Am I missing the point about tuition fees?

[Lord Bracknell]

The coalition has raised university tuition fees and introduced a new system whereby students will repay their fees at some stage in the future.

The justification for this is that the country is in an immediate financial crisis and has to cut public spending NOW.

But no student will be asked to pay anything until AFTER they have graduated and start earning real money.

So ... who is paying for university education NOW?

The government, apparently. Or the taxpayer, if you prefer to see things that way.

How does this achieve the objective of addressing the immediate financial crisis by cutting public spending NOW?

 

[Wilko]

Indeed. I can't see how this benefits anyone, if the idea of the initiative was to restrict instant government expenditure then surely this actually does the reverse because they need more money for the initial outlay to fund students in the first place? (Unless I have misunderstood)

 

[Tricky Dicky]

An interesting point and I don't know but it's very similar to the benefits change which we're told will cost several billion to introduce now, but save money in the long term. I though we had a 5 year plan to reduce the deficit so presumably these efforts won''t come in on time.

 

[Dave the OAP]

the unis will not recieve money from government, instead the student load co.....so the debt lives with them...Not the Govt.


simplesh

 

[crasher]

It would of course be completely cynical to suggest the Government is using the umbrella of financial crisis to push through an ideological programme which it might not be able to force at other times.

 

[warsaw]

Lord B you make a fair point, surely you are not suggesting that this policy is driven by political dogma rather than the need to save money now

Also, if you have a spare few minutes could you explain for those of us with just a passing interest the LIb Dem argument against tuition fees, why were they animated enough to sign the pre-election pledge against them and what was their policy on paying for university education?

I'll go and put on the kettle...........

 

[Lord Bracknell]

the unis will not recieve money from government, instead the student load co.....so the debt lives with them...Not the Govt.


simplesh

Thanks, granny.

So ... have I got this right? The country got into this mess, thanks to unprecedented levels of public debt. And we are solving the problem by borrowing more money?

As you say ... simplesh.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Lord B ... if you have a spare few minutes could you explain for those of us with just a passing interest the LIb Dem argument against tuition fees, why were they animated enough to sign the pre-election pledge against them and what was their policy on paying for university education?

Explain Lib Dem policies? Sorry. You've asked the wrong man.

 

[withdeanwombat]

It would of course be completely cynical to suggest the Government is using the umbrella of financial crisis to push through an ideological programme which it might not be able to force at other times.

Yes,it would be completely cynical,and would go against all we ever knew about the conservatives,who,with their running do......sorry,LibDem stalwarts are acting solely in the national interest,and we should of course support every policy they propose .Don't forget that umbrella is pretty threadbare and the financial crisis is so bad that only a slack handful of rich and very rich citizens will come through unscathed.Lucky we're all in it together,eh?

 

[Danny-Boy]

The coalition has raised university tuition fees and introduced a new system whereby students will repay their fees at some stage in the future.

The justification for this is that the country is in an immediate financial crisis and has to cut public spending NOW.

But no student will be asked to pay anything until AFTER they have graduated and start earning real money.

So ... who is paying for university education NOW?

The government, apparently. Or the taxpayer, if you prefer to see things that way.

How does this achieve the objective of addressing the immediate financial crisis by cutting public spending NOW?

Really Lord B as someone who is extremely active in Labout political circles, I thought you would know the answers rather than posing the questions.

But isn't this more a case of casting your rod and line again?

 

[Danny-Boy]

Explain Lib Dem policies? Sorry. You've asked the wrong man.

Well explain LBOUR policies then. That is the policy that Ed Miliband wanted but his shadow Chancellor Alan Johnson didn't, until his arm was twisted.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Really Lord B as someone who is extremely active in Labout political circles, I thought you would know the answers rather than posing the questions.

But isn't this more a case of casting your rod and line again?

What makes you think I am in any way "active in Labour political circles"?

My last encounter with the Labour Party was to win nine times as many votes as they did in the Ouse Valley by-election in 2006.

 

[Danny-Boy]

And it would also be cynical to suggest that Labour is desperately trying to make people forget the "13 years" - well more if you go back before 1997 in fact - of "New Labour" by actively endorsing and supporting a rabble of thugs and militants who have hijacked peaceful demonstrations to try to panic the Coalition into measures which will be labelled by Labour as extreme.

And remember all the heavy-handed policing that Labour saw firt to impose over Iraq, Power-stations etc.

Or rather they wish you wouldn't.

 

[Danny-Boy]

What makes you think I am in any way "active in Labour political circles"?

My last encounter with the Labour Party was to win nine times as many votes as they did in the Ouse Valley by-election in 2006.

Come come Lord B that was over a single-issue locally, and we all know what happened about that don't we? What way do your affections lie nationally, then?

They certainly aren't with Norman Baker NOW are they? And you don't strike me as a Tory. Are you a Green now?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Put me down as abstaining.

The way the political process is developing, maybe "single issue" campaigning is the future?

 

[beorhthelm]

So ... have I got this right? The country got into this mess, thanks to unprecedented levels of public debt. And we are solving the problem by borrowing more money?

when was it any different? the whole welfare state and NHS is based on debt, as well you know. only nowadays the idea is to get as much of the debt off the treasury's balance sheet and on to others.

 

[severnside gull]

My understanding is that because the funding transfers from being a direct payment (to the institutions) to a loan (to the students) it is considered by the bean counters not to be part of direct government spending as it will eventually be repaid. By accounting convention it therefore improves the balance sheet.

Although I am largely retired I know that my institution has worked through the numbers and considers that it will have to charge a fee in the order of £7.7K per annum just to "stand still" in relation to the loss of direct government funding. Some degree courses will still attract additional direct government grants (ie. Science and Maths degrees). Expect even the most mundane universities to charge an initial fee of around £7.5K-£8K and the elite institutions to charge the maximum £9K.

Willit affect student numbers? Hard to tell. When we introduced fees in this country there was realistically no impact on student numbers despite the initial furore. In Australia when they introduced a full fee system the numbers dropped for two years and are now back to, and higher than, the previous level. I guess if a degree will help you to get any job (let alone a higher paid one) in the current climate it is worth it's weight (literally) in gold. I suspect that over the next couple of years, once schools, universities, careers officers et al help students to do the sums for potential long term income benefit vs very low repayment costs, the impact will be less than we might forecast now. One possible concern is the impact of higher fee levels on overseas student numbers as currently this source of additional income helps many universities to keep down the fees charged to home students. If their numbers decrease as a result of the fees hike, then the charges to home students might ultimately be even higher than currently forecast.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Put me down as abstaining.

The way the political process is developing, maybe "single issue" campaigning is the future?

My apologies, I had a message through other circles that you were active politically with "Real Labour", or is it "21st Century Labour"

Single issues politics inevitably result in referenda. Hugely expensive and can result in knee-jerk views.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

when was it any different? the whole welfare state and NHS is based on debt, as well you know. only nowadays the idea is to get as much of the debt off the treasury's balance sheet and on to others.

There is an alternative, albeit one that every major political party is terrified to admit.

Raise taxes, through a more progressive system of income tax than we currently have. Or, if you prefer, cut consumer spending by the very rich.

 

[seagulls4ever]

I thought about this as well, and I don't understand it either. I guess some of the richer people will pay the fees upfront, especially a lot of the international students. And for those that don't they won't class it as part of the defecit because it will be the students who owe the money, thereby making it look like the government has reduced more of the defecit than they actually have?