Universities will see 80 per cent funding drop
Comments |
by Martin Roche
Amid all the noise and protest about the tripling of student
tuition fees, the real nub of the issue - that public funding for
universities in England is being cut by 80 per cent - was
obscured.
There was no proper public debate about what in effect is the
privatisation of higher education in England. The Conservative and
Labour parties had an unholy pact that kept the issue of university
funding off the General Election agenda and we now all know that
the solemn promise to end tuition fees made by the Lib Dems was
ditched at high speed in favour of what Nick Clegg has described as
"a progressive policy."
For students from 2012, what the coalition says is progressive
is real live debt.
The government has argued that the state of the public finances
gave it no choice but to change higher education funding
arrangements. Well of course, this is nonsense. Governments always
have alternatives. They always have choices. In this case the
government chose to take higher education and make it subject to
market forces.
To me, this is not only intellectually flawed, socially divisive
and financially very high risk; it also puts political dogma before
the economic interests of the nation.
Universities have been cast adrift to, on the whole, fend for
themselves. Somehow or other (we have not been told how) market
forces will raise teaching standards, widen participation and
improve the quality and range of graduate output.
Not only are we putting the cost of higher education on to the
young, we're also embarking on a huge experiment that says the
market will produce the outcomes the nation needs. Those who point
to the US as an example of a successful higher education market
need to look again. It's not.
Are our universities fit to meet the management challenges of
losing 80 per cent of core funding? They'll all say they are,
though they can say no other as to do so would be to invite certain
failure. We'll have to trust them, though remember we're trusting
them with our global economic competitiveness as much as with the
education of our young people.
In the meantime our Asian competitors are pouring public and
private money into higher education, more graduates and wider
access. Spend a few minutes trawling the internet and you'll find
numerous trusted sources on how the Asian giants are spending far
more than us in GDP terms on higher education. They are becoming
intellectual giants, not just giants in manufacture and
assembly.
Our universities are our key to future competitiveness and
prosperity. If we want to stay competitive we'd better be sure we
have the brain power to do it and the ability to provide higher
education to every single person capable of contributing to the
national good.
The alternative is to slip behind. It's surely no time for
experimentation. It's time to stop talking about a university
education in terms in terms of personal gain and talk rather about
national benefit.
- Martin Roche MA runs Canterbury-based communications
consultancy Anchor Reputation Management. He is a graduate of
Aberdeen University where he read politics and international
relations.
Wednesday, February 16 2011
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.