Showing posts with label tuition fees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tuition fees. Show all posts

Friday, December 10, 2010

A Personal Statement - On Tuition Fees

The following is a personal statement I have issued as the former Liberal Democrat candidate for Linlithgow and East Falkirk in the 2010 General Election:



Last night in the House of Commons MPs voted 323 for and 302 against the proposal to increase the cap on tuition fees in England to £9000. If I had been elected on 6th May as the Member for Linlithgow and East Falkirk I would have been joining the 21 Liberal Democrats who upheld the Liberal Democrat party policy not to increase tuition fees but instead to look at abolishing them. This had been stated in our manifesto as well as the personal pledge that many of our candidates in May signed.

The reasons I would have done so are:

  • The party had instructed us to do so, not only in the years before the election, but in motions passed since the general election in most of our federal regions upholding that commitment.
  •  Because personally the increase on personal debt to students is something I personally have been campaigning against since I was an undergraduate fighting the introduction of student loans when they first came in to replace grants.
  •  We would be leaving students with half a hefty amount to pay off when they leave university, which when you take in the interest payments comes to a sizable part of a second mortgage
  •  Even though I would have been representing a Scottish constituency I saw that the cut of the teaching budget funded by the increase in tuition fees would have a knock on effect in Scotland were tuition fees have been abolished.

I take exception to some of the comments made by colleagues in the party I have long considered closely aligned to me on the political spectrum.

Steve Webb wrote on his blog:

"I stood on a manifesto that had literally hundreds of policies and pledges."

I thought a lot of that was aspirations, many of those had caveats dependent on the economic situation, one that didn’t no matter what the financial situation was the promise not to increase tuition fees. He goes on to say that he was elected as part of 'Coalition programme for Government', a programme that allowed for Lib Dems to abstain if the findings of the Browne Report were contrary to our beliefs. That was a concession that was made to our party over this sticky issue yet Steve and 27 others not only didn't take that option, or uphold their pledge but voted for increasing the level of tuition fees.

Lynne Featherstone another blogging MP wrote:

"For some one like me – who has always believed that education should be free – it has been a difficult decision. Sadly, my view of education (free through raising taxation) isn't on the table – or anywhere near it. That vision was ended when Labour introduced tuition fees and the principle of free education for all feel."

Thankfully my colleagues in Scotland didn't feel this way and reversed the decision in Scotland and as a result that was the aspiration of our party nationally to repeat that process in both our 2005 and 2010 manifestos. I also think that because of the general benefit to society as a whole of those who go through Higher (and Further) education that this should indeed be funded, if need be, by increased taxation. The fact that it is not on or near the table would be a reason for me to further vote against.

Last night I heard Vince Cable even say that Scotland had failed to take hard decisions, I beg to differ one that Scotland has taken in that tuition fees should be abolished and from what I understand the main parties are agreeing that they should remain abolished. That is a tough decision made in light of the current situation and one that I was signed up to as a candidate this May, that we, no matter how bad things were would phase fees out.

At least in Lynne’s favour she did have the courtesy to apologise for breaking her pledge.

However, I am most proud of the twenty one, who I feel are erroneously listed as ‘rebels’ they have stood up for what the party believes in, and how the electorate who voted for them believed they would vote. Therefore I salute Annette Brooke, Sir Menzies Campbell, Mike Crockart, Tim Farron, Andrew George, Mike Hancock, Julian Huppert, Charles Kennedy, John Leech, Stephen Lloyd, Greg Mulholland, John Pugh, Alan Reid, Dan Rogerson, Bob Russell, Adrian Sanders, Ian Swales, Mark Williams, Roger Williams, Jenny Willott and Simon Wright.

However, if Nick Clegg things that those listed above and myself are 'dreamers' because of our opposition to increasing tuition fees, I'm glad that I can still dream of a fairer and truly progressive way of funding Higher and, I want to expand it to, Further Education.

I'll not stop dreaming. I will fight on.

Even though this blog may be remaining silent over the next few months due to the nature of my work, I will be keeping up the fight. Recently I was elected as a Conference Representative for my local Liberal Democrat Party. I will not be ripping up my membership card in disgust, I will be pushing up my shirt sleeves and getting down to the business of upholding the things enshrined in the opening paragraph of the preamble to the party constitution:

"The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. We champion the freedom, dignity and well-being of individuals, we acknowledge and respect their right to freedom of conscience and their right to develop their talents to the full. We aim to disperse power, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity. We believe that the role of the state is to enable all citizens to attain these ideals, to contribute fully to their communities and to take part in the decisions which affect their lives."

