As People & Things continues to examine this prevailing economic and political crisis, it is important that this issue of publicly funded tertiary education be explored beyond the simple opposition I articulated two weeks ago.
Since that time, the discussion has evolved and it is now prudent to further justify state funded tertiary education in the context of attempts to build an egalitarian society. It is also important to take up the challenge of alternatives, especially since the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) seems convinced there are no alternatives to this draconian action. The final aspect of this issue is the University of the West Indies (UWI) factor, which can be examined separately.
As one reflects on the issue philosophically, the response of the Young Democrats stands out as being particularly simplistic and equally unfortunate. Ironically, on the previous occasion when the Sandiford administration tackled this issue, the Young Dems took a very different approach. I was at that time an executive member of that organization and we agreed to express our discomfort with the DLP’s stated position, notwithstanding our affiliation.
In those times we believed that in keeping with the socialist tradition, the political party’s youth arm and women’s league served a special function in keeping the main party “grounded”. We therefore did not define our role as a younger movement of political yardfowls, but instead exploited our good offices to make the Government aware of any potential impact on youth development.
In addition, we took the bold step of drafting an alternative policy document which was tendered by way of the Barbados Students Association. Ironically, this document was rejected by the then president of the UWI Guild, who is now a minister in this administration, but it did make some useful suggestions which are worth repeating.
The document restated the commitment to a philosophy on state funded tertiary education but conceded that adjustments needed be made to preserve the long term viability of the policy. As such, we suggested that educational categories ought to be established with some being identified as priority categories. The full document can be made available, but it suggested that non-mature students who are fully matriculated and pursuing a first degree, and who are meeting strict performance targets, should be considered a priority and fully covered by Government.
It argued that non-priority status should be accorded to others such as those who are mature, those pursuing a second first degree, postgraduate students and those who are either not fully matriculated or have “lingered” on the steps of UWI beyond the normally expected three years. We believed this more structured approach could have achieved considerable savings to Government while preserving the philosophical principles behind state funded tertiary education. Importantly, this type of prioritization appreciates the need for “free education” to evolve with the times and for students to take responsibility for their education.
We also acknowledged a major deficiency of our present system where students are not forced to “give back” to their society in a structured way, which continues to be a problem.
Needless to say, the foregoing ideas became “moot” as the Government was eventually changed and the Barbados Labour Party seemed to find the money to continue funding education as before. A similar problem has now re-emerged and the DLP has defended itself by stating that students who are unable to pay for their tertiary education may now seek support from the Student Revolving Loan Fund which, on the face of it, seems reasonable.
In reality, however, this is a repudiation of the DLP’s commitment to egalitarianism since students whose parents can pay their fees will continue to study whatever they wish, while the others will be forced to study based on the size of the loan they can procure.
Anyone familiar with student loans understands they are not inexhaustible and must be secured by someone who is sufficiently well resourced to repay the loan if the principal borrower doesn’t. Currently no individual can guarantee two loans, and one therefore presumes that the DLP is aware of the existence of large pools of guarantors who are wealthy enough and young enough to guarantee the loans of this large wave of students.
Once that hurdle is cleared, the next major issue is the implication of a poor student emerging from UWI with the type of debt that can be anticipated under this regime. This problem can be illustrated by reference to a simple comparative example of two students of equal intellect from families of different means. Under this new regime both can study medicine if that is their inclination. However, one will enter the workforce debt free and can therefore pursue a specialization almost immediately, while the other will theoretically become a doctor carrying close to $100 000 in debt, which would effectively shackle that student and create a most un-level playing field.
• Peter W. Wickham (peter.wickham@caribsurf.com) is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES).