Can you claim free education for all if the standard of that education fails to offer children an opportunity to reach their full potential? What would you deem satisfactory schooling for your child?
Since the early 1800s, elementary education in Guyana was underpinned by a range of religious orders. In the 1960s, the Government assumed control of schools and the Education Ministry was established. Following independence from the British in 1966, the inherited British curricula was tuned to align itself with the country’s political, ethically and economic needs and soon after came the promise of free education to all whether it be academic, technical or vocational.
While the vision and intent were well placed, overcrowding and underfunding, scarce educational materials, poorly maintained equipment and untrained teachers were the reality. Poor salaries failed to attract good quality teachers; many of whom left to seek employment elsewhere. Despite education being prioritised as one of the main development areas for Guyana over the past decades, and despite obvious advances during the new millennium, the same challenges remain for schools across the country today.
Taxation is a necessary facet of any society; it has been since the days of old. While we can all accept that taxes are vital to support the infrastructure that citizens rely on at the local, state and national levels and acknowledge their necessity in the support of national defence programmes, social service programmes, public health and indeed education, there will always be conflict over what should be taxed. Of course the fingers generally point to luxury and choices.
The tax being levied against private education may come under the guise of luxury and choice, but that view is somewhat skewed. Until each citizen of Guyana can send their child to a public school and be confident that they will be issued with a full set of study materials, have teachers teach them in lessons they are timetabled to do so and be exposed to a well-rounded curriculum that will allow them the opportunity to pursue any career goal, the alternative of a private education that can offer our children a sound education should not be taxed as a choice.
If the idea is to hit the elite, it will fail. There are admittedly many amongst the populations of private schools fortunate enough never have to wonder how they will find the fees, but let us be clear, many have worked hard to get where they are today and for the very reason that they want the best for their children. Others are supported by helpful relatives and friends. Some may have no difficulties finding the extra 14 per cent but many will have to step out and settle for what is on the whole, an extremely poor education system.
The suffers will be those children of parents who despite financial challenges are sacrificing to expose their children to an education that empowers them; school leavers from public schools who failed to achieve, whose system failed them, that need alternative qualifications; future rulers of this country who will have to set aside the dreams their parents worked so hard to allow them to pursue.
The real losers in the taxation of education are the sons and daughters of Guyana, some of whom have decided to put what education has already given them to good use by eloquently expressing their views about the situation. Sixth form pupils from The School of the Nations, a school set up by two parents experiencing the limitations of public schools, the very school that offers programmes designed to give unsuccessful school leavers an affordable second chance at gaining qualifications, have been addressing the public. They will be taking their concerns through the correct channels in the hope to engage in dialogue that will highlight the damage this tax directive will cause. Dialogue they are hoping will dispel the misconceptions attached to what is seen as an elite school and show the realities of what opportunities are being offered, the type of people benefiting and the relatively low fees in comparison to like institutions. Fees which when increased will be out of reach of so many.
When a parent employs extra means to educate their child, it should be viewed as positive and encouraged by a system that is unable to offer more; not shot down, obstructed or punished. The burden will fall more heavily on the State if the option of private education for people of more modest means who sacrifice is pushed out of reach. The future of Guyana depends on the education of its young people; this area, public or private, should be sacred, not taxed. Ironically, the public system will not improve without more revenue from taxes, however they must be garnered from elsewhere.
