Education wrong to withdraw dancer's bursary

Tuesday 07 August 2018

An official complaints board says the decision to “withdraw the offer of a bursary to ‘top up’ [a student’s] fees for a specialised course were unjust, oppressive and improperly discriminatory.”

It’s published its findings just two weeks after a public hearing so the new Education Minister “can hopefully act swiftly” and the young dancer can go to college this September.

Her mother, known in the case as Mrs X to protect her identity, appealed to the States Complaints Board after the Student Finance department changed the amount of money her "very talented daughter" would be entitled to, following the recent change in the States' grants system, leaving her with an extra £3,000 to fund per year of her course. Although Education had said no one would be “worse off” under the new scheme the Board said in this case that was clearly not the case.

In October 2017, Mrs X received confirmation her daughter would be entitled to a full grant in respect of the admission fees, and the maintenance grant, leaving Mrs X to fund £1,500.

Mrs X explained that on 3 November, the last communication she had with the department before her daughter's audition, a bursary was being offered to top up additional costs. It wasn't until 12 February, when her daughter's application to the school had been approved that she was told she would no longer receive the bursary under the new higher education funding system, leaving a £4,500 gap to plug per year over a three-year course. "People knew my daughter was seeking this funding. I was given no heads up." 

Pictured: Deputy Jeremy Maçon, Assistant Education Minister who is currently acting as the Minister while Senator Tracey Vallois is away. 

Publishing their views today, Chairman of the Complaints Panel, Geoffrey Crill said, “The Department failed to apply the provisions as they existed at the time of the application. Officers had a duty to apply what was in force at that time, rather than delaying, or ‘parking’, applications to await a new scheme, which was imminent.  This wasn’t fair, or reasonable. The adoption, or otherwise, of new funding provisions was a political matter and not one to be assumed by administrators whose task is to administer the provisions as they exist at any given time.”

He went on, “Mrs. X had made every effort to prepare the groundwork before her daughter embarked on auditions for a college place, in order to ensure that the course was affordable and to avoid raising her daughter’s expectations unfairly. Having secured a funding commitment, she has then had to endure months of anguish whilst shielding her daughter, who was concentrating on her GCSE exams, from the fact that the pursuit of her dream career could be prevented on financial grounds. We urge the Minister to reconsider the application urgently, in order to enable a very talented young Islander to access her studies this September”.

So far, there has been no response from Education.