The Malay Peninsula was under direct British rule for more than a century. After the 2nd World War, when the anti-colonial struggle was at its height, Britain knew that it could no longer contain the Independence movement, and had to resort to indirect control through a class of local elites. That marked the first wave of overseas students, but they were mainly the children of rich aristocrats and business tycoons.

The picture changed somewhat in the 1960-70s. 'Independence' and 'development' entrenched the elites who in turn bred a string of professionals and technocrats. In a developing country like Malaysia, a glaring gap exists between the rich and the working masses, whose life hovers around the brink of poverty, despite generations of unflinching toil. They have no hope out of this destitute whirlpool; their dream is if they work hard and save enough, perhaps one of their children could have a high education and climb out of this under priviledged class. But how many of such dreams could come true?

Minimal Higher Education

Malaysia like many developing countries, largely through the effect of colonization, plummeted downwards in value due to persistently high inflation, and this is a continuing trend.

The Basic Balls up

During the existence of the STB (1976-79) the basic level was $30 per week. If the level had been indexed to the CPI at the level of the STB's introduction in 1976, then at the start of 1979 it should have been $36.04 (requiring a 20.1 % increase) and at the end of the year it should have been $40.65 (requiring a 36.8% increase). It is NZUSA's policy, in fact, that the basic level should be adjusted to the 1976 level.

Only a politician like Merv Wellington could, in one fell swoop, transform a very poor situation into an appalling one.

The already eroded $30 was cut by $7 to $23 per week. Thus instead of the required has its development priorities distorted. By as late as 1970 there was only one university. To-day there are five, and a few technical colleges. Even so, there are only places for about 30,000 tertiary students compared with 40,000 university students alone in NZ, with ¼ the population of Malaysia. The result was (in 1977-78) out of the 26,000 eligible applicants to the universities only 5953 were accepted i.e. 1 in every 4. Of the remaining ¾ and many other thousands more pre-university students, only a very small percentage will be fortunate enough to go overseas to countries like UK, Australia, NZ, etc. To the rest, it means an end of their academic pursuits, a shattered dream and the beginning of a lowly paid menial job if they can find one.

Overseas students rally at Parliament, May 1980 500 fee

The Disparity Gap eases

For the sector of Malaysian students who resort to going overseas, the past few years have become increasingly difficult. Britain now requires overseas students to bear the 'full cost' of their education i.e. 3,300 pounds a year for a science degree. NZ and Australia followed suit last year by imposing a discriminatory fee of $1,500 a year - a stunning 600% increase. To the many middle and lower-middle class families (where the majority of Malaysian students currently in NZ come from) earning between $3,000-6,000 a year, even these two countries are now out of their reach. Thus, only children of the wealthier families can afford to come, with the exception of a handful who manage to borrow and work their way here. This discriminatory fee policy in effect widens the disparity gap and aggravates the indebtedness of families in Malaysia. The official reason given for the increase was that 'overseas students are generally from wealthy families' only adding insult to injury for the hapless victim.

Where we go from here

The NZ General Election is only 6 months away. It will never be a better time to do some lobbying among the MPs, especially.

[unclear: 36 here] was a 23.3% direct [unclear: culo] when the basic level, if [unclear: inasumer] Price Index (CPI), [unclear: shp] 42.64 it was a pathetic $25.4% short-change.

[unclear: But] enough, the level of the [unclear: bamed] the Tertiary Study [unclear: Gnnot] been increased since [unclear: its] or even introduction. If [unclear: inel] when announced in the [unclear: 19I] TSG should have been [unclear: $2lber]1980. And if indexed [unclear: top] introduced in 1980 it [unclear: soon] $25.78 by September [unclear: 19on't] always indicate the [unclear: rea] situation. However, soup [unclear: kitijne]1980 it was discovered [unclear: that] students from Manukau [unclear: Tete] had been using a soup kit. The kitchen's manager [unclear: coi] this was real genuine [unclear: por][unclear: thoiinal] seats who will be extra [unclear: sen] 'sympathetic' to a well [unclear: orgswre] group. We should [unclear: apiiie] National and opposition [unclear: Merliament]. The Labour Party [unclear: havi], said they will rescind the [unclear: feeirm] the next Government.

