´óĎó´«Ă˝

The new politics ...As Mrs T once said "You turn if you want to..." Nick, Dave and Ed didnt listen to the rest, they were too busy turning.

Well I have been wasting the last forty years in teaching, encouraging children in inner city London to go to university. The kind of debt that these proposals will generate will scare my pupils away. On the other hand it will mean that even more stupid pupils with loads of money will go to Oxford and be educated by the Bullingdon club.

Can someone explain to me what I tell my pupils please... Mr.Cameron, Mr Willets, Mr. Browne? I expect to be deafened by their silence.

Perhaps I should retired before they take my pension!

Fees made simpler:

Pay them in England
Don't pay them in Scotland

"all in this together"

More unfunded promises from the labour party and their qualification free chancellor.

What kind of example does this set?

Let's conjure money out of nowhere and paid for by a budget done by someone without a maths O-level?

What should one say to one's children? Don't bother going to school because there is no need to get any qualifications - you can always become the shadow chancellor?

Until Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition have some kind of credible deficit reduction plan and can show an understanding of why their previous attempt at government couldn't get its sums right, all attemps at seious discussion about possible alternatives to the coalition's proposals are a waste of time. You can't discuss serious reform of anything with an opposition party that has no idea how to pay for anything.

It's a great time to be a tory...

All party leaders were talking a lot before the last election about the need to restore public confidence in MPs.

Maybe a good start would be when your MPs pledges to do something before the election (to get your vote) that just a few months later he does when he previously pledged t do (part of the basis for him being elected). To do otherwise it deception or fraud.

When people enter a verbal contract then it is legally binding. Often it is difficult to prove a verbal contract but photos of the individuals holding copies of their agreement and videos of them speaking the words are pretty good evidence when somebody could be argued to have got their job (your votes) through a verbal contract. and breaking that contract after just a few months when nothing has changed means you must be liable (as you could be argued to have got your job and excluded others on the basis of that contract/agreement).

Well put Nick and displays simply why the public are usually exasperated by political parties. The embarrassment of Labour by their recent past continues. They will need many months of clear and principled leadership to regain the political and ethical high-ground. The CSR will be a powerful test of whether Labour has changed for the better of whether New Labour has just regenerated in form like Dr Who.

The funny thing is that much of Lord Brown's proposal resembles the Australian system where it is called a Graduate Tax. It had to be repackaged so the old Thatcherite right wing of Tory Party would support it.

For the LibDems this is an "armageddon issue". Unless they can point to massive support for poorer students and a greater burden being carried by the better off this will split their party.

Politicians are just incestuous filth that will lie through their teeth to get power and then do the opposite when they have it.

And they wonder why we're disaffected?

Rockrobin @ 4:

Enough "opposition bashing". Just explain why the government has done a total U-turn on this issue? Both parts by the way, not just the Torys. When you can answer that sensibly then we'll listen to you derision about the labour party.

If you want my thoughts, see post 8, though I suspect it will get moderated...

2. At 10:20am on 12 Oct 2010, franksol wrote:
'Well I have been wasting the last forty years in teaching, encouraging children in inner city London to go to university. The kind of debt that these proposals will generate will scare my pupils away. On the other hand it will mean that even more stupid pupils with loads of money will go to Oxford and be educated by the Bullingdon club.'

---------------------------------------

Absolutely and utterly right - carry out this policy and we are throwing away the intellectual future of this country.

Such are the machinations when everyone tries to crowd out the political centre ground. I can hardly say I'm surprised.

Yep, have to agree with Nicks underlying point - you can't trust a politician.

Looks to be particularly obvious in the case of the liberals who made a clear statement on fees and are now about to take part in a policy which is blatantly non-compliant with their stated position.