I'll carry on dreaming of achieving the above, but when I'm awake I'll be fighting tooth and nail to achieve it.

Note: This statement is made in a personal capacity due to the fact that I was a Liberal Democrat candidate in the General Election in May. It is not a statement on behalf of either the West Lothian Local Party, who very graciously selected me, nor the Northern Irish Local Party of which I am now a member, nor of my current employers. 

Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Tuition Fees – An open letter from the Liberal Democrat grassroots

Reproduced below is the Open Letter as sent to Vince Cable (Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills) and responsible for the implementation or not of the Browne Report. It has also been sent to every single Liberal Democrat MP. It is signed by myself and other key influencers, I'll try and provide as many links as possible from the signatories. (I know there are more links I will add them when I can)

Dear Dr Cable,

On the 12th of October, Lord Browne published the findings of his report into higher education funding, which contained some good points and some very bad points.

One of the bad points was to remove the cap on tuition fees meaning that some courses could end up leaving a student in debt by over £36,000. This is an utter disgrace and cannot be allowed to happen. Vince Cable himself has said the level of personal debt is too high. Why should we force students to take on this kind of personal debt before they even buy a house?

The Liberal Democrats have, since 2001, pledged to scrap tuition fees. And while we are aware that this is not a Liberal Democrat Government, it does not warrant an abstention. We urge you to honour your pledge to fight any increase in fees.

Our party has always been one of fairness, but judging by Mr Clegg’s and Mr Cable’s responses to the suggestions it appears that we are moving away from that.

Please support us and help to retain the party’s identity within the coalition.

Regards

Kelly Panter (8612609) Birmingham Selly Oak)
Christopher Fenton (Birmingham Selly Oak)
Paul Wild (8630704)
Duncan Moore (Oxford East) 8616515
Jonathan McCree (Haringey Lib Dems)
Fraser Nesbitt (Bristol East)
Rachel Smith (Sheffield Hallam)
Dr. Richard Davis (Battersea and Tooting)
Caron Lindsay
Benjamin R Lille (8428808)
Elaine Bagshaw
John Fraser (Westminster South & City of London)
Charlotte Galpin (8271607)
Daniel Sear (Guildford) 8640319
Mike Dixon (City of Birmingham Organiser Lib Dems)
Cllr Chris Ward (Guildford)
Robert Howell – Southend
Stephen Mullen (membership no 6039944)
Chris Wilson (Kingston & Surbiton)
Duncan Borrowman FE member, PPC Old Bexley & Sidcup, former National Campaigns Officer
Susan Gaszczak – Watford
Cllr Fiona White, Leader, Lib Dem Group, Guildford Borough Council
Matthew Doye (Somerton and Frome)
Irfan Ahmed (lead campaigner in the Pendle parliamentary campaign in 2010)
Stephen Glenn (2010 Westminster Candidate for Linlithgow and East Falkirk)
Michael Carchrie Campbell, Chair, Northern Ireland Liberal Democrats; sometime convenor LDYS NI.
Nikki Thomson (2790866) Edinburgh Central constituency
Hannah Arnold (8686785)
Cllr Season Prater, Sandgate, Kent. Former LDYS Exec Officer.
Keith McGrellis (Northern Ireland Lib Dems member)
Darren Briddock (South East Region Chair Elect 2011)
Mr Matthew Burton (8570027)
Cllr Martin Hunt – Colchester
Cllr Nick Barlow – Colchester
Luke Bosman – Preston
Cllr David McBride – Bromley
Simon Green Borough Councillor (LB Brent) and Ex Vice President, University of Leicester Students’ Union 2005-6
Nima chatrizeh – Student
John Doran, ex Surrey County Councillor and deeply ashamed member.
James King Please sign me up as well. Ordinary member in Southport, and student activist in Oxford.
Michael James Yates (Preseton)
Merlene Emerson (Chair Chinese LibDems & candidate for London Assembly 2012)
Cllr Daisy Cooper
Andy Pickwell
Richard Huzzey (Oxford West & Abingdon)
Cllr Sam Potts (6644139)
Martin Hunt (Leader Libdem Colchetser Borough Council)
Craig Brown (8587094)
Colin Ross (4902826)
Kai Page
Lisa Harding
Lynne Beaumont, Lib Dem Group Leader, Shepway District Council
Val Loseby, Shepway District Councillor
Bev Rolfe, Shepway Lib Dem Local Party Chair
Maggie Sheldrake, Folkestone Town Councillor
Bill Sheldrake, Shepway Liberal Democrat Executive Member
James Shaddock
Cllr Stewart Golton, Leader of Leeds City Council Lib Dem Group
Cllr Jim Spencer, Leader of Otley Town Council
Cllr Ben Chastney, Leeds City Councillor
Cllr Jamie Matthews, Leeds City Councillor and PPC for Pudsey
Cllr Martin Hamilton, Leeds City Councillor
Cllr James Monaghan, Leeds City Councillor and PPC for Morley and Outwood
David Hall-Matthews, Leeds Central Member and Chair of the Social Liberal Forum
Adam Pritchard, Leeds North West Member
Chris Lovell, Leeds West Member and President of Leeds Liberal Youth 2008-2010
Stephen Sadler, Chair of Leeds Central Lib Dems
Peter Wrigley, President of Batley and Spen Lib Dems (personal capacity)
Ian Howell, Leeds Central Member
Christina Shaw, Leeds North West Member
Cllr John Cole, Bradford City Councillor and Chair of Shipley Lib Dems
Cllr John Watmough, Bradford City Councillor
Cllr Steve Smith, Leeds City Councillor
Cllr Alan Taylor, Leeds City Councillor
Matthew Burton
Chris Ward
Ramon Chiratheep
Hugh Bailey-Lane
Chris Lovell (Chair of Leeds Liberal Youth 2008-2010)
Chris Gurney
Richard Davis
Caron Lindsay
David MacDonald
David Parkes
Harriet Ainscough
Rachel Olgeirrson
Allan Window
Jason Lower (Secretary, Tonbridge and Malling branch)
Paul Freeman
Jenny Marr
Tim Prater
Kirby Meehan
Alexandra White
Michael Yates
Margaret White
Stephen Mullen
Christopher Leslie
Stephen Rule
Sara Bedford
Cllr Katie Ray
Becky White
Emma Page
Claire Berwick
Cllr Keith Legg
Martin Veart
Gareth Epps
Keith Nevols
Nikki Thomson
Cllr Terry Stacey
Cllr Susan Buchanan
Ramis Azer
Nick Blake
Marie Jenkins
Dominic Mathon
Kristian Chapman
Mark Whiley
Henry Vann
Cllr Ross Carter
Vanessa Hubbard
Sophie Bertrand
Seth Alexander Thévoz
Simon Courtenage
Tim Holyoake
Nick Edgeworth
Andrea O’Halloran
Luke Shore
David Warren
Gary Glover
Will Miéville-Hawkins
Fiona James
Jordan Kleiner
Laura Webster
Hywel Morgan
Christopher Mills (East Hampshire)
Ray Khan

That’s 135 signatures. A thank you from the whole team involved in this to everyone who signed.

Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Where are the Answers Nick?


I see that my friend and colleague Michael Carchrie Campbell has taken to task one of the email Lib Dem members received last night. I'm going to take to task the other.

Nick Clegg, after the announcement of the Browne Report inviting comments to be sent to him. Apparently according to last nights email the special email address that was set up received over 1000 responses. Yet only five points were raised in the response all carefully worded to sound supportive:

  • concern that the proposals would result in a free market in higher education
  • some key progressive elements of Browne’s report, particularly the repayment system similar to the concept of a graduate tax, and highlighted the need for Liberal Democrats to emphasise the positive aspects of the report, while ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected
  • suggestions we should make savings elsewhere and increase taxation to fund higher education
  • need to focus on Further Education and apprenticeships as well as higher education
  • concern that those from disadvantaged backgrounds wouldn't be able to go to university under Browne’s proposals
I'm amazed that in those 1000 emails there wasn't a response to the unrest amongst many candidates like myself who raised the promise from our manifesto (emphasis mine):

"We will scrap unfair tuition fees for all students taking their first degree, including those studying part time, saving them over £10,000 each. We have a financially responsible plan to phase fees out over six years, so that the change is affordable even in these difficult financial times, and without cutting university income. We will immediately scrap fees for final year students."


and how this grinds instead with an increase in the tuition fee cap. If we were promising responsibility with our financial account how can we say we have allowed for even these difficult times yet are doing the opposite. It wasn't just a NUS pledge than many of us signed it was a manifesto commitment that "even in these difficult financial times" we would not need to burden our students further.

All we got under the question of making savings elsewhere was the same old drivel we were hearing from Cameron pre-Election not the bold, fairer, progressive language that the issue of tuition fees has raised through every conference debate we have had on the issue down my 22 years within Liberal Democrat circles.

I for one not am not going to be a shrinking violet on this one. Nick if you are going to be writing to members cut the drivel and actually answer our concerns. As Jennie Rigg put it so eloquently the other day "it would help if it was not worded as though giving a lecture to the hard of thinking".

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Vice-Chancellor Warns of Privatised University Education


A stark warning has come from the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ulster in light of the Browne Report.

Professor Richard Barnett says what he brands a small group of "elitist" English universities lobbied and got a lot of their own self interest included in the Browne Report. A point that if true should send alarm bells ringing amongst those of the Liberal Democrat MPs who seem to have so whole-heartedly switched to accept the recommendations. Recommendations that we were wary of back in May enough to allow us to abstain if we didn't like them.

The view of these elitist institutions he says is that University Education should essentially be privatised. That would appear indeed to be what the lifting of the cap on Tuition Fees would allow, Oxford and Cambridge already competing on the international stage for best performers in academic achievement would be able to increase their funding without increasing the student base.

Professor Barnett said:

"This is a case of not wasting a good crisis to push through that agenda.

"Fortunately for us higher education is a devolved responsibility, it will be a decision for the assembly to decide.

"But, the scale of the cuts here do not justify the scale of the increase of fees.

"As we re-balance the economy it's skills that matter. This is an investment in our future and it's important that all sections of our society be part of that new economy. Every country in the world is investing in skills and in universities."


However, the agenda of Browne seems to be to privatise the institutions of Higher Education. That will make it a case of ability to pay not ability to learn that will be the differentiating factor.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Too many words often a sign of running to hide - LibDems.org.uk

Hat tip to James McKenzie for saving this:



Today that has been replaced on the website by this emphasis mine:

Liberal Democrats believe university education should be free and everyone who has the ability should be able to go to university and not be put off by the cost.

In coalition the Liberal Democrats are looking at proposals to ensure the bottom 30% of graduate earners will pay less for tuition than they do at the moment.

Following the Browne Review into Higher Education, Business Secretary Vince Cable is working on a system of repayment for tuition designed to make the highest earning graduates pay more than those who earn less.

He has also secured the raising of the payment threshold from it’s current £15,000 to £21,000.

The coalition agreement says:

UNIVERSITIES AND FURTHER EDUCATION

The Government believes that our universities are essential for building a strong and innovative economy. We will take action to create more college and university places, as well as help to foster stronger links between universities, colleges and industries.
  • We will seek ways to support the creation of apprenticeships, internships, work pairings, and college and workplace training places as part of our wider programme to get Britain working.
  • We will set colleges free from direct state control and abolish many of the further education quangos. Public funding should be fair and follow the choices of students.
  • 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.

  • If the response of the Government to Lord Browne’s report is one that Liberal Democrats cannot accept, then arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote.
  • We will review support for part-time students in terms of loans and fees.
  • We will publish more information about the costs, graduate earnings and student satisfaction of different university courses.
  • We will ensure that public funding mechanisms for university research safeguard its academic integrity.

Can be please now allow the arrangements to be made for our Liberal Democrat MPs to use their judgement over the vote? Rather than telling them to support these findings, and trying to convince members to do likewise.

As for the impact of Browne on these areas:

- 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.


While it is ensuring points 3 and 4 I feel it is lacking in providing for the students. Degrees are not merely a priced commodity, that should be free to vagracies the market forces and available to those who can afford it. Look at the opening line that remains from the previous education page.

"Liberal Democrats believe university education should be free and everyone who has the ability should be able to go to university and not be put off by the cost."


