By Richard Digard
Before Economic Development Minister Kirsten Morel devotes any more of his time and that of his ministerial colleagues to pondering how best to stop the ‘brain drain’ of Jersey students – by hitting them financially with loans instead of grants if he’s given half a chance – I suggest they ask the students themselves what puts them off returning.
A pound to a penny it will be the near zero chance of ever owning a home here, given that a one-bed flat costs an average of nearly £340,000, and rents are equally astronomical. Whack ’em with student debts of, what?, £40,000-£60,000 and that’s really going to improve home migration, isn’t it?
Check the number two reason for not coming back and it will be job prospects and the desire to progress their chosen field after graduating. Oddly enough, not everyone wants to work in finance and some of the most popular degree courses aren’t readily employable here.
The third reason will be career progression – yes, there are opportunities in Jersey but many students in both islands really do want to try to spread their wings after a childhood on the rock and see how far they can go rather than drift back here, where you’re pretty much guaranteed to be able to make a living but not necessarily a home.
I say this with some confidence, because I’ve carried out the exercise. Yes, it was a few years ago, but not one of my son’s cohort, him included, have returned post-graduation, and they and others I’ve quizzed over the period all quoted the same reasons.
It was more than academic interest that I did so, too, because Guernsey also flirted with the idea of swapping grants for loans. And, bluntly, it was as daft then as it is now.
Yes, I get that Jersey needs to save money – not as pressingly as Guernsey, which has really made a hash of its finances and near-term future, but let that pass for a moment – but penalising students isn’t the way to do it.
As an aside, there’s also the issue of what would happen if the Morel Plan was 100% successful and all students returned, like homing pigeons, each and every year. And all of them looking for somewhere to stay and for a job that’s suitable for their ability and experience.
OK, that’s not exactly what the minister’s looking for. He wants a scheme that’s just a bit successful, so they come back in dribs and drabs and can be absorbed, but particularly when they’ve gained a bit of experience. He is Economic Development after all. So when does the grant become a loan? After how many years? Five? Ten, 15?
Name a figure, it doesn’t really matter, but somehow you’re going to have to keep tabs on them. In Guernsey’s case, the last figures I can easily access (November 2021) show that there were 514 students enrolled in higher education in receipt of a taxpayer grant. Jersey’s figure will obviously be significantly higher.
The point here is that our figure peaked at more than 800 in 2013, so if grant/loan clawback starts after ten years, that’s more than 6,000 ex-Guerns to account for and therefore way, way more Beans. And if you – using a brand new department, obviously – do stay in touch, what then? When does the friendly annual correspondence from a paternalistic States of Jersey turn into pay up or else?
I won’t, however, labour the point over the difficulties of recovering debt out of jurisdiction or the desirability of sending in the heavies to repossess furniture and other not-so-valuables from a former Jersey student who hasn’t quite made the grade in life, tempting though that is.
Instead, it’s worth reflecting that in the UK, the value of outstanding student loans at the end of March 2023 reached £206bn. The UK government forecasts the value of outstanding loans to be around £460bn (2021-22 prices) by the mid-2040s, so ministers there probably wish they’d stuck with a brain drain instead.
My biggest issue with the Morel Plan, however, is far more fundamental. The harder you make it for children and young adults to learn, the more you handicap their potential for life and for living.
That’s why comparing too few students returning to a poor return on investment is so objectionable. The investment is in the individual, not the States of Jersey or its employers here. It is a compact with all Jersey families who live and pay taxes that government will do its utmost to see that their children have the best possible chance to flourish, develop their skills and knowledge, unlock their talents and reach full capability.
If you think that’s pushing it a bit, why not charge kids for going to primary school or reduce the leaving age for secondary pupils? That’ll save a few bob. Oh, and Guernsey used to do it. Admittedly, that was purely to ensure a steady supply of cheap labour for the then dominant tomato industry, but the numbing effect on young lives was the same and pretty catastrophic when horticulture collapsed.
From her cautious comments the other day, I take it that Education Minister Inna Gardiner also has doubts about the Morel Plan and hurrah for that. It seems to me that if a supposedly civilised and prosperous community isn’t prepared to back its offspring all the way and as far as they can go it ceases to have legitimacy.
Instead, I’d be looking at the means testing that already surrounds Jersey and Guernsey student loans and see if they are designed with taxpayer interests more in mind than those of a young adult trying to use education as the most effective lever towards social mobility and equality of opportunity.
For an island that claims to Put Children First it seems a rather more productive use of ministers’ time.
-
Richard Digard is the former editor of the Guernsey Press.
