A NEW government payment to help families with schoolchildren has sparked backlash from parents of higher education students, who say it exposes a “deeply unfair” gap in support.
Earlier this week, ministers unveiled the “Back to School Bonus”, offering households earning under £75,000 up to £150 per child to cover uniforms and essentials. Social Security Minister Lyndsay Feltham said the scheme would “ease any financial stress on families”.
But the Student Loan Support Group has now accused the government of failing to apply the same logic to university students facing significantly higher costs.
In an email to ministers, support group co-founder Nicki Heath said the disparity between the £75,000 threshold for the school bonus and the £52,600 threshold for student grants was “difficult to understand”.
She warned that by failing to increase the student finance threshold this year, ministers had effectively cut support.
“The reduction in grant for the same income has increased because the income threshold didn’t change this year,” she wrote.
Figures provided by the group show that families earning £75,000 must now find more than £4,000 a year to bridge the gap between the maximum grant and what they actually receive for a student studying away from the Island.
Ms Heath added that the real cost of higher education already far outstrips available support.
“Accommodation costs can eat up their entire grant, before we even add in travel, cost of study, and food,” she said.
“The hours students need to work to cover the costs over their grants is rising; this can impact their study time.
“Due to the war in the Middle East, we can expect further cost-of-living increases, as has been forecasted.”
The group says the situation has been worsened by years of inaction, with key thresholds frozen since 2018. Had they kept pace with inflation, Ms Heath argued, the income limit would now exceed £70,000.
“Any pay increase last year further erodes the value of the student grant,” she added, warning that even modest rises in household income can significantly reduce support.
Ms Heath said the contrast between the support for schoolchildren and higher education students sends the wrong message.
“[The] government acknowledges the cost increases for one child and helps, but ignores completely the other whose costs are significantly greater,” she wrote.
Ms Heath warned that cost-of-living pressures could see some students ultimately choosing not to study at all.
“All we can do now is ask directly, if you can provide answers as to why government are treating these two groups of students disproportionately, as student costs are significantly greater than a child at school,” she wrote.
Following queries from the JEP, the Social Security Minister said she “understand[s] and sympathise[s] with the financial pressures faced by parents with children of all ages”, but stressed that the Back to School Bonus had been designed within strict budget limits.
In an email response to Ms Heath, Deputy Feltham said the £75,000 income threshold “was chosen to support lower income parents within the available budget for the Scheme”, with funding agreed by States Members as part of the 2026–2029 Budget.
The minister also pointed to differences between school and post-16 education, noting that while school attendance is compulsory, “there are many options for post 16 children and it is appropriate that the family makes an application if the student wishes to follow a path that qualifies for a student grant.”
Further details of the Back to School Bonus scheme and its eligibility criteria are due to be published on the government website ahead of applications opening later this year.
