Due to the return of most student's applications, SHG statistics are now being collated. As a result of this, now is an important time in which to demonstrate a united protest against the Tertiary Assistance Grants scheme (TAG) as a whole. In this way we may effect a decisive change in the system itself.

The chance for such a 'united protest' has come with the meeting of the Vice Chancellor's Committee this Wednesday. At this meeting it is intended that a 'sit-in' be held, in order to bring the various anomalies and short-falls of the scheme to the attention of those in a higher position of authority.

This will be slightly different to the now established 'march' form of protest, and it is hoped that as many students as possible will join together in what can really be effective means of protest. To keep you up to date with the various cock-ups the TAG scheme has to offer you, the following article outlines some of the reasons why the sit-in will be held.

Fact and Fiction

The many faults of the scheme are outlined by NZUSA Research Officer, Ian Powell. The main causes of anomalous decisions are;

• simply straightforward administrative or secretarial mistakes. For example, the applicant's budget may have been added up incorrectly
• the misapplication of specific criteria
• and the inconsistent application of general criteria in cases where the assessor was required to exercise judgement.

A major problem seems to be the question of the criteria themselves. The criteria used for assessing hardship applicants by the Department of Education are a secret, and as a result, "... less than half of the 'anomalous' decisions were challenged (last year) mainly because the students concerned had insufficient knowledge of the basis on which the original assessments were made."

This, along with many other important facts, were learnt after a study into the TAG scheme at Waikato University in 1980.

Injustices of the Scheme

If you are under 20, you have less chance of getting any SHG, as not only are your own financial circumstances assessed, but also those of your parents.

The questions asked on the forms and at the interview itself, are humiliating and are seen to be an invasion of privacy. And even under the present scheme, the more money you saved, the less money you are likely to get during the academic year. On the other hand, if you were unable to get a job, you may be told you should have (never mind the fact that the country is facing its highest level of unemployment since the Depression) and still get nothing.

As President, Deryck Shaw, outlined in NZUSA's position paper on the TAG scheme, the numerous factors revealed "show conclusively that the TAG was a total failure in terms of a scheme supposedly meeting the needs of tertiary students and tertiary education." That was directed at last year's circumstances; this year's are even worse.

Perhaps the biggest fault is the length of time that Supplementary Hardship Grant applicants are required to wait until their case is evaluated.

Close to Home

In a survey carried out at Vic in April this year, it was discovered that only 37% of bursary recipients had applied for the SHG, and of those a massive 66% had not yet heard back from the Education Department.

The department has now assured the University that it has almost finished assessing claims. However, out of a total 1069 applicants so far this year, there are still 230 forms still to be returned. Many have been waiting for up to 12 weeks for a reply.

These students are, at this stage, almost halfway through their academic year, without knowing their income. Some are being forced to withdraw from university because they cannot afford to continue studying.

Of those students who have heard, 32% are getting nothing at all. This is somewhat higher than the 28% last year.

Belts Tightened

Vic Bursaries Officer, Molly Thompson, explained the factors behind the increasing difficulty in getting the SHG.

It seems that the criteria itself had narrowed considerably since last year, with the effect that the Education Department is now "nit-picking" in its assessment procedures. The application form has been redesigned, with a change in format requiring more information about income, expenditure (vacation and in-term) and assets.

Students travelling overseas in the vacation unless approved to do so, will not be eligible for SHG.

Items of expenditure which students will not be allowed to claim for, seem to be continuously growing. This list includes virtually everything one could possibly spend money on, except food, rent, clothes, and textbooks. And considering that in several cases applicants have been turned down because of claims relating to these, the scheme seems to be rather stuffed.

Students who could not get vacation employment (due to sickness, etc) are not being treated sympathetically. It appears that parental income has become an increasingly important factor for those students under 20.

Case Studies

What can only be seen as gross inefficiency in an already vastly inadequate and unequal system, is placing enormous undue pressure both psychologically and physically, upon the very people it was set up to aid.

When looking deeper into the situation, it becomes even more apparent that the system is stuffed.

One woman was told to reduce her $25 rent before she could expect any assistance! Another student was told he should be living at home because he was under 20. The fact that if he did so, he would have to share a room, and travel for over an hour just to get to university each day, did not seem to carry any weight.

Perhaps one of the best though, is the reply given to an Honours student. He was told that his wife should be supporting him, even though she was not earning a salary, but was on a small scholarship which funded her research. If she stopped that research to aid her husband, her scholarship would be cut; if she did not aid her husband, he could not afford to complete his course.

Alternative Scheme

With these glaring anomalies in mind, the University has submitted a possible alternative scheme, based on a modified system. The Minister of Education, Mr Merv Wellington, is at the moment considering these proposals. And with a meeting, chaired by the Director General of the Education Department, this week to look at this, it is important that students show some organised, united reaction to the system as it stands at present.

So the sit-in on Wednesday will provide an opportunity for a wider range of people to participate, and does not require the kind of physical exertion associated with marching.

See you there, if you care.

Peter Hassett