Who you going to protect? When the Green party entered talks on a new programme for government, it was reported that the party was demanding there be no reduction in basic rates of social welfare. The party believes in the rhetoric of protecting the most vulnerable.

By the time the talks ended last Friday week, the Greens were – by default – moving to protect the most vulnerable by agreeing to a reduction in basic welfare payments. The absence of any mention of basic rates in the programme ensures that dole and pension payments will be reduced in the forthcoming budget.

What the Greens did secure was a commitment not to reintroduce third level fees. According to these priorities, the most vulnerable in society are the middle class parents of college students, and the students themselves, who are being afforded an education which will greatly enhance their prospects in life. The party knows where its bread is buttered. Waffle about the most vulnerable is all very well, but votes are what matters.

Nothing illustrates the vacuous nature of political ideology in this country like the issue of third level fees. At its worst, it exposes a deep cynicism about politics, particularly from those defining themselves as left wing.

For sure, this would be a horrendous time to visit on hard pressed families the prospect of forking out thousands for something that was free for the last 13 years. But there needs to be an acknowledgement that the current system is grossly unfair. At the very least, students should foot some of the cost through a loan or taxation measure. The culture of entitlement, which spread like a virus through the smoke and mirrors years, also infected students. They believe somebody else should foot the bill to raise their prospects in life above others less fortunate.

The Greens really take the biscuit on this issue. According to John Gormley, his party is "the party of education". It is patently obvious that maintaining the current free access to third level is regressive to education on a national basis.

Education is central to the economy and society. A long standing passion for education had a lot to do with the major growth through the 1990s. The knowledge economy is now heralded as the way forward. Education is a vital tool in extracting us from the current mess.

Despite its importance, the third level sector is chronically underfunded, and unlikely to receive the kind of investment required to keep it competitive and capable of turning out top class graduates.

Those who go on to post graduate work – a sector which will become increasingly important – are now saddled with huge fees. With no income from undergraduates, the colleges lay it on heavy with postgrads. The system is unsustainable and will have more implications for the state's future than a bad dose of Nama. So much for the Greens' passion for education.

Others use the issue for naked political capital. The new regime was introduced by the Labour Party ostensibly to increase access for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Some saw it as a cynical ploy to shore up Labour's middle class base.

There has been increased participation in third level since 1998, the year after fees were abolished, just as the trend was towards increased participation prior to abolition. In 1992, 36% of school leavers went to third level, 44% in 1996, rising to 60% in 2008. There is nothing to suggest the trend was due to the absence of fees.

Participation has also increased among lower socio-economic groups, but this was at a time of economic wellbeing. School leavers from one group, "non manual", which includes clerical and social workers and low ranking gardaí, actually decreased in participation by 2% between 1996 and 2004, according to the Higher Education Authority. This group is the one most affected by low thresholds for grants, which is the real problem with access to third level.

The linking of free fees to education disadvantage was best illustrated in a survey conducted earlier this year by the Union of Students in Ireland. Every TD was polled on their position on fees. The only member of the opposition to disagree with free fees was Maureen O'Sullivan, who was elected in June to the seat previously held by her colleague, Tony Gregory. Her base is the inner city of Dublin. She knows that the issue of education disadvantage is all about what happens at primary level, a sector which remains chronically underfunded. Free fees are irrelevant to education disadvantage.

In reality, the current regime is one in which a man collecting the bins outside a hospital consultant's house is paying for doctor junior 's studies, so that junior isn't saddled with any of his own debt. Most left wing parties have no problem with such an obscene vista.

In the bigger picture, the current cop-out on fees is felt further down the socio-economic scale. As with a reluctance to introduce a property tax, so too the failure to address free fees will result in that group beloved of political speechwriters – the most vulnerable – picking up the tab.

In these straitened times, low-paid wages must be cut. The dole must be cut. Pensions must be cut. Health service must be restricted and physical pain endured. But that sacred cow, third level fees, is left lone to graze in the field of relative plenty. Let's hear it for the Greens.

mclifford@tribune.ie