50 Shades of GATE: Beyond Party Politics and Ole Talk – A Student Perspective

“And when you trust your television
What you get is what you got
’cause when they own the information, oh
They can bend it all they want”
– John Mayer, Waiting on the World to Change

We would not be having this discussion on GATE today, if the state consistently monitored and evaluated the programme over the past ten years. We would not be quick to “settle” for a politically expedient solution, a short cut to reengineering GATE as a sustainable education programme that reduces poverty and emancipates minds, if administration after administration intervened in the programme for improvements since its establishment.

Already, student and youth leaders with narrow political ambitions have clung onto the low political hanging fruit, claiming the deferred initiation of changes to GATE to the 2017 academic year as a victory. What I cannot settle for is a weakening of our university and national democracies by limiting public debate and participation from affected groups.

Austerity and recession do not erode democratic principles and youth/student empowerment.

 Multiple messages and Communication Errors: According to the Post-cabinet Press Briefing on the 3^rd August 2016, it was announced, “Where the household income is above $20,000.00 per month students will be required to pay 50% of tuition fees.” However, hours later at a PNM Party Group Meeting in the Port-of-Spain area, acting Attorney General, Minister Stuart Young shared that it was in situations where household income is above $30,000.00 per month students will be required to pay 50% of tuition fees. While this position offers greater relief to lower-middle class families, it is a classic example of the major communication problem of the current government on the handling of the GATE review – miscommunication and different messages in the Post-cabinet Press Briefing and by a Minister in a party forum.

It is easy to write off student activists who are cautious about changes to GATE  as “unreasonable.” These critics place greater faith in the government’s decisions over the public’s demand for more information. Also, this view throws the burden of proof on people who have limited data points to make a decision on a matter in which the government has not sufficiently rationalised and reasoned in the public domain. What we must push back against is a politics of withdrawal in an economic recession where we invent “strong leaders” to hammer through public decision making because our democracy is weak and our institutions are not responsive.

“Waiting on the Report”: The greatest point offered by the student mobilisation effort was building a chorus for a popular demand of the GATE Task Force Report (2016). On the 13th July, it was reported that the 70-page GATE Task Force Report would be submitted to Cabinet on the 14th July and the nation “could expect answers within two weeks.” To date, the Report has not been made public for popular education and debate. The Minister of Education, Anthony Garcia has not communicated anything on the status of the report at this point. On the 5^th August 2016, in an interview in the T&T Guardian newspaper, it was reported, “ [Minister Stuart] Young could not say if Government would be making the Task Force report public.” The only forum where representatives of the state came face-to-face with the public on GATE, this year, was at an event hosted by the Heleconia Foundation, a PNM-affiliated professional association, led by government Senator Mike Coppin on the 28^th July 2016. The event included a presentation by Minister in the Ministry of Education Dr. Lovell Francis. While I commend Dr. Francis for making himself available for public engagement and even criticism, he did not share any information that was not already circulating in the public. The Q&A segment of the programme had questions directed to the Minister one after the other, well after the expected the finish time of the event. Many of the attendees were also in solidarity with the position of the UWI Socialist Student Conference. Curiously, Senator Coppin’s full endorsement of the changes to GATE are very interesting because they not only do not reflect the mood of the forum he convened, it does not even account for some of the considerations offered by the panelists and his Foundation’s membership.

Composition of the Task Force and the Myth of Consultation: In March, it was reported that a GATE Task Force was appointed to submit a report to the Ministry of Education by July 2016. The Task Force comprised 2 consultants, 7 state representatives, 2 University representatives, 4 civil society representatives (of which 3 are private sector) and 1 student representative. The composition of the Task Force is not only anti-student, it illustrates the framework upon which the terms of reference for the task force was set up – matching and measuring education in relations to the labour market. No student leader or civil society organisation concerned about education would want to be present at such an unevenly balanced Task Force. If there was a commission on Capital Development and the Private Sector, can you imagine a committee that included only 1 representative of the business sector?

The Task Force was convened to review GATE; what is abundantly clear is that the committee was meant to assess the wastages in the system, but also propose to the government where “cuts” can be made. While this intervention was necessary and should have occurred many years ago, a more engaging and fulfilling study on ‘the feasibility of funding quality higher education in Trinidad and Tobago’ may have developed a stronger basis for popular support and commitment.

On the 25^th June, the UWI Guild of Students hosted a “GATE Consultation” as the deadline for the submission of the report neared (mid-July) in an attempt to break with the top-down, closed-door, boardroom-centred nature of the Task Force. The Task Force was not required to submit these inputs in its original constitution. Interestingly, in an unsurprising twist of events, the government now references the student consultation that was submitted by the UWI Guild President as a consultative measure that was included into the findings of the Report. A ‘save face’ strategy at the student level has been now co-opted by the government for their ‘save face’ approach in order to legitimise the Report by claiming it included some degree of consultation. While members of the Task Force may not be at liberty to discuss the contents of the Report, it was the duty of student leadership to make demands on the government to publish the report in order to inform students about the framework upon which Cabinet would be making decisions.

GATE Task Force:

– Mr. Errol Simms, Chairperson
– Theresa Davidson, Director of Funding and Grants, Ministry of Education
– Neville Niles, education research specialist;
– Dr. Gaylene Holdup, Scholarship and Advanced Training Division, Ministry of Education
– 2 Ministry of Finance representatives
– Ministry of Planning and Development representative
– Labour and Small Enterprise Ministry representative
– Tobago House of Assembly (THA) representative
– Dr Rolph Balgobin, T&T Manufacturers’ Association

– Natasha Subhero, T&T Chamber of Industry and Commerce
– Richard Saunders, campus registrar, UWI St Augustine Campus
– Dr. Ruby Alleyne, Vice-President, Quality Assurance, UTT
– Dr. Harrison Guy, Human Resource Association of T&T
– Folade Mutota, Women’s Institute for Alternative Development (WINA)
– Makesi Peters, President, UWI Guild of Students

Cost of GATE and Cuts: Education is a public good, but it is not free. Financing higher education is a tremendously expensive endeavour managed by the State to protect the welfare of the citizenry.

A lot of the national conversation has focused on UWI students. Less attention is given to other tertiary education institutions and colleges. Even less is given to the post-secondary institutes that GATE funds. The private institutions include the College of Ultrasound Studies, Bordercom International Tertiary Academy, Academy of Motor Mechanics Ltd. for example. Academic and vocational post-secondary training are covered under the GATE programme. The student population benefitting from GATE is diverse.

The costs of GATE and breakdowns of the information institution by institution have only begun to circulate in the media in the past week. What we do not know as a public is how do the recommendations of the Task Force address the issue of the sustainability of GATE. How were the cuts rationalised ?

Philosophy of Education: Michael Manley in The Politics of Change: A Jamaican Testament (1974), wrote “Every developing society must aim at free, compulsory, universal education as its highest national priority…. Right at the outset it is necessary to clarify a philosophical question about education which cannot be left unanswered” (138). Manley, at the time, is making a bold case for broader access to education for the poor and marginalised of Jamaica. He also introduces an element, which is often ignored in the public discourses on GATE, which recognises a “philosophy of education.” Terms such as “return on investment,” “economic benefits,” and “wealth creation” and the neoliberal likes fit into a logic of capital that starves the intrinsic value of education to a people.

The design of GATE in the Vision 2020 strategy and policy was framed as part of Trinidad and Tobago’s move to become a “knowledge society.” However, lack of monitoring, poor data collection and weak review mechanisms of GATE established since 2004 created a programme that did well for politics and not sustainability. This is why there is a loud voice against the “gimme gimme culture” of GATE, which is seen as a political patronage programme more than a poverty reduction and education strategy. Dr. Terrence Farrell in The Underachieving Society: Development Strategy and Policy in Trinidad and Tobago 1958-2008 (2012), illustrates the failures of the State to execute Vision 2020 in the framework of its original mandate. He shares, “ Vision 2020 became more of a slogan than a plan in implementation…Far from being an exercise in charting the long-term future of the country, Vision 2020 ended as an exercise in futility.” The Vision 2020 document is no longer the guiding policy document for the current PNM Administration; however, the manner in which the “evaluation” of GATE was made have shown that there is little learned from the lesson of the past.

What is valuable cannot always be monetised. What is valuable is valuable. Education is valuable to the person and the development of society.

Questions to the Minister(s) of Education

1. Why was the GATE Task Force’s constitution anti-student?

2. A means test sounds good on paper. The implementation of such criteria raises a number of concerns:

– Is the government prepared to justify why this approach was taken which has fundamentally changed the orientation of GATE?

– What methods of means testing are being considered?

– How will household incomes be assessed?

– A means test also runs the risk of welfarising education. More and more on Facebook and in public debate I see discussion about which group and what group is worthy of GATE.  What measures are being put in place to avoid stigmatisation of students from working class socio-economic backgrounds?

US College Model: Welcome to the Caribbean: I am afraid that the language of the Cabinet decision on GATE reeks of American-style university management. In that model, loan ceilings are raised because student debt is seen as normal, the encouragement of philanthropy by the private sector becomes a convenient strategy for state withdrawal from long terms investments, and education is not about culture, liberation, personal growth – it is about jobs in the economy.

A national discussion on the possibility of caps on tuition fees are more important than ever because they are expected to rise within this academic year. Which means 25% or 50% of what your degree costs when you matriculated may have a very different cost after your first academic year.

The UWI Socialist Student Conference is advocating for tuition caps in order to prevent students increasingly paying more and more for tuition even when they are sponsored part of the fees.

Political pleasure by hurting democracy? That is 50 Shades of GATE: This “evaluation” and “review” process has done more to discourage students by “thinking three times” before they apply for higher education than build a culture of informed decision-making and responsibility when persons think about the possibilities of education and their future. An economic recession demands hard decisions on national budgets. A cut to social spending without addressing institutional accountability is neoliberalism 101.

We value the self-reliance and hard work of generations of Caribbean people who studied hard and saved their money to access education – something that they valued very highly. At the same time, we are not willing to sacrifice our philosophy of education that maintained its open and democratic character. If we sacrifice this, we are taking away our sweat and steps toward progress.

In whatever way I can, I will continue to encourage a different conversation on GATE and spend a year sensitising and mobilising students around sustainable and quality public education. Let us not turn against our people in this moment of hardship, we feel the pain. Let us turn our eyes to greater state accountability and the democratisation of information and decision-making to make the walk a little better.

Blog Feature Image by UWI Socialist Student Conference, August 2, 2016