4 Rockborin - this is a blog about top up fees - I think you need to learn to read.
Once again the lies of the coalition are laid bare.
'Fair' - slash university funding and, at the same time, put up the fees.
This is like cutting a bar of chocolate in half and trying to sell it at twice the price. There may be some stupid rich who might still buy it but everyone else will give up chocolate.
Still, at least the stupid rich will be able to go to Oxbridge - nothing new there then.
It's a great time to laugh at Tories

I think your title is a little off Nick. That should be Politicians made simple. Politics is the art of lying and dodging the consequences.

I can't find anywhere in the news where Labour support scrapping fees, but if this is true it's another disappointing development from them.

I'm not surprised about the other two though, just continuing as they mean to go on.

13 - "This is like cutting a bar of chocolate in half and trying to sell it at twice the price."

Things were so much better under Labour. They had a magic chocolate fountain that produced a never ending supply of free chocolate for all.

You guys need to be a little more understanding - RockRobin did not go to university.

He thinks politics like a football game. When his side wins he like to chant and poke fun at the opposition.

It is simplistic but it keepps him happy and he doesn't really hurt anyone.

Laughatthetories @ 13:

Great name! Sadly I don't see much to laugh at. I grew up watching the Tories systematically destroy the fabric of the society of this country over 18 years. And this stupid bloody country has given them licence to do it again under the smokescreen of "Deficit Reduction".

It ain't funny; but it's a great name!

Its simple really . Nick and Daves Tory Party are just sorting out the debts so that our children arent saddled with debt for the rest of their lives.As Dave said in his recent barnstroming speech they've only been in five months, just think what they could achieve in five years. Im thinking they could achieve a place thats good for the millionaires to live in and the rest can go rot; Im sure the Bullingdon boys kids wont be deprived of their place sat the top universities regardless of their intellect. We are reverting to history - Scotland had a school in every village in the 1800s, England were 100 years behind. The ruling class back then feared an educated population, employers feared educated people in the workplace on whose cheap and docile labour their profits depended. Change was made back then by a leading Liberal, Robert Lowe who said in 1867 "We must educate our masters" unlike our leading liberal Nick Clegg who couldnt bow lower to his masters.

Does anyone have a clue what a loan at market rates means. If I was an institution making an unsecured loan of ÂŁ60K to a drama student at the University of Scunthorpe, to be paid back at some point in the distant future, how much interest would I think I would charge - massive

16. At 11:10am on 12 Oct 2010, AndyC555 wrote:
"They had a magic chocolate fountain that produced a never ending supply of free chocolate for all."

Forget politics - if they have a magic chocolate fountain they have my vote whatever they say

13 Laughatnewlabour

How can any discussion about fees take place when labour want them abolished but can't say how they will be funded?

This will be the labour party's elephant in the room for five years; every time you oppose a coalition policy you can't say how you will fund your own.

Labour are a joke, they landed us in all this debt and now think anyone takes seriously their propsoed solutions.

Go away and come up with a serious deficit reduction plan and people might, just might decide to listen to your ideas on health, education and the police.

Otherwise you are consigned to having deficit attention disorder and the argument goes no further. You have no money to fund anything, no health service, no university fees, no police.

It's a great time to be a tory...

And your journalists appear to like our prime minister..

……All very good, but know bodies asked the multi billion pound question – who decided that 50% of the population need to go to university in the first place?

There are alternatives, so why isn’t the Government pursuing them?

It all sounds like a racket to get as many young people into debt for as long as possible, only the banks will come out on top.

Hang on – isn’t it debt that got our country into the mess it’s in now?

So once again we have the NIMBY's out in force. So if it is not education where do we make changes to reduce our spending?

Lets face it, they can cut what they like as long as it does not effect me.....

We should be looking to see how we can improve things rather than just;
1) throwing it all out
2) maintaining the status quo

What about reducing the amount of holidays taken making universities a 12 month operating institution rather than the seven or so months that they currentley are.
Southampton University
•Semester 1: Thursday 30 September 2010 - Saturday 29 January 2011
•Semester 2: Monday 31 January 2011 - Saturday 18 June 2011
•Christmas vacation: Monday 20 December 2010 - Friday 7 January 2011
•Easter vacation: Monday 4 April 2011 - Monday 2 May 2011
Oxford University
•Michaelmas 2010 Sunday, 10 October Saturday, 4 December
•Hilary 2011 Sunday, 16 January Saturday, 12 March
•Trinity 2011 Sunday, 1 May Saturday, 25 June

By doing so you could almost double the amount of students that can attend any particular university. So delivering more with the same, or would the Dons want massive pay increases to actually work for a twelve months doing what they are paid to do rather than pet projects funded directly or indirectly by their institutions.

The Coalition can no doubt cut the 'Scottish subsidy' this year as they have extra funds in Scotland for their free education places for Scots (probably no one else).

UK University fees should be calculated for all on the basis of allocating points depending on where the students studied at primary secondary and 6th form education.

In other words those who have better privileged chance of attending a top school on the basis that they had e.g. an expensive, privileged independent school pre University education should pay the highest fees except for foreigners who should always pay the most in 'tuition' fees (actually University fees are much more than just tuition fees).

Those making it to University after attending failing and under-performing state schools should be allocated the least number of points should pay the least amount towards repayment of the University education.

Why?

1. This kind of points system would be fairest as also providing vital incentives to those in under-performing schools ... to try and get to University as they would pay the least amount ... for the experience, if they can get the University entrance qualifications.

2. Such a system would rank and compare schools based on the actual evidence of 'postcodes' for school addresses, school performance and University entrant success rates and which, most people would probably agree, is a significant determinant of individual life chances in the UK.

3. This would give a significant incentive to every student and every school in the country to try and get themselves/their students places at University if they are capable of meeting the University entrance requirements; since paying for University would not then be any deterrent of their likely lower circumstances based but high level ability.

4. Those students who have attended expensive independent schools will be unaffected as their education and life chances are likely to be unaffected by much of this ... as their outcome will have simply cost them more than it does at present ... and the 'playing field will be just a little bit more level'.

5. Students should be allocated places at UK University based on allocating places to those with the lowest amount of points ... as arguably those with most money can afford to e.g. 'study internationally'.

22. At 11:29am on 12 Oct 2010, rockRobin7 wrote:
"And your journalists appear to like our prime minister.."

I think the Guardian stopped being a paper of the left wing shortly before the last election, when it supported the Lib Dems. It has been dragged to the right ever since. You'll have to turn to the Mirror if you want Labour support, or the Independent if you want, erm, independent thoughts.

At 10:22am on 12 Oct 2010, rockRobin7 wrote:
More unfunded promises from the labour party and their qualification free chancellor.

When did Osborne get his degree in Economics/Business Studies? Oh thats right hem did not - perhaps thats why he spouts such rubish.

The higher education needs a full review including the introduction of "two year study degrees" and the freezing of pay for lecturers.

Nick surely its not what Labour say - they are in opposition.
It is the extent of the lies from the con/dems and number U turns Clegg and Cable are prepared to make to stay in power

House prices about to drop significantly once again and inflation is still over 50% higher than it is supposed to be.

This call of "Let us all eat cake" has to stop.....

@23

Your quite right it is just a scam to get young people into the grip of the banks and load them with debt.

Looking at the bigger picture that has been the whole ethic of our banking system, they have robbed us blind , still got it wrong and then robbed us again to pay for their failings, and shortly they will announce how "well " they have done and why they need bazillions of pounds in bonus's.

Like all the politicians we have i am from an era that apart from the privileged class entry to university was based on ability not wealth we would do well to get back to that situation.

We then might end up with bankers who can count....

The education of our children should be society's biggest priority, the wealth and future security of the nation is vested within our ability to fund and deliver an adequate education system.
The 11+ examination favoured before the left wing inspired comprehensive system delivered the finest quality secondary education the lower classes had ever experienced. Moreover the secondary modern system delivered pupils well able to fit a whole range of vocational tasks. The system in place met the needs of society and our industrial base.
Now it seems that we are expected to pay dearly for a system which neither serves our industrial base nor society at large. We are producing a generation of highly qualified, under utilised individuals who are unfortunate enough to not be able to readily find a niche for their skills within todays post industrial society. This is a recipe for disaster.
We are courting anarchy, which was the left wing hope for the change to comprehensive system.
The lunatics are indeed running today's asylum. Education policy should be the cornerstone of strategic planning.

