Grants for Students

Scan page 5

The opportunist announcement by Shirley Williams, Secretary of State for Education that she is considering introducing grants for, school students who decide to stay on for sixth form education must be viewed with extreme scepticism.

Even Labour spokesmen have admitted that the proposed "full national inquiry" into such a scheme and into the grants currently available for the 16-19 age group will probably mean no action for another 2-3 years.

Any grant paid would certainly be means-tested like those for university students, and, if they were to fit in with Chancellor Healey's strategy of spending cuts, would be so small as to be insignificant.

The present maintenance grants for school studentsavailablé only at the discretion of the local education authority -average at a puny £2.50 per week for a sixth former. A mere 2½% of school students in England and Wales receive such 16-year olds in full time education, with a £4 bonus in the family allowance for every dependent child over 16.

But she did not say whether this would be awarded to all sixth formers or only those on special courses. And it is uncertain whether the money would be paid to the student or via the family.

Vague promises have also been made concerning students in the 16-19 age group who choose to go to Colleges of Further Education.

At present such students are entitled to tiny allowances similar to those for school students-and only 7% of those eligible receive grants.

Principle

Grants for school and college students should be a principle, not cynically exploited by Labour leaders as a vote-catching gimmick, or as a means of artificially reducing the numbers of youth on the dole:

Williams openly • admitted that one motive for proposing the scheme is that too many working class youth are not staying at school and are swelling the numbers of youth unemployed.

A £10-£14 discretionary handout is seen as a cut-price way of fobbing off youth and the Lib-Lab• coalition, with spending cuts forcing the closure of schools, cutbacks on books and equipment, and mass unemployment arong teachers.

None of these points were raised by National Union of Sturiante Pracirant Stalinict Cio Slipman, who welcomed the Williams proposals, and suggested no steps towards obtaining student grants.

The small National Union of School Students (NUSS), however, is in a position to take up Williams' vague promises and launch a campaign in the schools for the payment of adequate grants.

Era * Manpower Services Commission (which operated the 'youth opportunities' programme)£19.50 per week.

This grant must be protected against inflation-rising penny by penny in pace with the cost of living. And it must be paid direct to the student, and not through the intermediary of the family.

Around The cost of such grants would of course be considerable -and would highlight the necessity for an all-round fight against cuts in public spending and cuts in education in particular.

But if youth are to have a genuine opportunity to pursue their education beyond the age of 16, this fight must be taken up in the student, trade union and Labour movement.

Back peddle

Meanwhile Williams continues to back peddle on the introduction of comprehensive education, allowing Tories in a number of areas to preserve selective schooling and refusing to take action to stamp out private education.

Comprehensive education got underway in the 1950s. On present showing it could be at least the year 2,000-half a century later-before grants for school students and fully comprehensive education are finally introduced!