In the 1975 general election the National Party, then the Opposition, promised New Zealand university and technical institute students that once regaining office it would introduce a 'new reformed bursary' to replace the Standard Tertiary Bursary (STB) of the Labour Government.

National Party publicity gave students the very real impression that its scheme would be brighter and better than the STB.

Three and a half years later the "new reformed bursary" was announced by Prime Minister Muldoon. However, as outlined in the Budget, and subsequently elaborated on by the Minister of Education Mery Wellington and the Department of Education, there is nothing to suggest that in any significant way this new scheme is an improvement on the STB. Whereas despite its many inadequacies (such as the failure to keep up with inflation and the abatement) the STB was definitely an improvement on its predecessor this cannot be said for the new scheme.

The new scheme is intended to be implemented for 1980 and will be called the Tertiary Study Grant. The underlying motivation behind this new scheme is to cut expenditure on bursary assistance. The Tertiary Study Grant should be seen in the context of a recommendation of the Cabinet Expenditure Committee that $5 million be cut from the STB.

An initial glance at the Estimates for Vote Education would suggest that an extra $6 million has been allocated to bursary expenditure.

However, in considering this three factors should be taken into account.

How the Scheme was Decided

In a post-Budget press statement on Saturday 23 June Mr Wellington made the following comments about how the decision to formulate and implement the Tertiary Study Grant was made.

"This is part of a continuing policy. In 1977 and 1978, Conferences were held by my Department and were attended by interested groups and organisations to consider financial assistance for Post School Study.

In April 1978 my predecessor established a Steering Committee on Financial Assistance for Post Compulsory Study which has made three interim reports to the Minister of Education. At the same time both my predecessor and I have met with student groups, teacher organisations and other interested parties and sought their views.

The new scheme announced in the Budget is an outcome of this review of the present system of assistance for tertairy students."

This claim of the Minister is a complete fabrication and is totally misleading. NZUSA has representatives on the Steering Committee and at no stage was the Tertiary Study Grant discussed and nor were its main features part of the two (not three) interim reports to the Minister. Furthermore the meetings between NZUSA and the Minister never discussed the scheme. At no stage was NZUSA invited to comment on the proposed Tertiary Study Grant.

The Main Implications for Students

The Basic Level

In reading the Budget to Parliament Mr Muldoon made an initial misleading comment when introducing the hew scheme. He referred to a $40 grant. However, in reality it is a $23 weekly grant for the academic year.

This represents a significant change from the present STB. Instead of four different levels there is now only one.

Obviously the group of students who suffer the most are those on the unabated rate. They represented, in 19 78, about 57% of all STB holders and will suffer weekly reductions of either $7 or $10.50.

The following figures show the distribution of students on the abated and unabated rates throughout the seven universities.

Returns for numbers of students receiving standard tertiary bursaries in New Zealand universities in 1978.

At a minimum at least one-third of STB holders will suffer a direct cut at each campus. The effects are most severe at Massey, Lincoln, Otago and Waikato.

The position of unabated students shows how farcicial the Minister's claim that the controversial abatement has been ceased is. Rather than abolish the abatement (which has been a demand of students since it's implementation in 1976) Mr Wellington has abated all bursary holders.

Superficially one would expect that the abated students would have reason to be content. There is little effective change for those on $22.50 but on the surface those on $19 get a $4 increase.

However if a conservative estimate of a 10% annual [unclear: rate] is added to a $1.50 [unclear: ne][unclear: e] the tax changes announced in [unclear: late][unclear: xtra] fees that students will have to pay [unclear: to] disappears and the net gam for this group of [unclear: s] is nil. Given this perspective, the students on will actually lose about $3-4 in real terms, above formulation is a very conservative one [unclear: ually] misleadingly portrays the real losses of [unclear: ents]. In February a Department of Education [unclear: ntial] document was leaked to Wellington's Post That document revealed that in order [unclear: re] the STB to its real value in 1976 for 1980 it [unclear: ave] to be increased by $9 per week. This $9 [unclear: de] up of $7.50 for erosion by inflation and or tax changes.

[unclear: nring] to the new single level it is also misleading that $23 is the basic level. In fact there is an restriction on this. Students are not eligible for if they are in receipt of a personal income of [unclear: 000] per annum. The amount of the grant will [unclear: ced] by $2 weekly for every $100 or part thereof [unclear: 000]. For full-time students holiday earnings disregarded.

[unclear: Hardship] Provisions

[unclear: dition] to the Tertiary Study Grant of $23 [unclear: ill] be a Supplementary Hardship Grant of up This will be available only for those in receipt [unclear: ertiary] Study Grant and who would be unable full-time without additional financial support.

[unclear: e] current STB there is a "frozen" difference of ween the abated and unabated rates. Therefore [unclear: ere] was an increase it was applied equally to all [unclear: els].

[unclear: ever] there is no guarantee that in this new two [unclear: em] this will be the case. There is every reason [unclear: ve] that when future increases are made they are be for the $17 rather than the $23.

[unclear: mparable] example is in Sweden where [unclear: er] grant/loan scheme operates. When the [unclear: a] scheme was first introduced in 1964 the [unclear: ant] represented about 25% of the total [unclear: assis-ackage]. By 1968 it was 22% and in late 1975[unclear: nly] 15%.

[unclear: ment] and Loans

[unclear: of] the most severe changes has been made to [unclear: nt's] entitlement to bursary assistance. At the moment a student is entitled to the STB for two undergraduate degrees and one graduate degree.

In 1980 a student will be only entitled for [unclear: assis-e] for a maximum of five years or for two [unclear: recog-thses], which ever is the lesser, be entitled many students who ordinarily would graduate degrees, _[unclear: ce] Students doing longer under-limited in their ability [unclear: law] and medicine, will be alone do post-graduate [unclear: worete] their courses, let years to complete their Bachelor's students take four to do post-graduate work or a second [unclear: un] Their ability degree will be impinged. It is also a [unclear: disinceduate] students who would like to do a two year [unclear: masters] involving research for a thesis.

Even "academically successful" students will be hit. They could' be eligible for only four year's assistance. For example, if a student completed his/her Bachelor degree in three years and Honours in one, s/he would not be entitled to bursary assistance for a fifth year to do a masterate or diploma course.

It is evident that the Government is endeavouring to establish a parallel system of grants and loans. Restricting the grant entitlement is the means of acheiving this. A system of supplementary assistance in the form of loans is being investigated for introduction as soon soon as practicable. It will include provision for "support" for students not eligible for tertiary study and/or fees grant assistance.

Fees

Currently University Entrance entitles students to a Fees Bursary which pays for all tuition fees. This applies to both full-time and part-time students.

Under the new scheme the Fees Bursary will be replaced by a Tertiary Fees Grant which will meet 75% of tuition fees. In 1979 this would have amounted to students paying approsimately $50 in fees With the erosion of university funding, however, it is quite possible that fees may increase in the future.

There is also an income restriction on eligibility for the Tertiary Fees Grant. Students are not eligible if they have a "personal gross annual income from any source" in excess of $3,000. It is unclear whether the words "from any source" apply to supposed assistance from parents or spouse.

Means-Testing

Even though the National Party rejects means-testing for its pet Superannuation Scheme, it is nevertheless prevalent throughout this new bursary scheme. [unclear: sentially] there are two types of means-testing -[unclear: paren eluding] spouse) and income (of the individual). A of the two is also possible.

Parental [unclear: meai] will be applied for single students under the [unclear: age] twenty. In applying for the Supplementary Harship [unclear: nt] this group of students will have to make joint [unclear: appli] with their parents or guardian. About 53% of all students are under 20. One of the greatest faults of parental [unclear: means] testing is that it assumes a uniform willingness of parents to contribute towards the costs of university education.

As stated earlier both the Tertiary Study Grant and the Tertiary Fees Grant are income-tested. The problem with income testing is working out a fair and equitable system in which to do it. One way is to base it on the previous year's income. But this falls down because both personal and general circumstances can vary considerably from year to year.

Another way is to base it on assumed earnings for the coming year. However assumed earnings are not easy to assess in advance and the result can invariably be a significant discrepancy between assumed and actual earnings.

Overall Assessment

The overall effect is two-fold. On the one hand it is a further erosion of the principle of free tertiary education. On the other it erodes the principle of universities being educational institutions rather than simply being qualification-entered institutions.