ALL YOU ON THE LEFT

Complaining thats its not fair, its not eqaulity etc.

Have you had your eye, ears and mouths shut for the last 13 years.

Your Favorite governement of Blair/Brown/harman that promotes eqaulity and fairness faced a high profile campain expossing the brutal unfairness and in-eqaulity of the Family Courts and its bias against fathers, yet you say nothing when confronted by this FACT. Nu_liebour insist it is fair and eqaul and has no bias.

SO what exactly is fainress and eqaulity , does it mean that you can just get the polices that you want and that by definition everyone else policies are unfair because they are not your own ones therefore imply that they must be nasty polices. It smackes of bullying to me ?


Some would say Fainress and Eqaulity are rampant discrimination to others

How can Scotland manage to fund the free places?

Perhaps the fairness agenda should extend to cover students both North and South of the border

Q. If tuition fees are so good why are they not charged before the tertiary level? Why not make infants pay for their kindergarten/reception class - and so on? If it is right for University level courses surely it is also right for all levels of education?

Let us all go back before the 1944 and 1870 education acts and reintroduce real Victorian values of mass ignorance and no right to any from of education - and sending children up chimneys or down the mines!

If we as a society can't afford the number of students we have then cut the number of students to a number we can and are willing to pay for maybe 100,000 - 120,000. Give them means tested grants and pay for their fees. [And scrap the excess Universities and daft courses.]

Another thought:

Bigger student debt inevitably means considerably increased downward pressure on House Prices.

I believe this report has several significant flaws which I highlight in some detail with further policy analysis here:

"3. At 10:21am on 12 Oct 2010, englandrise wrote:
Fees made simpler:

Pay them in England
Don't pay them in Scotland"
Capped in Wales.

"9. At 10:42am on 12 Oct 2010, Bryn The Cat wrote:
If you want my thoughts, see post 8, though I suspect it will get moderated..."
Wrong again Bryn - doubly wrong!

The ranting against private schools is misconceived. Many parents struggle hard financially to get their children the best education they can afford. That's their choice. Those children are, percentagewise, among the best behaved and responsible. They may not be all that bright but they glue our society together.
There are many responsible children from disadvantaged households, and the bright ones will get on whatever the politicians do. If all education were funded by the State the cost would be a lot more in taxes.

Labour had the benefit of grammar school education and then pulled up the drawbridge. Typical politicians. The impact was a dumbing down of education in this country, except possibly in the best schools, public and private. The government now wants to increase the cost to students of university education, but why stop at that? Make those who can afford it pay for their children's state schooling as well and do away with that universal benefit.
And yes, "2 franksol" the state pension is a universal benefit to which pensioners contributed but so what? If they have money take it off them, that would be fair wouldn't it. The fact that some have saved all their life for a comfortable retirement is irrelevant in the unthinking rush for fairness for everyone.
Those who try should be rewarded, those who don't shouldn't. But that ends up not being fair for everyone as some would be better off, so we can't have that.

Rockrobin @ 22:

"And your journalists appear to like our prime minister.."

Wow - so an Etonian Oxbridge member of the silver spoon club has the ability to present himself well. Amazingly insightful I'm sure. I can't wait for the next scoop from the Guardian...

What exactly did people expect? Frankly with his education and privelaged background he's hardly likely to presennt himself as a monosyllabic drooling imbicile is he?

I'm not interested who likes who or how well "Call me Dave" does at a press conference; all I want to know is how come the ConDem coalition has wheeled out something they both rejected completely during the election campaign- i.e. why has this excuse for a government lied to us again? Perhaps you'll snap out of the spell that Camerons charm has so obviously put you under for enough time to answer the question? Or will you evade it in the same way the article about Dave clearly says he does when a slightly tricky question comes his way?

