Free education and the auxiliary-fee debate

A.W. Sangster, Contributor

Tuition fees and the auxiliary fees that schools charge have again come into focus with the minister of education stating that no child should be barred from school on the basis of his or her parents being unable to pay the school fees. He has also accused some schools of charging exorbitant auxiliary fees.

The schools have replied that the money paid by the Government is inadequate to run the institutions and pay basic bills. Hence, the need for auxiliary fees.

Political history

The myth of free education was foisted on the county when Michael Manley announced in Parliament on May 2, 1973, that education at both secondary and tertiary levels would be 'free'. Edwin Allen, the then Opposition spokesman on education, walked across the floor of the House and shook Mr Manley's hand. Neither of them realised at the time what they were saying and doing, for the legacy of free education has been the subject of debate and political-party changes over the past nearly 40 years. It is worth recording some political history.

The People's National Party (PNP) government in the 1970s continued the announced policy of 'free education' meaning that students paid no fees or only small ancillary fees. The problem that the schools faced then and now is that the Government did not make up the missing tuition fee component that the schools used to get. Therefore, at the very beginning of the free education policy the schools were the ones that got short-changed, or to use a more recent term, got shafted.

The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) government reversed the free-education policies of the '70s in 1986 and required students at both the secondary and tertiary institutions to pay fees. There was a huge outcry at the time and strikes at the College of Arts, Science and Technology (now University of Technology) and the University of the West Indies for weeks. The Sherlock Report brought some relief to the emotional turmoil at the time.

On return to power in 1989, the PNP government for which Michael Manley had made an election promise to bring back free education, found itself unable to fulfil that campaign promise. To cover this embarrassment, the euphemistic term 'cost-sharing' was used to deal with the abhorrent term 'fees'. But whatever the term, school fees had not only returned but remained.

The JLP government, on return to power in 2007, initiated a modified form of free education by abolishing the tuition fee component for the secondary-school system. Auxiliary fees, which, by this time, had become an entrenched feature of the schools budgeting system, remained and had to be approved by the ministry. This is where we are today.

The problem of financing schools

Education is not free and has never been free. Some critical principles emerge in the debate:

1. Those that can afford the fees should pay.
2.  A child should not be denied schooling through inability to pay.
3.  The ministry should make up to the school the fees that the student should pay.
4.  There is the basic problem of the 'missing money'.

The problem of the missing money arises from two counts. First, the level of tuition fees allowed the schools, and which the ministry pays, is too low and does not cover many of the basic costs of running the school. This item needs fundamental revision. Second, not all students are compliant with the auxiliary fees that the school charges. This shortfall is not made up by the ministry, but is critical to the financing of the school's operations.

The PATH Programme is geared to helping families that need help with school expenses. We hear of PATH money being used for hairdressing and new clothes. One solution is to give the schools the PATH funds to disburse and to account for. The guidance counsellors are well aware of the students' needs and could help on the one hand by providing direct assistance to the student and on the other hand by using some of the funds to make up the unpaid auxiliary fees.

The society has to realise that education is an investment in human development and represents one of the most important elements in a child's future. Education must be seen as both a national and personal investment in the future.

Dr Alfred Sangster is executive director of the Jamaica Institute of Management. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.