So the debate about the reintroduction of third-level fees has moved from the 'if' to the 'when'.

Education minister Batt O'Keeffe has signalled a system for charging for tuition will be in place by the start of the 2010 academic year. The great dream of "free" education for all – a fundamental ideal for a republic committed to equality of opportunity for its children – which was begun in 1995 when Labour minister for education Niamh Bhreathnach abolished third-level fees is well and truly over.

It is a sad day indeed and a sadder one that the decision is somehow being dressed up as a means of redistributing access to education among lower socio-economic groups. It's not, nor can it be. Every piece of research done in this country or the world over shows that widening access to third-level education is dependent on the intensive support given to impoverished children at primary and second level – not at third level when the damage is already done.

The reintroduction of university fees has until now been regarded as politically untouchable, a bit like the children's allowance and old-age pensions. Our crashing economy has, however, targeted everything that is paid for by the exchequer and so free third-level education has increasingly been branded, almost dismissively both within and outside education circles, as a perk for the middle and upper classes.

There is no doubt that the rich have benefited from the end of fees. But then, they always benefited when it came to access to third-level education – and especially so when there were fees because they were able to find ways not to pay them.

One of the main reasons why Bhreathnach abolished fees was because of the widespread fraud involved in accessing the grants system and the inequality surrounding education-based tax breaks. Grants were routinely paid to wealthy farmers and self-employed families who under-declared incomes and wrote off business expenses in order to qualify for third-level aid. Educational covenants with massive tax reliefs were freely available to those with pockets deep enough to invest in them. The only people who felt the real burden of sending children to college were the middle classes and lower middle classes who wanted better opportunities for their own children.

And it is highly likely that they and their children will take the greatest hit in 2010 when the new mix of grants and loans being aired by the minister is introduced.

As yet, it isn't totally clear what sort of system O'Keeffe prefers, although the Australian model of providing student loans is widely tipped as the favoured approach.

Department officials say they have been studying models from all over the world and whatever system they put to cabinet in the next two weeks will be "uniquely Irish", based on our own demographics and the needs of Irish students and Irish third-level institutions.

Whether we should be pleased or worried about such an approach is hard to judge.

O'Keeffe's performance in testing times would not exactly earn him a first. His initial back-of-the-envelope calculations on how much money the reintroduction of fees could pump into third-level education was wildly and embarrassingly off the mark. At primary and secondary level, he made light of the impact of the cuts in pupil/teacher ratios announced in the last budget and also of the effect of reducing the number of support teachers for children with special needs. (Are these not the very teachers who improve access to third level among lower socio-economic groups?)

Thankfully, he has rowed back on some of the more draconian decisions, but his lack of consistency does not augur well for his ability to tease out the consequences of some of his decisions. The minister for education has said that he wants the new third-level funding scheme to underpin fundamental reform of the university sector itself to ensure that students and their parents get a higher quality of education and one that is more focused on the "smart" economy that is being spun as our salvation.

He has appointed an expert group to develop a strategy for third-level reform because of criticisms that the system is wasteful and inefficient in places and that a lot of what is on offer is either duplicated or misdirected in terms of our economic needs.

It will analyse current performance of our university system compared with other OECD countries and make recommendations for the sort of changes needed to encourage higher standards and a more active "fourth" level which can attract international grant funding for research.

All colleges are enduring a difficult financial year, with UCD in particular trouble having just announced a €20m deficit.

But whatever sort of fee structure – or "student contribution model" as the department of education like call it – it will not improve access. It will just make it harder for those already at the margins to take part in what should be a fundamental right, but is also a fundamental need for the future of this country.