USI HAS ACCUSED the Minister for Education of "fudging" her responsibilities to students over the distribution of the £150 charge levied on them.

The comment was made by the union's education officer, Malcolm Byrne, following the Minister's reply to a Dail question on the Higher Education Authority working group formed to make recommendations on the charge.

That HEA group was established in October 1995, following pressure from USI. The basis for its establishment was the concern of student representatives that some colleges were using the £150 charge levied on students for examinations, registration and student services, following the abolition of fees. It emerged that some students' unions were receiving less than £6 per student from the fee, with which they were expected to fund student services as well as clubs and societies.

Among those who receive the smallest allocation from the charge are Carlow RTC and UCG, where the unions receive only £5.70 per student. UCD students' union receives approximately £7, according to USI, less than the unions at Dundalk, Waterford or Limerick RTCs.

The HEA working group is chaired by C Noel Lindsay, chairman of the HEA, and includes representatives of the university sector, the RTCs, the DIT, the HEA and the Department of Education. USI has three representatives, the single largest group.

However, the working group has met only once since its establishment. That meeting was held in July 1996; despite efforts by USI, it has failed to meet again.

"Nothing is happening on it," Byrne says. "There should be a model code of practice by now. USI has been trying to get the group to meet, hut there has been no movement on it."

According to the Minister, the HEA "decided that certain information in relation to the distribution off the £150 charge would be collated with a view to informing the work of the group". The Minister went on to say that "certain difficulties" had been experienced in this area and the HEA had contacted the various parties involved in an effort to expedite matters.

The delay has been caused by difficulties in obtaining a precise breakdown of the manner in which some colleges distribute the £150 charge. USI now plans to provide the HEA working group with an overview of what it perceives to be the problems involved in obtaining the information in question.

USI is particularly anxious that progress should be made towards a model code of practice before the cap on the £150 charge is lifted at the beginning of the next academic year. The national union is concerned that the abolition of fees may force colleges to look elsewhere for autonomous sources of income and an increase in the £150 charge might be one way of achieving that. In the absence of a model code, USI fears that students could face rising levies with little or no say in the ultimate dispersion of the money raised.

The working group will meet in the very near future to consider further steps and USI hopes that speedy progress will be made.