Golding vows to abolish guarantor requirement for SLB loans
/ Our Today
administrator
Opposition Leader Mark Golding has announced that the next People’s National Party (PNP) government will abolish altogether the requirement to find guarantors in order to access tertiary loans from the Students’ Loan Bureau (SLB).
Golding, in making his first Budget Debate presentation as opposition leader, was going one up on last week’s announcement by Finance Minister Dr Nigel Clarke, who in opening the 2021-2022 Budget Debate disclosed that that only one guarantor would be required by the SLB going forward.
Golding, who is also the PNP’s president, welcomed the move, saying it was a step in the right direction but did not go far enough.
The Opposition Leader told Parliament that, the requirement of finding a guarantor “works against children from low-income households”.
He added: “The next PNP government will abolish altogether the requirement of finding a guarantor to access student loans.”
“We will ensure that borrowing a student loan to invest in their education is something that students no longer fear.”
Opposition Leader Mark Golding
Golding promised that the next PNP Government will reconfigure the loan structure used by the SLB so as to cap monthly payments at a reasonable percentage of their actual income, to ensure that it is manageable for young graduates.
“We will ensure that borrowing a student loan to invest in their education is something that students no longer fear,” Golding declared.
He made the point that, ”when the Public Accounts Committee recently looked at the SLB, we found that the amounts recovered from guarantors are quite small in the scheme of things, which suggests that the retention of this requirement is not necessary for the sustainability of the institution”.
He contended that the Jamaican society is aware that many potential student loan applicants from low-income homes cannot find an acceptable guarantor.
Golding noted that financing of tertiary education needs to be transformed, especially for young people whose parents just don’t have it, arguing that the State, and not the student, must bear the risk of employment creation.
Comments