Madam, – Before Batt O’Keeffe reintroduces third-level fees, there are a few questions he might answer.
1. In what sense can people, no matter how wealthy, be made legally responsible for the continuing education of their former “children?
2. Is 18 not the legal end of childhood and the age at which people are constitutionally regarded as self-sufficient, independent entities with all the rights of citizenship?
3. If not, when does a parent’s financial liability for former “children” end?
4. If “children’s” earnings cannot be taken into account when deciding on subventions for elderly parents in nursing homes, why should parents’ earnings be taken into account when deciding on their “children’s” college fees?
5. Why should people who already pay high taxes due to their known or declared income be further penalised when similar earners who, through evasion or avoidance, pay less tax will now be now doubly rewarded by not having to pay the proposed fees?
6. Is envy (“they’ll have to take one holiday less”) a good reason for introducing these fees?
7. How many politicians will have to pay fees for their “children” given that a large percentage of their pay takes the form of tax-free expenses?
– Yours, etc,