NZUSA Media release: Wednesday 7
November
Getting to the truth about Students Loans
A call to apply greater public scrutiny to the Student Loan Scheme was made in an oral submission by the NZ Union of Students’ Associations (NZUSA) to Parliament’s Finance and Expenditure Select Committee today.
“We have an on-going concern that the limited scrutiny being applied to the law underpinning the scheme just isn’t good enough, especially when fundamental aspects of the scheme just don’t add up,” says Pete Hodkinson, NZUSA President.
“One of our challenges to the Select Committee today was that after 20 years of creating a disproportionate debt mountain – now well past the $12 billion mark – it’s time to hold a serious review of the scheme on behalf of the almost 1 million people whose lives have been affected by it.
“The call for such a review – in tandem with a Select Committee inquiry into equal education opportunity – is gaining cross-party support. A review would look for more equitable alternatives to the student debt model, and would reframe the debate”.
A large part of NZUSA’s submission took Select Committee members through an argument that the number crunching for the Student Loan Scheme does not provide a true representation of the net affordability of the scheme to the government compared to its unaffordability to students. NZUSA’s concern is that claims of the high cost of the scheme are being used to justify cost-cutting measures by the government in a way that reduces access to tertiary education and potentially misleads the public.
Select Committee member and NZ First leader Winston Peters’ reaction was that this sounded to him as if the scheme “would constitute a fraud on the investor (students)”, while Labour MP David Clark agreed that NZUSA statements about the true cost of the scheme were closer to the truth than indicated by the official record.
In addition to a set of eight recommendations [available at www.students.org.nz] NZUSA expressed frustration at all of the behind-the-scene changes that are made by way of regulation without a full and searching investigation into the major impacts being felt by significant groups of students. Students such as postgraduate students, medical students represented by the NZ Medical Students’ Association, older adults (55+) seeking to retrain, and students with dependent family members – primarily women.
“When all of the incremental changes being made to the scheme are taken into account what we are left with is a scheme that is in danger of running counter to its own goals of promoting access, as well as a scheme that is only guaranteed to heap a negative fiscal drag on each new generation, to push more New Zealanders overseas or discourage them from returning, and to further ignore the GDP benefits of greater participation in tertiary education,” says Pete Hodkinson.
Note to
journalists: The 2012 Annual Report of the Student Loan
Scheme is expected to be tabled in Parliament later this
month or in early December.
_____________________
For more information see http://students.org.nz/2012/11/select-committee/
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FINANCE &
EXPENDITURE SELECT COMMITTEE
BY THE NEW ZEALAND UNION OF
STUDENT’S ASSOCIATIONS
Written
submission
1. That in its deliberations on the
consequences of the bill the Select Committee thoroughly
consider any aspects of the bill that will actually worsen
the current situation of affected students (present and
future) in unfair or unreasonable ways, and flag those for
current and future reference.
2. That the Select
Committee clarify the methods being used to communicate with
students about Budget announcements and the supply of
further communication (e.g. FAQ information) that is
detailed and balanced, to students.
3. That, given an
environment of rising living costs (high rent in Auckland
being a case in point) and a constrained job market, the
Select Committee consider how adequate the current student
support package is for students who are struggling to afford
tertiary education.
4. That the Select Committee should
interrogate the regulatory impact statement accompanying the
bill to gain a sense of the financial setback a higher
repayment rate will have on the (estimated) 440,000 affected
borrowers.
5. That implementation of tertiary education
policy in New Zealand remain focused and driven to achieve
more social inclusion and a much higher level of social
mobility (New Zealand’s intergenerational mobility being
at the bottom of the OECD according to this year’s OECD
Education At A Glance report).
6. That an overall review
of the SLS be considered with urgency and commenced in 2013.
This recognizes that the SLS has over the last two decades
undergone a number of variations and requires a major
rethink. This review could be easily allied to a proposed
(Education and Science) Select Committee inquiry into equal
educational opportunity.
7. That the economic downsides
of encumbering new generations of graduates from our
Institutes of Technology/ Polytechnics and Universities with
unaffordable debt levels be taken seriously, and that the
Green Party’s proposed solution of a progressive
non-punitive repayment scheme be further investigated along
with approaches that exist in other jurisdictions. A minimum
would be a much higher threshold before repayments begin,
and a more equitable repayment rate would at least bring us
into line with Australia.
8. That the Select Committee
seek to hear directly from groups of students such as
Postgraduate students and NZMSA on matters that are
materially jeopardizing completion of their studies. (NZUSA
can facilitate this with the Select Committee Secretariat).
(Reiterated in the Oral submission to include
recommendations that the Select
Committee
• Acknowledge the true cost of the
Student Loan Scheme
• Undertake a review of the loans
scheme in terms of its contribution to the goals of more
social inclusion and greater social mobility
• Urge the
reconsideration of the unaffordable debt levels imposed upon
students who undertake courses for which there is
acknowledged to be little (or no) financial return
• Consider as a matter of urgency a shift away from
starting payments so low and imposing so high a uniform rate
of repayment as compared with international practice and the
needs of borrowers and the New Zealand
economy)
SEPARATE RECOMMENDATION OF THE NEW
ZEALAND MEDICAL STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION
NZMSA
calls upon the Select Committee to consider introducing
either an exemption or an extension to the 7EFTS cap on
Student Loans for medical students in this Bill in order to
protect equity of access to the medical degree for
postgraduate/other- entry students. Doing so would improve
the value of the Student Loan Scheme for New Zealand’s
medical students and the New Zealand health system.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM NZUSA MEMBER STUDENT
ASSOCIATIONS
QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMITTEE
TO CONSIDER
1. Given repeated concerns
raised about the efficacy of the overall SLS will the
Committee consider the call made by Opposition MP Grant
Robertson during the First Reading for “an overall review
of the scheme”, including a review of the adequacy of
student support in 2013?
2. Clear communication
about the nature of the SLS is extremely important and the
role of the Select Committee in establishing correct
information is vital. Is it correct to state, as
Opposition MP David Clark has done, that the student loan
collection system “works as a
tax”?
3. A large emphasis
of this bill is to extend provisions for data-matching.
Data-matching and data privacy concerns have become more and
more acute in New Zealand due to a series of highly
publicised lapses and data breaches. In the wake of the WINZ
Kiosk debacle, NZUSA sought and received an immediate
assurance from Studylink that student data was within the
scope of a review of the MSD’s network security.
Will the Select Committee be seeking a full briefing
by officials and the Privacy Commissioner on the impact of
any information sharing under this bill, and will
information from that briefing in turn be shared to all
interested or affected parties?
4. On the bill’s First Reading, Government MP Jonathan Young stated that a student should not come away “with indebtedness that does not give, at the same time, an opportunity to gain employment”. Given the impact of the indebtedness that is created by the SLS does the Committee consider that an opportunity to gain employment is a reasonable expectation for new graduates to have for the investment they make, and as part of the ‘social contract’ they enter into?
5. We understand that Working for Families entitlements are calculated before student loan repayment rates (increased this year by 20%) and that resolving this unhelpful anomaly could be addressed through this bill. Will the Select Committee be addressing this anomaly?
6. In referring to the “integrity” of the SLS the Minister of Revenue, Hon. Peter Dunne, stated that this year’s move to reduce the repayment holiday for borrowers who are going overseas (subject to application to IRD) from 36 months to 12 months is “instilling greater fairness and accountability”. Given this assertion has been challenged in Parliament in the context of the current bill, will the Select Committee be forming a view on whether this can be verified as a true statement?
7. On the First Reading of this bill Opposition MP Tracey Martin queried why all domestic students or new graduates who remain in New Zealand and who have been hooked on to the SLS should not also be able to apply for a “repayment holiday”. Given that a period free from repayments is an automatic feature of the equivalent scheme in the UK, should not the Select Committee investigate treating all borrowers in the same way?
8. For those borrowers who are overseas, Opposition MP Louisa Wall raised an important concern that very little is known about them to ensure that their targeting under this bill is as non-prejudicial and as free from discrimination as possible. To achieve that goal Ms Wall suggested a case by case analysis would be needed. Can the Select Committee consider an investigation that will better profile the composition of the 91,000 borrowers living or travelling overseas?
RECOMMENDATION
That
in the exercise of its special powers the Select Committee
seek guidance from officials as to which of these questions
it can give a priority to in its findings, and provide
answers for (on a question by question basis).
ENDS