a retired brewery man, my mum is a full time mum and there are a few of us living in the house. Only this year did I qualify, and at that I only got the lowest grade allowance; 345 euro spread over the entire academic year (115 every three months). It's a joke of a system to be honest, so I wouldn't trust the government to be entirely equitable in their means testing of fees. They will target people that they said they wouldn't.

Predalien

They never intended to announce anything about fees in the budget today, it'll be done later this month by O'keefe himself

PeakOutput

MarlboroMan wrote: »

the top 5% of earners are being taxed an extra 4% ontop of the already high income rate so i wouldnt see how it would be fair for on them. they spend their whole life getting to the position they have only to be brought back down to the same level of those who didnt make as much of an effort in life....
.

20K or there abouts over 4 years is not bringing the top 5% of earners down to anywhere near my/our level and i think you have success confused with effort they are not necessarily the same thing. i know people who have been very very lucky and will be set up for life and i know people who have worked their ass's off in jobs and are on mediocre wages

either way you contribute what you can afford and they can afford it

edited due to typo

Xavi6

Sully wrote: »

Fees wont cut out wasters who do a course and drop out. Its nothing to do with "friends" as most people split up and do different things anyway. People do the course they *think* they are interested in and drop out when they find out its 1) very hard, or 2) crap. Course information, at least on IT Courses, is very sketchy. Iv been to the open days and the information can be vague. Plus, the registration fees are expensive - drop out, you wont get paid again.

As I said, in my experience it is. Every year Dublin 15 students flock to Maynooth in large part due to it's convenience. It's 'cool' to get the train to Maynooth in a big group, go out on the lash midweek etc. People see Arts as an easy course so that combined with convenience is a breeding ground for wasters.

I know that if it was costing a few grand for the course a lot of them wouldn't have been out there as mammy and daddy would have had more of a vested interest in how they were getting on.

K4t

snubbleste wrote: »

Free fees were only introduced in 1996

Yes I know, when times were good. How is it fair to bring them back now?

PeakOutput wrote: »

what families are you refering to exactly?

middle income families, paye workers. If fees are re-introduced they will be the ones who will pay. You can talk all you like about only the top 5% paying the fees but you and I both know that won't happen.

PeakOutput

K4t wrote: »

Yes I know, when times were good. How is it fair to bring them back now?

yes when times were good ie the country could afford it. times are now bad therefore the country cannot afford it

middle income families, paye workers. If fees are re-introduced they will be the ones who will pay. You can talk all you like about only the top 5% paying the fees but you and I both know that won't happen.

ok so we are talking about different people here.

when this was first talked about before christmas i believe was the first mentioned. the figure thrown around was families earning over 100K a year would have to pay fees. i have no problem with that as long as there is an allowance if they have 2/3/4 kids in college at the same time

if the cut off is much lower than that i would totally disagree with it

i also think that the grant system needs to be changed to increase the bands and decrease the ease of abuse

K4t

invincibleirish wrote: »

You're showing your age there K4T, 'free fees' were only introduced in the mid 1990s. There was a time when fees were the norm.

No, you mis-interpreted my post. What I'm saying is how is it fair to introduce fees now when the economy is completely screwed and when parents are facing income levies and increased taxes. In '96 the economy was thriving and fees were abolished! It doesn't make sense to me.

AARRRGH

My masters cost me €6,000 per year. This definitely made me take it a bit more serious and work a little bit harder.

I agree with the concept of free fees, but I do think it makes people a bit more relaxed about dropping out.

Does anyone know of any statistics which show the drop out rates before and after the introduction of free fees?

invincibleirish

K4t wrote: »

No, you mis-interpreted my post. What I'm saying is how is it fair to introduce fees now when the economy is completely screwed and when parents are facing income levies and increased taxes. In '96 the economy was thriving and fees were abolished! It doesn't make sense to me.

In 1996 we still had highish (compared to the period 2000-2006) unemployment but the economy was certainly developing.

If a family earn over 120k+ per year they should well be able to afford full fees(with increased exemptions where a number of children are in college). Is it fair that middle income earners you mention whose children receive no grants have to pay 1500k registration fee, the same as those whose parents are millionaires? tell me K4T do your parents own any additional property like holiday homes etc.? do you attend a grind school? if you do then mum & dad need to prioritise what they spend their money on in these tough times.

Sully

Xavi6 wrote: »

As I said, in my experience it is. Every year Dublin 15 students flock to Maynooth in large part due to it's convenience. It's 'cool' to get the train to Maynooth in a big group, go out on the lash midweek etc. People see Arts as an easy course so that combined with convenience is a breeding ground for wasters.

I know that if it was costing a few grand for the course a lot of them wouldn't have been out there as mammy and daddy would have had more of a vested interest in how they were getting on.

Well I cant say I have seen the same down here at least. Registration fee is expensive enough now, so it should be a deterrent.

SD1990

The ammount of people that are relaxed about droping out because of no fees fails in comparison to the amount of people that would be FORCED to drop out if they were brought back imo..

Léan

invincibleirish wrote: »

Fees should be reintroduced, there are too many people who's parents can afford to send them to expensive grind schools and fund their college lifestyle. If your parents own additional properties outside of their family home then they can afford to send their kid to college, if they can't have both then they'll have to pick & choose.

I'm sorry but I hate this attitude that 'all people that go to grind schools are loaded and should pay fees' etc..

My parents scraped the money together to send me to a grind school. In fact my mother opened an account in the credit union and tried to put in what she could every month to send me. By no means did they have extra money to send me there, they thought long and hard about it and decided it would be an investment in my education.
There is no way my parents would be able to afford college fees if they were introduced. They put evey bit of money they could aside to allow me to go to a grind school so I could get the points I needed to do my course and since then i've been working hard in college to give them the results.

The attitude that people who can afford to go to grind schools can afford college fees is totally unfair. I went to school with a lot of people from many backgrounds and the majority of them couldn't afford to be going to the school and were doing what they could to get by. A friend of mine even took out a loan to go to the school to get the points she needed.

Most of the time it's the points system that drives people to go to grind schools and not because they can afford it, but that's another issue altogether.

Sierra Oscar

I dont think it was expected that fees would be announced in the budget.

invincibleirish

Léan wrote: »

I'm sorry but I hate this attitude that 'all people that go to grind schools are loaded and should pay fees' etc..

My parents scraped the money together to send me to a grind school. In fact my mother opened an account in the credit union and tried to put in what she could every month to send me. By no means did they have extra money to send me there, they thought long and hard about it and decided it would be an investment in my education.
There is no way my parents would be able to afford college fees if they were introduced. They put evey bit of money they could aside to allow me to go to a grind school so I could get the points I needed to do my course and since then i've been working hard in college to give them the results.

The attitude that people who can afford to go to grind schools can afford college fees is totally unfair. I went to school with a lot of people from many backgrounds and the majority of them couldn't afford to be going to the school and were doing what they could to get by. A friend of mine even took out a loan to go to the school to get the points she needed.

Most of the time it's the points system that drives people to go to grind schools and not because they can afford it, but that's another issue altogether.

OK relax chill, i also attended a grind school in my youf i know how it is. Grind schools blossomed in the years after free fees were introduced, parents who now did not have to spend money on college fees put their kids into these schools instead. These schools create an educational apartheid and contributed to the points inflation you referenced.

dimejinky99

High end earner Families who can afford to send their kids to college should be made to pay to do so. this should be assessed on a case by case basis. Middle-low earning families shouldnt be charged fees ever. It completely deflates the whole idea of a knowledge based economy and really it's us shooting ourselves in the foot in a maasive way. This budget is ridiculous anyways, people should be encouraged to spend, not saved, but the bank bailouts are the killer. As usual Irelands government gets it totllay arse about face. we need a change now and even FG would be better than this shower of incompetents.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

No but they should be in the form of means testing.

Sorry I havn't read the rest of the thread yet so I don't know if this has been brought up, but how bloody badly do you want to hit the members of society who have worked their asses off in college and planned their expenditure and saved their money?

Really? You want them to pay for poorer people's dole, poorer peoples medical expenses and now for their kids to go through college while their own kids will be forced to pay themselves? Absolute joke.

Fee's for all or fee's for none. Will these people that pass the "means test" not be able to pay their own fee's back after too?

invincibleirish

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Sorry I havn't read the rest of the thread yet so I don't know if this has been brought up, but how bloody badly do you want to hit the members of society who have worked their asses off in college and planned their expenditure and saved their money?

Really? You want them to pay for poorer people's dole, poorer peoples medical expenses and now for their kids to go through college while their own kids will be forced to pay themselves? Absolute joke.

