Editorial

Malta has a vibrant educational system that, in theory at least, offers a wide choice to parents when deciding where to send their children. Public schools run by the state dominate the scene with Church schools and, more recently, independent schools also playing an important role.

In the last two decades, independent schools flourished as more parents, through sheer hard work, were prepared to pay the significant fees charged. At present, there are 14 independent schools. They are now feeling the pincer effect of a fall in demand as fewer children are enrolled for private education and an equally dangerous drop in affordability as more parents struggle to meet their financial commitments. Moreover, according to the Independent Schools Association, the Church schools’ expansion plans are threatening to squeeze the independent schools out of the market.

The association has therefore called on the government to consider issuing €17 million worth of tax vouchers to enable more parents to afford the admittedly high cost of private education. It claims that, if this form of subsidy is not forthcoming, the future of independent schools will be at risk.

While many would argue that the role of independent schools enriches the educational system, it may be more difficult to justify the use of public funds to support such schools. Moreover, as stated by the Education Ministry, the government already gives tax credits to parents of students who attend independent schools. At the same time, the government has committed itself to supporting the three-tier system of education.

The criteria that need to be considered by the government before deciding whether, and to what extent, the independent schools’ request can be met will be various. In the context of limited financial public resources, especially at a time when public expenditure is being rationalised, one needs to ask whether there is an overcapacity in the educational sector. If this is the case, one can hardly expect taxpayers to support this overcapacity.

Another criterion is whether the payment of subsidies for private education, whether directly to independent schools or to parents who might want to give their children this type of education, is socially fair. This is very much a political issue and the government needs to decide whether to promote subsidised private education as a family-friendly measure that deserves more support than other measures aimed at easing the burdens of parenthood.

Another important consideration is the subordination of priorities in the broader social welfare context. At a time when public funds are limited and pressures are building up to finance increasing public expenditure on health, pensions and higher education, compromises have to be made. This may mean that some worthwhile causes will still not get the support they need because of financing limitations.

The argument that, if independent schools were to close down, the state would incur even more expenses to educate children that would otherwise have attended independent schools may sound logical. But it is unlikely to persuade the government to accept it at face value. Thousands of individuals, for instance, opt for private health services but have so far not claimed to be subsidised by taxpayers’ money for not using the public health services.

The realistic way forward is for the government and the independent schools to meet and find ways of making independent education viable with the least possible cost to the taxpayer.