I still believe. I do not believe Browne allows for that or enables that.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Elaine Bagshaw's response to Nick's tuition fee email


Elaine Bagshaw a former Chair of Liberal Youth posted her response to Nick Clegg's email on Facebook. I felt it deserved a wider audience and therefore with her permission I am publishing that response below.
My response to Nick's tuition fee email

Dear Cowley Street staffer/poor intern that's been given this job,

Thanks for your email. I note it's the exact same one you sent to MPs last night, that many had already seen and reacted to. The fact that you haven't acknowledged a single point about debt and trust and the hundreds of others that have been made by people since we all saw that email, shows how little you now respect the membership of this party. If you want an "open dialogue", start by opening your ears and listening.

You keep referring to this dire financial mess argument. The problem here is that we had a fully costed and affordable manifesto - I know, I helped formulate the thing in FPC, in which a 6 year plan to scrap tuition fees was included AND costed. I have to ask whether you will now be using this as an excuse to drop all of our other pledges? Have you started a review of our manifesto and the policies in the coalition agreement, to see if we can afford them? Have you started a process internally to make sure we never produce a manifesto that, in hindsight, contains pledges we simply can't afford? No, didn't think so.

You may not have made any detailed decision but you and Vince both publicly endorsed the broad themes in the proposal. Vince did so on Tuesday morning before the ink on the Browne report was even dry. It is not an open dialogue when you have already decided privately and said publicly what you are going to do.

There are some good points in the Browne report, the extension of support to part-time students is an excellent move, but all it proposes is to tinker with the system. I agree that major reform of the system is needed, but Browne simply isn't it. It was a narrow review that hasn't tackled many of the major issues in HE, and hasn't looked widely enough at the alternatives.

But the biggest issue here is trust. I have been a proud member of this party since I joined at Uni because we are not like Labour and the Tories. It was us who could during the expenses scandal could hold our heads high and say that not a single on of our MPs had flipped their homes or overclaimed on a mortgage. Now, we sit in the same ditch as every other politician and political party that said one thing to get votes and did another once in power. I believed that over the next five years we could get a lot out of the coalition, and that we wouldn't be wiped out at the next election. Now, I'm not so convinced. You and Vince over the past two days have shown yourselves to be just like every other power grabbing politician, and frankly you have treated the membership with disdain. I supported you in the last leadership election, but if happened again today I wouldn't be able to. I am seriously reconsidering whether to stand for any publicly elected position whilst you are leader of my party.

You have let thousands of party members and voters down. You may be enjoying government now but it is us who will have to pick up the pieces of this party when you are gone. The legacy you are leaving us is not one I will be proud of.

Yours,

Elaine

Nick Why Aren't You Listening to Us?

I've just received an email from Nick Clegg, one which I am rather disappointed to have received. It is one to general members and not to the various PPCs like myself who signed the NUS pledge on tuition fees. Therefore it is addressing me as an ordinary member not someone who with the confidence of our funded manifesto, was confident we could honour our pledge not to increase the student cap no matter how bad the economy was. Who stood before various meetings, on numerous doorsteps and wrote many emails telling people we would and we could honour this pledge no matter what.

He starts (there are bits of Fisking in red by me):

I am painfully aware of the pledge my colleagues myself included and I made to you and to voters on tuition fees ahead of the General Election. Departing from that pledge will be one of the most difficult decisions of my political career it is one that after 22 years of struggling on this issue I still will not depart from. It means doing something that no one likes to do in politics – acknowledging that the assumptions we made at election time simply don’t work out in practice but our assumptions were to reduce it over 6 years before the election, now we are looking to increase. Surely the next logical assumption, a middle ground, is to hold off the reductions a bit longer. With the benefit of hindsight, I signed a pledge at a time when we could not have anticipated the full scale of the financial situation the country faces now and the absence of plausible alternatives for students to the arrangements we are now advocating.
He carries on saying:

We have broadly endorsed them but this is an enormously complex issue and we will take the time needed to get it right. Yet with the report announced at 9am we had Vince Cable fully endorsing it at 3pm. This despite it being a complex matter that we needed to get right. Even the coalition agreement allowed our Liberal Democrat MPs time to gauge what the Browne report said and to take action (admittedly only abstain) if it went beyond what we believe in. I think that applies to all our MPs up to the level of Deputy Prime Minister.
But I'm glad that part-time students are included in funding in the same way as full time students, that is a manifesto pledge delivered. I'm glad that Vince Cable still disagrees with a graduate tax as that is not progressive and discriminatory against graduates who fail to find graduate level employment.