#27 John

1."When did Osborne get his degree in Economics/Business Studies? Oh thats right hem did not - perhaps thats why he spouts such rubish."

2."Nick surely its not what Labour say - they are in opposition."

3."It is the extent of the lies from the con/dems and number U turns Clegg and Cable are prepared to make to stay in power"


1. When did Brown get his degree in Economics/Business Studies? Oh that's right, he did not - perhaps that's why he was such rubbish.

2. It's what labour did which most people are furious at, what they say in opposition is important if the government is to be fairly held to account, which will entail labour admitting the dreadful mess they made of 13 years in government and what they think the government should do to sort out their mess.

3. I believe neither the conservatives or the LibDems won the election outright and formed a coalition government. If either party had won a majority I'm sure they could and would be held to account for pre election statements/promises.

Has anyone actually read the report?

www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/corporate/docs/s/10-1208-securing-sustainable-higher-education-browne-report.pdf

24. At 11:36am on 12 Oct 2010, Chris London wrote:
"What about reducing the amount of holidays taken making universities a 12 month operating institution rather than the seven or so months that they currentley are. [...] By doing so you could almost double the amount of students that can attend any particular university. So delivering more with the same, or would the Dons want massive pay increases to actually work for a twelve months doing what they are paid to do rather than pet projects funded directly or indirectly by their institutions."

I'm a lecturer at one of the two universities you mention (Southampton), and I can assure you that it is a twelve month operation. This year, I failed to take my full annual leave allowance due to work pressures - no carry over, so I've lost the fortnight that I was unable to take. I spent my summer supervising taught postgraduate students and my research postgraduates, working on my research projects, and preparing for the undergraduate teaching in the new academic year.

You seem to have little idea of the realities of UK HE. We both teach and conduct research, and we're judged on the latter (through the Research Excellence Framework) with very real financial implications.

C'mon Nick, update your title, should be Fees For Dummies.

Don't take your eyes off the big picture.

We spend more than we earn. Simple so far.

We keep borrowing what we don't have, but don't seem to identify what the underlying cause of our problem is. Simple so far.

Whilst accepting the need for cutting back, we prefer that it doesn't relate to whatever we are currently talking about. Simple so far.

We don't have enough jobs to satisfy the demands of all the people who want to earn money.

The potential employers, faced with some useful selection criteria, indicate they only want people with degrees, but don't offer any extra jobs nor, increasingly, any extra money.

So, the mugs fall for it, go and earn a degree, thus perpetuating the university and the professors/lecturers, but incur thousands of poundsworth of debt in the process.

At what point will people who have spent money they don't have on gaining a degree that is of no use to them and not having an opportunity to earn any money to repay their debts, will the reality dawn on them that they have been wasting their time?

At what point will all those with their heads in the sand recognise that cutting expenditure means just that?

At what point will the "students" recognise that its not a game any more, and the whole process designed to offer access to university education for all was a scam, perpetrated by an intellectual elite who have no regard to the distress they cause others?

The government cant justify spending public money on university education, so needs to push the cost on to the beneficiary, the student. This is a cut, and is justifiable.

In transition, with the university not being able to get money from the government, they want to get it from the student, and it is now a fee. If you don't want to pay the fee, don't take the service. Simple.

If you can't get a job anyway, why increase the misery by also having a debt hanging over your head?

This may mean that some university staff lose their jobs. Boo hoo.

35. At 12:25pm on 12 Oct 2010, Thom Brooks wrote:
=========================================================================
So once again we have the NIMBY's out in force. So if it is not education where do we make changes to reduce our spending?

Lets face it, they can cut what they like as long as it does not effect me.....

