Last week the debate around tuition fees was focused on whether it would put off people from low income backgrounds going to university. Yesterday that choice was made even harder for them as the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) was axed. When I say it was axed that is effectively what the savings to the scheme have done. If you turn to page 42 of the green book you will see that the savings from “replacing” EMA are £0.5 billion, which also happens to be the entire budget for the scheme.
EMAs are a means-tested allowance of between £10 and £30, paid to 16- to 19-year-olds from deprived backgrounds (where household income falls below £30,810 per year) who stay on in education. Those receiving the £30 payment make up 80 percent of all recipients and to be eligible to receive this payment household income must be below £20,817 per year. This sum may seem insignificant to some but, as a survey carried out by the NUS in 2008 found, 65% of participants on the highest EMA rate of £30 stated that they could not continue to study without EMA.
In addition to this research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that attainment at GCSE and A-level by recipients of EMA has risen by 5 to 7 percentage points since its introduction, and by even more for those living in the most deprived neighbourhoods.
But, if one wants to look for an example of why the axe should not fall over the EMA system, then one need only look to Scotland. The SNP administration in Holyrood, in charge of the EMA for Scotland, has cut the budget for EMA by 20 percent and made regressive changes to the scheme’s eligibility criteria. These changes lowered the threshold for the £30 payment and axed the £10 and £20 payments.
This has unfortunately led to fears in Scotland that progress made will be undone by the SNP administration’s policy of cutting the EMA budget. At the time of the cut the NUS claimed that it would lead to 8,000 students dropping out and, as youth unemployment in Scotland has risen by 7,000, it is hard to dispute their early prediction.
The £20 and £10 payments may seem a small amount of money to some, but this maintenance allowance removes some of the barriers to participation in education. The £10 and £20 brackets are particularly useful in covering costs towards transport.
Figures released by the Scottish Government last year on EMA highlighted that the old system developed under the Labour administration was successful. The figures showed that 39,110 college students and school pupils from low-income families were taking up the allowance in 2007-8, up from 2006-07 levels.
The figures also showed that the allowance helped school pupils from low-income families stay on in education, with 77% of school pupils on the EMA scheme for the full year completing the attendance rates and learning expectations set out for them compared to 70% in 2006-7. The percentage of those on the EMA for a full year receiving £10 and £20 payments completing the scheme increased to 82% (the figures for 2006-7 were 74% for those on £10 payments and £73% for those on £20 payments).
These figures may just be a list of statistics for some but for me it is a different story. Since I started the Save EMA campaign I have had hundreds of emails and messages from teenagers on the website who are worried about their futures. I will leave you with this one from Alex, which I feel symbolises the importance of extending choice and empowerment in education:
“Without EMA I wouldn’t be able to go to college and become what I have always dreamed of being.”
Please sign our pledge at www.SaveEMA.co.uk
Hurrah for this campaign; as a teacher our school was in the pilot for EMAs and I saw firsthand their positive impact because students don’t get them if there are problems with attendance or the standard or completion of their work. They therefore provide a security and an incentive and have had a totally positive impact on young people, their learning and building their confidence and ambition.
I urge everyone affected by this to lobby the government over this. The EMA scheme has been hugely successful in maintaining discipline, punctuality and has incentivised kids to do better than they were doing when they were receiving no incentive at all. It helps less well off families with, clothes, fares, food and books and stationary for college and gives a young person a sense of independence. It would be absolute folly to get rid of it and I am asking the government to reconsider abolishing it.
I’m a student at the minute, this is so studid cutting it I think it’s fair as it is. Who’s going to provide the books as we have to pay for them. we dont get paid if were late, iif we dont attend form, if we miss any assembly’s or lesson i think thas fair. the government just want all the teenagers to go on the dull then and make more trouble like all the stabbing and everything that has happened recently. least were still in education. how many students you really think going to stay in education when ema is cut.
Danielle,baby ,well you’re not dull ! you have the guts to speak out . Go girl !
The entire EMA system is floored. If it is to create independence then why shouldn’t all students receive the allowance instead of being dependent on their parents higher income. If it is to create an incentive then why should the people not receiving the money want to go to college. A reimbursement system would work much more effectively, this would help to cut the budget but would still help students who need financial help and could be offered to every student.
a lot of kids won’t even recognise the term ‘parents’, this system was surely also about saying ,well, your country cares about you ?
there you go shame on you con&libs party ,the rich get richer and the poor stay poor .the ema money not just help poor kids it also show them that if you work hard you get paid as you do when you start work. shame on this government ,what next.
“the reasons for the rise in youth unemployment among black youths are manifold;under achievement in the classroom,a disadvantage when it comes to friends and family connections helping them find jobs,and the disappearance of the traditional blue – collar jobs “. Steve Strand (Warwick Uni.) “One in two young black people (48%.16-24 year olds) being unemployed is quite a shocking figure. If you think that education is a gatekeeper to a future there are gaps between black and white performance.But that is not big enough to account for the difference of education”. “Others point out that even in good times a third of young black people are out of a job,a “scaring effect” that meant there is a persistent loss of skills,and a longer and harder road back to the workforce”.
i dont think you should cut EMAs because it then means the 16-19 year olds living on the breadline wouldnt be able to go to college and the money that they get from this would be there only source of income as im only 15years old im not eligible for yet, but once i go to college i hope that the EMAs will be there to help me throught the college years, if not i will not be able to got to college