Why the issue of tuition fees will not go away

Average institutions charging top-rate fees will prove a continuing headache for the government.

Oxford's announcement that it will charge £9,000 for undergraduate tuition fees is no surprise. It is the fourth university to confirm that it will charge the maximum amount, after Cambridge, Exeter and Imperial College London.

These announcements will not worry the coalition. All have an excellent reputation. What will concern the government, however, is a constant trickle of lesser universities announcing that they, too, will charge the maximum amount for tuition.

The Lib Dems have already gone on the defensive. Nick Clegg said this weekend: "I cannot think of anything more absurd than a university saying, to prove that they can offer a good education, they can whack up the price to £9,000. They are not Harrods." He is right – it is absurd. But what did he expect?

There is a market in higher education – one heavily weighted in favour of universities. Every single university in the UK has more applicants than places. Vince Cable's threat that "at some point, a university committee will destroy their own student base unless they are very, very careful" is as empty as they come. Universities call the shots when it comes to admitting students. They will not charge £9,000 to show off – they will do it because they can.

Even average universities are vastly oversubscribed. According to Ucas, the University of Chester had almost ten applicants per place in 2010. Kingston University had 44,083 applicants, of whom only 7,524 were accepted. Even the University of Lincoln has nearly five applicants for every place. Unless there is an improbably large drop in demand for higher education, practically any university in the UK could charge the full £9,000 and still fill every single place.

This leaves the coalition in a pickle, with little recourse other than to appeal to a university's sense of what's right and fair, as the government's universities minister, David Willetts, did last month. "Unless universities can prove that there will be a commensurate and very significant improvement in the education on offer, it is difficult to see how such an increase could ever be justified," Willetts claimed. It could, however, be justified by pointing to the 80 per cent cut in the teaching grant that the coalition introduced.

Justified or not, raising the cap and then castigating universities that decide to raise their fees accordingly is policy at its most incoherent. The government failed to make a convincing case for higher fees and is now attempting to compensate for its failure by intimidating universities. The coalition's policy is a mess. Its problems with higher education are not over yet.

Getty
Show Hide image

Our union backed Brexit, but that doesn't mean scrapping freedom of movement

We can only improve the lives of our members, like those planning stike action at McDonalds, through solidarity.

The campaign to defend and extend free movement – highlighted by the launch of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement this month – is being seen in some circles as a back door strategy to re-run the EU referendum. If that was truly the case, then I don't think Unions like mine (the BFAWU) would be involved, especially as we campaigned to leave the EU ourselves.

In stark contrast to the rhetoric used by many sections of the Leave campaign, our argument wasn’t driven by fear and paranoia about migrant workers. A good number of the BFAWU’s membership is made up of workers not just from the EU, but from all corners of the world. They make a positive contribution to the industry that we represent. These people make a far larger and important contribution to our society and our communities than the wealthy Brexiteers, who sought to do nothing other than de-humanise them, cheered along by a rabid, right-wing press. 

Those who are calling for end to freedom of movement fail to realise that it’s people, rather than land and borders that makes the world we live in. Division works only in the interest of those that want to hold power, control, influence and wealth. Unfortunately, despite a rich history in terms of where division leads us, a good chunk of the UK population still falls for it. We believe that those who live and work here or in other countries should have their skills recognised and enjoy the same rights as those born in that country, including the democratic right to vote. 

Workers born outside of the UK contribute more than £328 million to the UK economy every day. Our NHS depends on their labour in order to keep it running; the leisure and hospitality industries depend on them in order to function; the food industry (including farming to a degree) is often propped up by their work.

The real architects of our misery and hardship reside in Westminster. It is they who introduced legislation designed to allow bosses to act with impunity and pay poverty wages. The only way we can really improve our lives is not as some would have you believe, by blaming other poor workers from other countries, it is through standing together in solidarity. By organising and combining that we become stronger as our fabulous members are showing through their decision to ballot for strike action in McDonalds.

Our members in McDonalds are both born in the UK and outside the UK, and where the bosses have separated groups of workers by pitting certain nationalities against each other, the workers organised have stood together and fought to win change for all, even organising themed social events to welcome each other in the face of the bosses ‘attempts to create divisions in the workplace.

Our union has held the long term view that we should have a planned economy with an ability to own and control the means of production. Our members saw the EU as a gravy train, working in the interests of wealthy elites and industrial scale tax avoidance. They felt that leaving the EU would give the UK the best opportunity to renationalise our key industries and begin a programme of manufacturing on a scale that would allow us to be self-sufficient and independent while enjoying solid trading relationships with other countries. Obviously, a key component in terms of facilitating this is continued freedom of movement.

Many of our members come from communities that voted to leave the EU. They are a reflection of real life that the movers and shakers in both the Leave and Remain campaigns took for granted. We weren’t surprised by the outcome of the EU referendum; after decades of politicians heaping blame on the EU for everything from the shape of fruit to personal hardship, what else could we possibly expect? However, we cannot allow migrant labour to remain as a political football to give succour to the prejudices of the uninformed. Given the same rights and freedoms as UK citizens, foreign workers have the ability to ensure that the UK actually makes a success of Brexit, one that benefits the many, rather than the few.

Ian Hodon is President of the Bakers and Allied Food Workers Union and founding signatory of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement.