PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Posts Tagged ‘Tertiary education’

The Student Loan Scheme

Posted by Grant Robertson on November 1st, 2010

The Annual Report of the Student Loan Scheme is out, and it gives some pause for thought. Almost $14 billion has been borrowed since the scheme began in 1992, with about $6.4 billion being paid back.

I was one of those original borrowers. There were some quirks to the scheme back then that have been ironed out. You could borrow the money for your fees and choose if it went to your bank account or directly to your institution. I had two friends who developed a rapid interest and then equally rapid loss of interest in dentistry one year. That is now not possible. You were paid in large installments (quarterly?), but could call a phone number and get money earlier if you needed it. I recall a shouted conversation into the pay phone in the bottle store of the Captain Cook one night. Now the living costs are paid in fortnighly installments.

I strongly opposed the scheme on its introduction. It was symptomatic of a government pulling money out of the tertiary sector and make education less accessible. Fees were going up, allowances were disappearing. The interest, both while studying and afterwards was a horrific barrier to repayment and indeed for some to borrowing in the first place. Labour in office got rid of the interest, capped fees and widened eligibility for allowances, and the scheme became more acceptable. Yet still it shackles young graduates with a large debt as they start their working life. I can say from my electorate work, it is still having an impact on some people borrowing for first homes.

But what can we replace it with that does not create further inequities and is affordable alongside the rest of the government’s priorities? The longer the scheme goes on, the more difficult it is get rid off. Labour went into the 2008 election with a policy that would have given all students an allowance, phased in over a four year period. This would significantly reduce the debt burden on students, but it is expensive (the annual cost then was estimated at around $210 million annually) especially in tighter financial times.

Other options that are live internationally include graduate taxes that eliminates the upfront cost barriers and have a time limit on them. There are also systems with more scholarships, bonding and employer contributions. Of course the ultimate answer its to invest more into tertiary education to help create the skilled workforce and inclusive society we want and need. But it has to be balanced against, health, housing, super and all the other things governments must do.

We are working on our tertiary policy now. Labour’s policy remains to make tertiary education progressively more affordable and accessible. We also want a quality system, which means resourcing tertiary institutions well, and understanding the changing way that people are accessing education. In the fifth Labour government we put a lot of attention on student support, in the future we also need to ensure that overall quality is enhanced, and not just universities either, but vocational and industry training too.

Whatever, we do need to see tertiary education as an investment in our collective future well being, and an integral part of developing a productive economy.

Tags: ,
Filed under: education, students
35 Comments

Another case of pulling up the ladder?

Posted by Maryan Street on March 20th, 2010

Steven Joyce, new Tertiary Education Minister, has floated the idea that a portion of universities’ funding should be pegged to pass rates or course completion rates. That way, taxpayers are meant to know that they are getting value for the heaps of money they are pouring into students by way of allowances and loans.

But hang on a minute – just look at his own tertiary education record. By his own admission in a recent interview, he enrolled in vet science at Massey, failed everything (or “didn’t make the cut”) in his first year, enrolled in Chemistry for two weeks and decided he didn’t like that either, then  enrolled in Zoology, which he eventually did go on to complete some years later. By current standards, he would probably go down as THREE ‘did not completes’. How would Massey feel about enrolling him for another chance if 10% of their funding were to be dependent on students passing??

But he went on to be a valuable contributing member of society – and make a lot of money as well. So why is he looking at pulling up the ladder and not allowing other people to do the same as him? People’s lives, like his, do not always follow a linear path but often unfold with age in a series of ever widening circles. Reminds me of Paula Bennet, the gutsy solo mum who pursued tertiary education successfully with the help of the state, axing the Tertiary Incentive Allowance for those solo mums wanting to do degrees like her.

So ladders are OK when you’re climbing them right? But there’s no use for them once you have got to the top?

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Tertiary education, education
12 Comments

What is National planning on student loans?

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 2nd, 2010

I have to say that when I saw that Steven Joyce had been appointed Tertiary Education Minister I thought it was probably not just about Anne Tolley struggling to handle her responsibilities.   There were any number of other Ministers who could have taken the Tertiary portfolio, but it was handed to the Nats number one strategist and the PMs close confidant.  This means that National want to “do” something in the tertiary portfolio.

Good. Tertiary Education is a vital area for our future, and it needs to develop and change in order to provide the graduates and the research that is so vital to our economy and society.  But what is it exactly that National wants to do?

Well, a clue this morning from John Key on Sunrise. He says there are ‘economic’ issues in the portfolio including

whether the student loan policy works and whether there can be improvements made.

Now Steven Joyce is a clever political operator, and he knows how popular the interest free student loan policy is, but it is true that the Nats are worried about the liabilities that the scheme gives them. Also remember that National has never liked interest free student loans. John Key said they were “irresponsible” and he would oppose the policy “with every bone in his body”.

We can’t ask written parliamentary questions for another week. So some journalist out there might like to ask Mr Key or Mr Joyce just what changes are in store for student loans?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: education
16 Comments

Education, education, we have lost our education

Posted by Maryan Street on December 9th, 2009

Prizes for those who recognise the Shakespearean derivation of the title of this blog – play, plus Act, Scene and line number would be really impressive!

The Education and Science Select Committee is going to hear my submission on the 53,000+ petitions seeking reinstatement of funding to Adult and Community Education delivered through high schools, aka night classes. That will happen next year now, probably in February, but certainly early on in the year. It is the biggest petition tabled in Parliament so far this term.

People shouldn’t give up on this issue. This is the moment right now when Ministers are haggling with the Minister of Finance about their budget bids for next year. Or they should be by now anyway. I’d be worried if they’re not. So here is an opportunity for people to urge Anne Tolley to reconsider her decision from last year and reinstate this comparatively squitty amount of money ($13 million) and save herself another year of protests, irritating questions in the House and bad press in every national, provincial and local newspaper in the country.

If you want some help in writing to her about this issue, click here. It ain’t over yet!

Tags: ,
Filed under: education
15 Comments

Polytechs under attack

Posted by Maryan Street on November 20th, 2009

Now I can talk about it – the Education and Science Select Committee today released its report on the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill. What a crock. It was bad before and it’s even worse now. What are those Nats on?

The original bill cut Polytech Councils down from their current 14-20 membership (most have 14-15) to 8, with 4 appointed by the Minister, 1 student rep elected by the student body, the CEO, an academic rep and 1 poor sod community rep. Big control for the Minister.

NOW – they have come back with 4 appointed by the Minister and the remaining 4 appointed by the Polytechs’ own statutes – ie: anybody they like. So now we don’t even have a guaranteed student rep. Imagine how the Students’ Associations are feeling about that!!

Nobody – but  NOBODY – amongst all the submitters asked for that!  They all asked for more places to get more community reps, especially where the polytech covers quite differing regions such as UColl (covering Palmerston North, Whanganui with an h, and the Wairarapa). And they wanted Maori representation.

Sure, their own statutes can require Maori representation but if there are Polys which don’t feel like doing it (or the 4 Ministerial appointments don’t feel like doing it), that’s it. This is a dumb educational position.  Look at the people who take up second chance opportunities at polytechs, including trades training, nursing studies – all the things we will go on needing in spades into the future.  It is dumb preparation for the skills needs of the labour force in the future who are increasingly going to be  Maori and Pasifika. And it is dumb politics. This is Auckland SuperCity slap-in-the-face stuff. Tolley has no idea what she will unleash, just like the night class cuts. Somebody tell her, if you want this government to survive. On second thoughts……..

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: M?ori, education, select committee
12 Comments

Another 1990s failure back on the agenda

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 27th, 2009

Twelve years ago as a first year university student I attended my first ever student protest march. The 25th of September 1997 has stuck in my mind ever since because it was the first and only time I have been arrested. Thankfully neither the District Court nor the High Court agreed with the Police decision to arrest 75 of us for trespass while we were protesting in parliament grounds.

It was an important test case because it confirmed the principle that all citizens have the right to protest peacefully at parliament. That case finally came to a conclusion a few weeks ago when the Police agreed to pay compensation and parliament’s speaker (which was actually Doug Kidd at the time) agreed to issue apologies.

Twelve years later, it’s interesting to see the issues that led to that protest march once again emerging from the new National government. Back in 1997 the then Bolger-led National government released a Green Paper on tertiary education. They proposed to introduce a corporatized, pro-market system for university and polytechnic funding. Democratically elected governing councils made up of stakeholders were to be replaced by boards of directors appointed by the government.

The Tertiary Review Green Paper followed hot on the heels of Max Bradford’s pro-market electricity reforms and came at a time when the public had tired of the privatisation agenda. It was yet another sign that the National government’s continued trumpeting of the New Right free market agenda was out of step with ordinary New Zealanders. Two years later Helen Clark’s Labour team comfortably won the 1999 general election.

Interesting to see, therefore, that the new Minister of Education Anne Tolley is putting some of those issues back on the table. The Sunday Star Times reports the government plans a radical overhaul of polytechnic governance, dumping about 250 of the 400 existing councillors. Maori and Pasifika representatives would be axed, along with representatives of employers, unions, and former students.

Tolley’s decision to resuscitate elements of the controversial and failed Tertiary Review Green Paper reforms is another signal that pro-market corporatisation and privatisation is firmly back on the government’s agenda. Education will be viewed as a commodity to be bought and sold, while students will be viewed as consumers, not learners.

Twelve years ago my opposition to these very reforms compelled me to join a protest march. What happened next was one of the key events that led me towards a life in politics. When Tolley brings her legislation before parliament, this time I won’t just be protesting outside, I’ll be fighting her every step of the way inside the House too.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Filed under: democracy, education, national, parliament, public services
4 Comments