Fee's for all or fee's for none. Will these people that pass the "means test" not be able to pay their own fee's back after too?

Me Fein much?

dimejinky99

dimejinky99 wrote: »

High end earner Families who can afford to send their kids to college should be made to pay to do so. this should be assessed on a case by case basis. Middle-low earning families shouldnt be charged fees ever. It completely deflates the whole idea of a knowledge based economy and really it's us shooting ourselves in the foot in a maasive way. This budget is ridiculous anyways, people should be encouraged to spend, not saved, but the bank bailouts are the killer. As usual Irelands government gets it totllay arse about face. we need a change now and even FG would be better than this shower of incompetents.

So you think a good way of getting people to spend is making sure that gratuates are in debt as soon as they leave college?
Good plan.

invincibleirish

invincibleirish wrote: »

Me Fein much?

Not at all, I have already been through the system and even though I might go back again as a mature student, this whole fee debacle won't affect me much.

I'm merely looking out for generations to come, unless people actually think its a good thing to make this country as unattractive as possible to anyone earning a decent wage.

dimejinky99

your missing the point. fees excludes lower earning families kids from ever attending college in the first place. Back to the bad old days of annoying Fentons & Andrea's from D4 only being able to go to college. Bad scene all round. And it's heading that way. Education is a right not a privelige and excluding people from all areas, classes and income bands is going to be hugely detremental to our economy in the very near future and from then on.

invincibleirish

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Not at all, I have already been through the system and even though I might go back again as a mature student, this whole fee debacle won't affect me much.

I'm merely looking out for generations to come, unless people actually think its a good thing to make this country as unattractive as possible to anyone earning a decent wage.

Whats your definition of a a decent wage? no one is suggesting that everyone has to pay fees, only those earning above a certain threshold? btw we already have fees introduced in the form of the registration fee, and a wholly inadequate grant system. Reform is needed whats your alternative?

dimejinky99

dimejinky99 wrote: »

your missing the point. fees excludes lower earning families kids from ever attending college in the first place. Back to the bad old days of annoying Fentons & Andrea's from D4 only being able to go to college. Bad scene all round. And it's heading that way. Education is a right not a privelige and excluding people from all areas, classes and income bands is going to be hugely detremental to our economy in the very near future and from then on.

So you believe that the students parents of higher earning families should be paying their fee's straight out? Or should the students themselves get a loan? If it's the latter then what is to stop these students from lower earning families to do the same?

invincibleirish

invincibleirish wrote: »

Whats your definition of a a decent wage? no one is suggesting that everyone has to pay fees, only those earning above a certain threshold? btw we already have fees introduced in the form of the registration fee, and a wholly inadequate grant system. Reform is needed whats your alternative?

My alternative is to 1) Leave the system as is. I went to college with people from low income families who got the grant and high income families who didn't. I honestly can't see what's wrong with that? Fair for everyone.

2) If people think our 3rd level education system is that bad and underfunded (You'd swear we lived in afghanistan the way some people describe it) then introduce a loan system for EVERYONE.

dimejinky99

Rojo, high end earning families can afford to educate their kids. Read my post. If they can afford to pay? they should be made to pay. If they cant? free fees&free education access programs such as there are, should be made available to them. It's not rocket science. The grants scheme works on this basis. It should apply in the fees aspect also.

dimejinky99

dimejinky99 wrote: »

Rojo, high end earning families can afford to educate their kids. Read my post. If they can afford to pay? they should be made to pay. If they cant? free fees&free education access programs such as there are, should be made available to them. It's not rocket science. The grants scheme works on this basis. It should apply in the fees aspect also.

But they already pay in the current system with their high end taxes. The system you're proposing sees them paying twice no?

ec18

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Does this mean everyone has to pay the new registration fee irrespective of income or is it means tested?

If you qualify got a grant than you will be reimbursed for the registration fee i believe

dimejinky99

No it doesnt. Everyone pays tax. It's as the goon says, those who can afford to pay should be made to pay. It's the only way we can ensure we're still on the path to a high quality knowledge based economy, not one accessible to the high earners and elite. Most families can't afford to put kids through college, they shouldnt be excluded because of their earnings, we just left decades of that behind, and we saw what happened. why go through it again?
waste of time. Fund health and education primarily. Everything else will fall into line after that.