[unclear: Firsty] experience of UK, it [unclear: shot] a surprise that the NZ [unclear: Goay] at anytime announce an [unclear: incr] $l,500 fee. More likely, it [unclear: willting] increase pegged to the [unclear: rat] of this country! Already [unclear: run] that the fee will be savagely [unclear: incr] 500 next year.

[unclear: Laidrawal] No Olive [unclear: Br:]

[unclear: A] applaud the withdrawal ([unclear: raly]) of the racist LATOS ([unclear: Lalevement] Test for Overseas [unclear: Stut] is no indication that the [unclear: Gotolding] out the olive branch. [unclear: We] caught off-guard. We must be [unclear: rll] out to vehemently oppose any [unclear: rease] before it is too late.

[unclear: Tect] NOSAC is running a [unclear: peti] NZ Government to protest [unclear: agaustifiable] and discriminatory [unclear: feel] to demand an immediate [unclear: freele] with the view to eventual [unclear: reduce] fees to the same level paid by [unclear: Nd]students.

[unclear: The] continues as Long as [unclear: Dis] Exists.

Under the STB the hardship system was much less controversial and complex. If your parents lived in your university centre then your STB was abated by $11 per week to $19. However, you could apply for nonabatement on grounds of hardship. Also if your holiday earnings had been impaired by employment difficulties you could apply for up to $7 extra per week.

There were many flaws in this system, but because the basic level was significantly higher than the TSG, relatively fewer students were in hardship. Consequently, under the STB less than 1000 students would apply for up to $7 per week.

But instead of getting rid of the abatement Wellington in effect abated all students, thereby intensifying the means-testing, and consequently the anomalies. Whereas under the STB less than 1,000 students applied for hardship in 1979, in 1980 nearly 17,000 applied for the Supplementary Hardship Grant. This, albeit crude, comparison sums up the crass nature of the hardship component of the TAG. And what other Minister of Education could cause a 1600% increase in hardship applications in one year?

The Great Fees Rip-off

Merv Wellington was not content to sabotage what remained of a basic grant. He also got stuck into fees. It has been an accepted argument by many people that low tuition fees improves accessibility to tertiary education. This argument is particularly prevalent in Labour Party circles. Consequently as a result of this belief, and student pressure, the Labour government of 1973 to 75 instituted two positive reforms to the Fees Bursary. It extended the value of the Fees Bursary to cover 100% of tuition fees (previously it had been 90%), and the scope of it to cover part time students, not just full timers. These reforms remained in existence until 1979.

In apparent acceptance of the belief that universities should be elitist, and accessibility limited, Mr Wellington made major changes, as part of the TAG, to the Fees Bursary. Renamed the Tertiary Fees Grant (TFG), coverage was cut from 100% to 75%, income restrictions were introduced ($3000 in 1980 and $3500 in 1981) which cut out many part time students, and the criteria for retaining it were made much more stringent. Thus it is not surprising that there was, in 1980, a 21% reduction in the number of students receiving the TFG.

(Dis)entitlement

As if cutting the basic grant, intensifying means-testing and slashing fees grants/bursaries were not enough, Merv Wellington went further and hacked into bursary entitlement (tenure as distinct from eligibility).

Under the STB all bursars were entitled to two courses of study as well as for a masters course. This meant that students could receive a bursary for a "conjoint" course (eg BA/LLB or BA/BSc) as well as a masters degree.

But under the TAG the entitlement for the TSG and the TFG has been cut to two courses or five years, whichever is the lesser. The effect of this is that assistance for conjoint courses is out.

A and B Bursaries

Even this relatively small and less significant area of bursary expenditure did not escape the Education Minister's hatchet. Before the TAG students needed only to pass a full time course to retain their A or B Bursary. But under the TAG more stringent criteria based on higher grades (A and B Passes) are required in order to retain it.

What's left to Say

In one year the Minister of Education has changed an inadequate bursary scheme into a totally disastrous scheme. Every fundamental area of bursary support has been slashed or substantially undermined. Consequently it is essential that students, with election year in the back of their minds, express political opposition to the TAG through the Education Fightback campaign and other channels.