Tuition fees

[rich_jacko]

This excellent blog by Nick Robinson pretty much sums it up.

I'm deeply annoyed by the result of the vote but not at all surprised. Everyone knows from back in May that the Lib + Lab numbers don't stack up high enough, and that's if all Lib Dem MPs voted against, which they weren't going to. The only way this was ever going to get defeated was if there had been a significant Tory rebellion, and nobody was targeting their MPs (although hurrah once again for David Davis).

Bah!

Comments

[longrat.livejournal.com]

Plenty of money to splash cash where needed, this is just another excuse to milk the middle classes for their hard earned cash.

[ju-bear.livejournal.com]

Not surprised and I fear for the country's fate in the hands of these mad men and this hell hole of a coalition.

Tell me, why did they get in again? >;p

[rich-jacko.livejournal.com]

Coalition Programme:

"We will await Lord Browne's final report into higher education funding, and will judge its proposals against the need to:
- increase social mobility;
- take into account the impact on student debt;
- ensure a properly funded university sector;
- improve the quality of teaching;
- advance scholarship; and
- attract a higher proportion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds."

Labour Manifesto:

"The review of higher education funding chaired by Lord Browne will report later this year. Our aim is to continue the expansion of higher education, widening access still further, while ensuring that universities and colleges have a secure, long-term funding base that protects world-class standards in teaching and research."

You're not seriously suggesting that we were given much of a choice there, are you?

Buried deep in the Browne report is this little nugget:

"Recent OECD research shows that in the UK the benefits of higher education to the individual are, on average, over 50% higher than the public benefits."

In other words, about 60% of the benefits of higher education go to the student in the form of higher earnings. The other 40% are the public benefits, in the form of having a professional workforce to staff our hospitals, teach our children, drive our economy, etc. and of graduates generally being healthier, more law-abiding and less chavtastic.

The obvious conclusion from this is that only about 60% of the cost of a degree should fall on the student, and the remaining 40% on the taxpayer. But the report then seems to ignore this and recommend that students pay practically all the cost themselves. The average cost of a degree is about £7k a year, but fees could go up to £9k a year. Rather than taxpayers subsidising students, it'll become students subsidising taxpayers. That's madness.

I feel a letter to my MP coming along.

[edy-.livejournal.com]

and politicans claim to wonder why the electorate are disenfranchised and trust them less than the tabliods...

I would write to my MP but every time I've done so before she's forwarded it to parliment and the stock response has come back from both of them showing that the letter has been barely read, much less considered, and is given as nuch notice as your average gnat.
I realise that this is probably because it's been passed to an over worked civil servant but since the recpients have passed it on in this way and then returned the response, it's effectively a case of the MP and the relevant dept saying "la, la, la, we're not listening cos you don't matter".
To be fair as an individual I probably don't matter but, when they also ignore mass protests (whether against the war or fees etc.) without looking to consult in any form at all (so the quieter voices as well as the rallies can be heard), that's just arrogant and ignoring their duty to represent the country.