When Minister of Education Batt O’Keefe put fees on the agenda for discussion at the start of the summer, as always, a variety of responses came out. Somve were measured, considered, and flexible; others were simplistic, unbending, and unhelpful.
When Minister of Education Batt O’Keefe put fees on the agenda for discussion at the start of the summer, as always, a variety of responses came out. Somve were measured, considered, and flexible; others were simplistic, unbending, and unhelpful. Tragically, the USI’s response is of the second sort. They have maintained their stringently anti-fees line since the beginning of the debate, right up to this month’s intention to “highlight the negative effects that any reintroduction of fees would bring” (our emphasis) to delegates at Fianna Fáil’s meeting in Galway on the weekend of the 14th.
Utterly rejecting the idea of any change is an extraordinarily simplistic and saddening view for a student union that should be nimble, sharp and revolutionary. Already, before the academic year has even properly begun, the USI are being left behind in this debate. Last Thursday’s meeting between the Minister and the heads of the Universities to discuss, among other things, the suggestion of an Australian-style loans system did not benefit from the USI’s input because their puerile sulking over the very fact that the debate is taking place at all means stakeholders have no incentive or desire to listen to them.
The USI have further made the mistake of conflating “free fees” with “access to education”. Universal access to education, ostensibily the USI’s desire, is something that this newspaper and every right-thinking person believes is a worthwhile cause. But the USI has lost sight of this goal with its focus on fees. Universal access to education is a complex social issue that doesn’t merely have cash at its roots, and by combing the two issues, the USI have employed a strawman that undermines their position.
The USI are failing us all – their members – by pursuing this line so doggedly. If they continue, their stewardship of our best forum for discussion will squander our chance to contribute our concerns and interests and will drown out our potentially loudest voice.