Written Question · S3W-13589 · Session 3
Further to the answer to the first supplementary to question S3O-3427 by Fiona Hyslop on 22 May 2007 (Official Report c. 8926), what diffic…
The question
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to the first supplementary to question S3O-3427 by Fiona Hyslop on 22 May 2007 (Official Report c. 8926), what difficulties to parents and students it considers may have been averted by its decision not to run two systems of means testing for student loans and bursaries concurrently.
The answer
The Scottish Government has averted a number of difficulties to parents and students by its decision to not run two systems of means testing for student loans and bursaries concurrently. These include:
1. By running with one system, we are ensuring that we are no longer discriminating against married couples and civil partners. This is because if we were running two systems we would be taking account of spouse’s income in all cases but only partners income in some cases. Having one system ensures that partners’ income will be treated in the same way as that of a spouse or civil partner. As a result of this, students with partners will be eligible for the same support as students with spouses or civil partners.
2. Two systems of means-testing would mean that many continuing students would miss out on the initiative of extending the young students’ bursary to students under 25 with children. The single system ensures that some continuing students will benefit from this change.
3. In cases where a family has more than one student, this means that the parents will only have to provide one set of information. It also means that both students will be assessed on the same basis and receive the same level of support.
4. Running with one system ensures that all students are assessed on a level footing and the same income assessment will be applied regardless of level of study.
5. There is no risk of students and parents completing the incorrect application form. There are various ways that students can receive information on student support but we have no way of knowing that they are receiving the correct information. With one system of means-testing there is only one application form for students and parents. This ensures that students are using, and receiving, the correct information, advice and guidance and the appropriate application form. It is also means that students are better able to identify what funding they can expect. The advice and guidance literature and the website are simpler and easier to understand. This ensures that the correct application form is used and no delays occur as a result of having to re-submit the correct application along with additional documentary evidence.
6. Students are less likely to experience delays in their application for support. Running two systems of means-testing increases the volume of work for SAAS. While SAAS can take steps to ensure there is minimum impact in the processing and administration of applications, it cannot legislate for students and parents applying under the incorrect means-test. This could potentially lead to delays in payments to students if they were required to re-submit the correct application.
1. By running with one system, we are ensuring that we are no longer discriminating against married couples and civil partners. This is because if we were running two systems we would be taking account of spouse’s income in all cases but only partners income in some cases. Having one system ensures that partners’ income will be treated in the same way as that of a spouse or civil partner. As a result of this, students with partners will be eligible for the same support as students with spouses or civil partners.
2. Two systems of means-testing would mean that many continuing students would miss out on the initiative of extending the young students’ bursary to students under 25 with children. The single system ensures that some continuing students will benefit from this change.
3. In cases where a family has more than one student, this means that the parents will only have to provide one set of information. It also means that both students will be assessed on the same basis and receive the same level of support.
4. Running with one system ensures that all students are assessed on a level footing and the same income assessment will be applied regardless of level of study.
5. There is no risk of students and parents completing the incorrect application form. There are various ways that students can receive information on student support but we have no way of knowing that they are receiving the correct information. With one system of means-testing there is only one application form for students and parents. This ensures that students are using, and receiving, the correct information, advice and guidance and the appropriate application form. It is also means that students are better able to identify what funding they can expect. The advice and guidance literature and the website are simpler and easier to understand. This ensures that the correct application form is used and no delays occur as a result of having to re-submit the correct application along with additional documentary evidence.
6. Students are less likely to experience delays in their application for support. Running two systems of means-testing increases the volume of work for SAAS. While SAAS can take steps to ensure there is minimum impact in the processing and administration of applications, it cannot legislate for students and parents applying under the incorrect means-test. This could potentially lead to delays in payments to students if they were required to re-submit the correct application.
In the Official Report
No contribution in the Official Report cites S3W-13589 by reference.