We should be looking to see how we can improve things rather than just;
1) throwing it all out
2) maintaining the status quo

What about reducing the amount of holidays taken making universities a 12 month operating institution rather than the seven or so months that they currentley are.
Southampton University
•Semester 1: Thursday 30 September 2010 - Saturday 29 January 2011
•Semester 2: Monday 31 January 2011 - Saturday 18 June 2011
•Christmas vacation: Monday 20 December 2010 - Friday 7 January 2011
•Easter vacation: Monday 4 April 2011 - Monday 2 May 2011
Oxford University
•Michaelmas 2010 Sunday, 10 October Saturday, 4 December
•Hilary 2011 Sunday, 16 January Saturday, 12 March
•Trinity 2011 Sunday, 1 May Saturday, 25 June

By doing so you could almost double the amount of students that can attend any particular university. So delivering more with the same, or would the Dons want massive pay increases to actually work for a twelve months doing what they are paid to do rather than pet projects funded directly or indirectly by their institutions.

40 Bryn The Cat

..I want to know is how come the ConDem coalition has wheeled out something they both rejected completely during the election campaign- i.e. why has this excuse for a government lied to us again?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I'm not sure that the Tories are contradicting what they said at the election. Page 17 of the Tory manifesto below:

"..consider carefully the results of Lord Browne’s review into the future of higher education funding, so that we can unlock
the potential of universities to transform our economy, to enrich students’ lives through teaching of the highest quality..."

The Lib-Dems have changed position - haven't heard any senior Liberal explaining why yet!

Pietr8 @ 37:

Wrong again Bryn - doubly wrong!

Yes, pretty wrong! I fully expected not to be allowed to complain that politicians are "incestuous filth". I guess the fact that it is the truth is why it passed moderation... :-)

Why doubly wrong though? Are you suggesting that politicians are incestuous filth? Come off it, they're weasels through and through, can't be trusted or believed, will say anything toi get elected and then pursue their own agenda when in power. Career politicians are the plague of our democracy and this whole sorry story just goes to demonstrate that perfectly.

29. AqualungCumbria

The thing that depresses me most of all is the ethos that we have to carry on doing the same thing over & over again like lemmings.
There are alternatives to University & debt; we can go back to having more work based training schemes & this is what the Government should be driving.

Of course, that means their pals in the city & big business will have to play their part again, just like they used to.
No chance of that now because the government is scared stiff of them & won’t say boo to a goose.

Heck, if more people go back to earning & learning, they might even manage to keep themselves out of debt for a while, although this won’t please our Banking lords who practically run the country now on the Governments behalf (Note Who stands to gain out of this whole sorry situation)?

Dave the Rave wants a “Big society”, but doesn’t want to trouble the very people who could make the difference.

Young people are being lied to; get a Degree & you will get a really well paid job, so you won’t mind taking this heavy burden of debt now etc etc. Buy now, pay later.

Comprehensive review my backside; there’s nothing comprehensive about it.

Universities have been abused for a long time now by Governments who use it as a buffer to statistically reduce unemployment; time to get back to the plot of University educating the smartest & brightest & getting the rest into work.

Right, next problem, where can we find the jobs for them?

Here's what to remember when you hear mainstream party politicians trading blows:

a) they are fixated on each other, not the general public, except at election time.

b) their arguments usually have the purpose of 'shaping their public' for whatever they have up their sleeves e.g .the impending 'squeeze' (which may not turn out so bad).

c) they love the political game so much that we, the general public, are almost a by-product, which is particularly true for those politicians who are in the happy position of being 'above money'.

49 - I tend to agree with you but I will draw one big distinction between the left and right we have in the UK. The Right look at the situation and try and decide what will work. The Left are not interested in reality, only in their political dogma which they want to force on others because they have the arrogance to assume that they alone are 'right'.

You'll see that in the pontifications of Lefty and Saga. No laisse faire for them. They have the answers, they know what we ought to be doing. No live and let live or each to their own for them.

47. At 1:33pm on 12 Oct 2010, Bryn The Cat wrote:
"Are you suggesting that politicians are not incestuous filth?"
You can have the adjective or the noun but not both. I'm not sure I can choose which to omit!
There are some good ones but not a lot.