• Full Story

Student loan plan may breach human rights - HRC

Print

Wed, 18 May 2011 4:23a.m.

A plan to restrict older people's access to student loans has sparked calls of age discrimination

A plan to restrict older people's access to student loans has sparked calls of age discrimination

By Matthew Backhouse

A plan to restrict older people's access to student loans has sparked calls of age discrimination, with the Human Rights Commission saying it could breach human rights law.

The Government has signalled it would restrict living cost loans to people aged over 55 in Thursday's budget, as part of a broader push to cut costs in the student loan scheme.

The move could save about $10 million a year.

The Human Rights Commission today said it would be concerned about any arbitrary age-related policy that restricted the ability of students to up-skill and retrain.

The commission's Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner, Judy McGregor, said such a policy would potentially be unlawful discrimination under the Human Rights Act.

The Human Rights Act and the Bill of Rights Act make it illegal to refuse people goods and services on the basis of their age.

Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce said he had sought advice from officials and was satisfied the change was consistent with the Bill of Rights Act.

The difficulty with loaning to older people was that as they advanced in age, the likelihood they would repay their loans from income declined.

"We have an up to 70 percent write-off of those loans made to over 55s," Mr Joyce said.

"We would still look to retain loans for fees, it would be things like living costs that we would be concerned about."

But Dr McGregor urged the Government to explore non-discriminatory ways to recover student loan debts.

She said labour force data suggested the number of people in the workforce aged over 65 was climbing, which meant students over 55 would have more time to repay student loans.

Students aged over 55 were often women seeking a second chance at tertiary education or people seeking to retrain following redundancy.

Green Party tertiary education spokesman Gareth Hughes said refusing loans to older people was unfair and "a clear-cut case of age discrimination".

He said the move could expose the Government to legal action on the basis of discrimination.

"It would be much smarter to abandon this discriminatory policy than to wade into a complex legal minefield trying to justify that discrimination."

Greypower president Roy Reid said the move was a short-sighted exercise that targeted the elderly and could have serious repercussions in the future.

"The Government should explain why it should discriminate on the basis of age for no real reason apart from cost cutting."

New Zealand Union of Students' Associations co-president David Do said everyone could contribute to an innovative and highly skilled society, no matter whether they were young or old.

"Shutting out older students for no other reason than to cut costs is discriminatory and unfair," he said.

If the proposed changes were inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act, it would be the Attorney-General's job to bring that to the attention of Parliament.

Attorney-General Chris Finlayson said he probably held the record for issuing such reports, compared with previous attorneys-general.

"I'll look at the bill when it comes before me, as I do in my capacity as Attorney-General, and give you my view then," he said.

NZPA

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

18 May 2011 10:24p.m.

Wolfman wrote:

@Clarke. What benefit are you on? Obviously you want your Loony Labour Mates back in so they will increase it for you. By the way I am not a National Party member, in fact at the next election I won't be voting as there's no one standing from any party worthy of a vote.

18 May 2011 08:58p.m.

alan wrote:

where are your alternatives clarke ?? Obviously you are a typical labour supporter who has his hand out wanting something for nothing. An age restriction is a sensible idea especially during these difficult times. Just remember everyone if you vote for labour you vote for idiots like clarke !!

18 May 2011 05:30p.m.

Clarke wrote:

So just so we know what sort of person Wolfman is. He would get rid of working for families He would get rid of student loans (completely) He would sell off all our assets. So what does New Zealand have left after Wolfmans done? Nothing... nothing but handouts for the rich and business. Its Nationals fault that we are in so much debt, the best way to balance the books is create more employment.. but National remains clueless. Just remember everyone, if you vote National you vote for idiots like Wolfman.

18 May 2011 01:37p.m.

cherie wrote:

So at 80 you should be able to get it?
Common sense is needed and an age restriction is indeed common sense.
This is the problem with NZ to many people spouting forth on human rights. My children have a right to live in a counrty that is not crippled by debt don't they?

18 May 2011 12:59p.m.

Alex wrote:

@Wolfman: Hmm you are right, you have convinced me, only the children of the mega-wealthy should have access to tertiary education - that seems fair.

18 May 2011 11:59a.m.

Mouthguard wrote:

Toberone, I'd argue that none of those age limits are arbitrary. You are right, it is a stupid argument.

18 May 2011 11:08a.m.

Wolfman wrote:

@Alex, is that really the taxpayers or Government problem? It's the same as anything else in this world, if you can't afford it, you don't get it. This country has become known as the Handout capitol of the world.

18 May 2011 09:58a.m.

Alex wrote:

@Wolfman: No one would (be able to) go to uni then.

18 May 2011 09:43a.m.

Wolfman wrote:

Here's an idea, stop all Student Loans and tell anyone who wants to go to Uni you pay your own way. No Discrimination and would save the country Millions of Dollars. Oh but wait, Politicians haven't got the balls to do that.

18 May 2011 09:23a.m.

Toberone wrote:

What: there are not allowed to be age limits on stuff. I'm not 65 but can I have my pension now. Can a 12 yr old drive a car, get married, or vote. This is one of the silliest arguments I have seen for a long time. There are arbitary age limits on lots of thimgs. Obviously the greens are behind it. If passed properly by parliament it becomes law age and all.