The many legacies of The Right Excellent Errol Walton Barrow QC require little introduction or explanation to the average Barbadian. Perhaps one of his most important initiatives was the introduction of free secondary education, in 1961. This single action revolutionised the severely limited educational opportunities then available and enabled more than two generations of previously disadvantaged Barbadians to gain an education and improve their economic standing. According to the United Nations Development Programme, Barbados now boasts of a 99.7% literacy rate, compared to the 85% world average, and our international business sector can speak proudly of the fact that its cadre of Barbadian professionals and managers distinguishes the country from many of its competitors.
Successive governments built on the foundation set by Mr. Barrow, providing more schools at both the primary and secondary level, facilitating expansion of the University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus, and introducing subsidised tertiary education. But in recent years, subsidies at the tertiary level have had to be curtailed dramatically, causing much public outcry. We can but wonder why the consternation?
There have been concerns voiced in the private and public sector about the unsustainable cost of a rapidly expanding University campus, and even conjecture that the focus seems to have been on quantity of students and range of degree courses, rather than quality of education. There have also been questions on the relevance of the courses of study offered, compared to Barbados’ needs going forward, especially in light of the emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics).
Government financial support for an ever-expanding education system that, at the same time, must remain relevant and of a high standard, is clearly a formidable challenge in the best of times, let alone in this harsh global economic era. Perhaps, as far back as 1977, with the establishment of the Student Revolving Loan Fund, the then Government sought to meet the eventual reality of financial sustainability half-way, cushioning the inevitable withdrawal of heavy subsidies.
If so, the programme has certainly not succeeded in Barbados, and the reason is painfully obvious. The underlying concept of a revolving student loan fund is that loans are given to eligible persons (who cannot afford to pay up front) to assist them in pursuing tertiary studies, so that they can, in turn, take their place and contribute to the social and economic development of the country. If the system is to work effectively, those borrowers must repay those loans to enable incoming students to continue to benefit. Government might be expected to top up the revolving fund with capital to reflect the expansion of the student base, as appropriate, but no Government could reasonably be expected to have to replenish capital as a result of the non-payment of loans. It is simply not sustainable, and what appears to have happened in Barbados is nothing short of a national disgrace.
Under the Fund’s policy, there is a one year grace period after the borrowers complete their studies, which is designed to allow them to find gainful employment before being called upon to repay the loan. It appears, however, that the Fund has been allowed to be treated as a grant programme, with little expectation of repayment, and few consequences for non-payment. Indeed, some defaulters have skipped the island leaving their deficit to be covered by hapless guarantors, who never thought they would find themselves in that position.
As a result, the Fund is now struggling to finance the studies of prospective borrowers, as there is over 30 million dollars owing to them by defaulters. How much of that, after decades of default, is likely to be collectible?
Under the Act, the Fund is empowered to commence court proceedings against delinquents to recover sums owing. They are also permitted to file a Notice of Unpaid Certificate in Court against the defaulter, which acts as a legal judgement in favour of the fund. In addition, the Fund can also seek a garnishment order which allows the Court to demand that any third party who owes money to the defaulter, pay that money over to the Fund in satisfaction of the loan. Given all of these tools at their disposal, why has the Fund reached such a critical point?
Regardless of who is to blame, urgent action is needed to pursue defaulters who have had the benefit of these loans and are in a position to repay. Unfortunately for the guarantors, the same must apply to them, without whose support those borrowers would not – or should not – have been lent any money. These defaulters’ neglect is suffocating the next generation who simply seek the same opportunities to advance themselves. Government – and by extension, the taxpayers of Barbados – cannot be expected to provide new capital to maintain the status quo, and it is time that we Barbadians recognise that the entitlements of citizenship have limitations, and come with great responsibility.
It is time to pay it forward.
Section: