Students who signed loan agreements under the former Tertiary Education Loans Scheme continue to report higher repayment figures than what they originally agreed to, prompting renewed pressure in Parliament for clear explanations as to why amounts listed at the border differ from the initial loan balance.
Opposition MP Semi Koroilavesau said the complaints have become frequent enough for him to take them to the national stage.
“Can the honourable Minister for Education Aseri Radrodro inform Parliament of the reasons why TELS recipients are now facing an increase in the amount owed compared to what they initially signed off on?” he said.
Government says confusion is the issue
What followed was a long exchange that highlighted public uncertainty about the transition from TELS to the Tertiary Scholarships and Loans Service scholarship model, penalties for bond breaches, and how a graduate’s balance can rise beyond the original figure.
The minister maintained that confusion, not policy change, sits at the centre of most complaints.
Mr Radrodro said there was a need to “compare apples with apples, and not apples with mangoes,” before explaining what he believed was driving the misunderstanding.
“One is regarding loans, which the students are mandated to pay, and this new one is a TSLS, which is a scholarship scheme.
“There is quite a big difference in terms of talking about the amount owed.”
He said repayment was only required when a graduate breached their bond.
Opposition cites real cases
But the Opposition said the experiences of graduates tell a different story.
Mr Koroilavesau said students were turning up at his home in Nadi after being told at the airport that their balances had suddenly increased.
“When they signed up, they signed up for a certain amount. When they turn up at the border, they are told that this amount is still owed, which is different from the initial amount they had signed up for,” he said.
He highlighted a case now widely discussed among students.
“Someone who had owed $10,000 was asked to pay between $15,000 and $20,000. That is unfair.”
Parents and graduates said they received mixed information from different offices and were being sent back and forth to fix their figures.
Interest claims also raised
The exchange intensified when Opposition MP Rinesh Sharma raised a second concern: a student who said interest had been added without being stated in the original agreement.
“The initial signing agreement had no interest, but this student said that they have been charged 40 per cent interest, and imagine paying $30,000 in interest for a $50,000 loan.”
Mr Sharma asked how such changes were authorised and how low-income graduates were being protected.
Mr Radrodro said this should not be happening and asked again for case details so checks could be carried out.
Government points to loan write-off
The minister then reminded Parliament that the Government had written off $650million in loans for 53,725 students.
“The TELS recipient, parents and guardians will no longer have to pay a single cent back to the Government,” he said.
Only graduates leaving the country without serving their bond are required to repay the investment value plus a penalty.
He outlined how penalties are set, ranging from 10 to 50 per cent, depending on the unserved bond period.
More questions on penalties and criteria
Opposition MP Alvick Maharaj raised concerns about graduates wanting short-term overseas work, such as the PALM Scheme.
The minister referred him to the TSLS office or online portal, prompting comments that such details should be made clear in Parliament.
Later, MP Hem Chand asked whether repeat students faced different scholarship cut-off marks. The minister said the criteria were inclusive and “available online”.
Consultation and impact questions remain
The session ended with questions about whether students were consulted before penalties were introduced and whether an impact assessment was done.
“Consultation has always been part of the budgeting process,” the minister said.
Ongoing uncertainty for students
For students preparing to travel, uncertainty remains. Some are unsure if the amount on their original agreement is the amount they will be asked to clear. Others are unclear about conversions, penalties or their recorded bond service.
The Government says the rules are clear and that confusion stems from unserved bonds or missing details.
The Opposition says the concerns are real, growing and affecting families across the country.
The answers, as seen in Parliament, remain unsettled.
