Sir, - In an article by your Education Correspondent, Andy Pollak (The Irish Times, September 10th) an example is given from the de Buitleir Report on third-level grants quoting the case of a student's father who had net assets of over £500,000 but whose income was just over £6,000 - with a result that the student qualified for a full grant.
This example was followed by the comment: "if you are a farmer's son or daughter you are on a winner." The clear implication was that the student's father in the example was a farmer. This is wrong, in fact. The example quoted by Andy Pollak was of a businessman, not a farmer.
Andy Pollak's article is an unacceptable continuation of the unfair allegations against farmers' sons and daughters who qualify for third-level education grants. The reality is that the current rules on reckonable income actually discriminate against farmers and other self-employed families as the normal capital allowances are not deducted for third-level education grant purposes. The de Buitleir Report recommended four years ago that normal capital allowances should be deducted. This has not happened.
The article does nothing to resolve the many problems in the third-level grant scheme which confront all families. - Yours, etc.,
Economist, ICMSA, Limerick.