Tamara King, Staff ReporterTHE CONTROVERSIAL education tax, introduced 20 years ago, is finally to be used for the purpose it was intended.
Stung by continuous criticisms that the tax is absorbed into the Consolidated Fund and not going towards educating the nation's children, the Government is currently discussing its removal.
"This move may invest people with greater confidence that the money is actually going towards education," Minister of Education, Maxine Henry-Wilson told The Sunday Gleaner last Friday.
Mrs. Henry-Wilson, describing the tax as "a minuscule amount" of the total allocated to education, said that the process of removing the education tax from the Consolidated Fund is slow because of the legislative changes that will have to take place before the monies can be separated.
The education tax was implemented in 1983 by the Edward Seaga-led administration to make up for any shortfall in funds needed to run the education system efficiently. However this goal was never achieved. Instead the money went straight to the Consolidated Fund.
The move revenue officials say was compulsory under the Constitution.
According to chapter 8, section 114, of the Jamaican Constitution, "There shall be in and for Jamaica a Consolidated Fund, into which, subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force in Jamaica, shall be paid all revenues of Jamaica."
However, an official from the Jamaica Teachers Association (JTA) who has more than 20 years professional experience and has taught at various levels of the education system, recalled that at its inception, the fund was going to be used to "top up" the salary of educators.
"When the tax was imposed, the whole country agreed with it and supported it because we thought it was going to be put directly towards education," said the teacher who did not wish to be named.
He said the general public was misled by the Government and that those opposed to the dismantlement of this fund were told that legal ramifications existed and therefore the education tax has to be placed into the Consolidated Fund.
Both the Opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and the JTA have endorsed the current plans to separate the tax from the Consolidated Fund.
Dr. Adolph Cameron, JTA's secretary-general said that the public has always maintained that the money should be kept separately and used specifically to fund education.
"When it is put in the Consolidated Fund, it is not spent on education alone," Dr. Cameron said.
Persons, including Dr. Cameron, who advocate that the education tax be separated from the country's general revenue cite the Antiguan system as a model.
In Antigua and Barbuda, an education levy is collected from the workforce with the exception of a few persons such as teachers and the clergy.
According to Anne Jonas, executive assistant to the Minister of Education in that country, "Prior to 1995, the Ministry of Education used to receive its funding through the Central Treasury (central funding system - the Consolidated Fund equivalent). At the time the Minister felt that it would be wise to have a direct funding stream to help supplement the funding received through the Central Treasury. It was then decided to introduce a levy of 2.5 per cent on salaries. The 2.5 per cent is not, actually, on the entire salary but is on salary exceeding $6,000 per year," she explained.
Mrs. Jonas also added that the levy is managed by a statutory board, the Board of Education which is comprised of ministers of religion as well as public and private sector officials.
"Generally speaking, the central funds, are consolidated, meaning that all the funds go in and are shared up for different areas in the country. The thing is, with an education fund, it means that all the funds should, under normal circumstances, be channelled only into education. So that is, primarily, one of the biggest advantages," she said.
Mrs. Jonas explained that the money received from the education tax is supplemented by central Government funding. This supplement is used to pay salaries and fund large-scale infrastructural developments and in some instances, maintenance.
JLP spokesman on education, Senator Anthony Johnson, agreed that should the fund be taken out of the Consolidated Fund, there would be greater transparency about its use.
He said he had no knowledge that the fund is being used for purposes other than education. However, if that was the case then the Auditor-General should have reported on the matter. Mr. Johnson also said that he would not have a difficulty with the removal of the Education Tax from the Consolidated Fund and its application to education.