However, I do have concerns about the final remarks:

The overriding principle for Liberal Democrats is that any system of higher education funding is fair I agree wholeheartedly. It should increase the number of students from disadvantaged backgrounds Still agreeing; it should increase social mobility agreeing again; it should ensure fair access for all and not put anyone off attending university agree; it should increase the already world-class teaching and research at our universities agree; and it should ensure that those who earn more pay more agree.


Yet I agree with all this but it is not achievable under the Browne recommendation. The payments to some Universities will be higher to the prestige Universities will be higher. The number of students from disadvantaged backgrounds will be put off my fees which may be as high, or higher, than the family income. Social mobility will not be enhanced a the poor students will have to deal with the extra amount they have to pay back, at a commercial rate of interest. They'll be even more hogtied than the current graduates are. If penalising our students to increase world-class teaching and research is involved that is wrong. We pledge it should be free to all at the point of entry. As for those who earn more paying more yes. However, with lifting the cap all will be paying more to pay it back.

Yesterday there was a growing groundswell from MPs, PPCs other elected positions and ordinary members against the endorsement of the Browne report by "our" party. Linda Jack at conference asked Nick could we trust him with our party. Our party has told the leadership time and again down the years that we will not bend on tuition fees. Our party is telling him that again now, yet somehow he seems to be ignoring that, or the fact that we have a get out if we disagree with Browne, and is actually endorsing rather that saying we cannot support this and abstain.

Nick are you listening? We don't agree! We shouldn't endorse. Many of us are angry not with the Browne report but the way in which our leaders are rebelling against the will of the party on this. We are democrats it is the party that decides policy.

Former Lib Dem Leaders Will Vote Against Rise in Tuition Fees


Two former leaders of the Liberal Democrats have come out in opposition to the Browne Reports call to raise the cap on tuition fees and have said they will vote against it. Charles Kennedy Rector of Glasgow University and Sir Menzies Campbell chancellor of St. Andrews University.

"The Browne report is big and important and there is a lot in it that needs to be studied and still a lot to be discussed and debated.

"But as rector of Glasgow University, I will be standing by the NUS pledge I made on tuition fees before the general election."



The proposals could have a knock-on effect in Scotland because they could reduce finance from Westminster through the Scottish grant.

This would leave institutions north of the border facing competition from better-funded English ones and Scottish students would face the same fees regime if they followed a degree course south of the border.

Ming BBC Radio 4's World at One yesterday:

"Not only did I sign a pledge, I was photographed doing it.

"My credibility would be shot to pieces if I did anything other than stick to the promise I made.

"As for others, they must make their own judgment depending on their own circumstances."

Lord Browne’s review recommended abolishing the existing £3,290 cap on tuition fees. This would allow universities to charge as much as £14,000 a year.

The move should be accompanied with a real rate of interest on student loans, a higher threshold for loan repayments and a more generous system of grants, he said. Thus penalising twice with the extra per annum and higher repayment rates.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

NUS Podcast on Implications of Browne


You may not regonise the other chap in the (greatly used of late) picture of me signing the NUS pledge. Well he is NUS Scotland President Liam Burns.

Anyway he has sent me a link to a Podcast where NUS staff discuss the potential implications on students, graduates, and universities.

The participants are Aaron Porter (National President), Vic Langer (Head of Political Strategy), David Malcolm (Head of Social Policy) and Graeme Wise (head of Political Strategy), Katie Dalton (President Wales) and Ciarnan Helforty (President NUS-USI).

In Which I Disagree With Nick a Lot

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice
Over on Lib Dem Voice there is a letter which Nick Clegg has sent to all MPs on the subject of Tuition Fees. In it he writes:

Like you, I am painfully aware of the pledge we all made to voters on tuition fees ahead of the General Election. Departing from that pledge will be one of the most difficult decisions of my political career. It means doing something that no one likes to do in politics – acknowledging that the assumptions we made at election time simply don’t work out in practice. With the benefit of hindsight, I signed a pledge at a time when we could not have anticipated the full scale of the financial situation the country faces now and the absence of plausible alternatives for students to the arrangements we are now advocating.


Actually NO Nick I don't agree with you. The Browne report is looking at removing the cap on tuition fees. This means that only the wealthiest of our young people, those from a privileged back ground will be able to go to our finest institutions of learning. This is not the fairness for students that we stood for.

As well as promising not to increase tuition fees we did say we would seek a fairer alternative. One thing we suggested in the past to do it was a penny on income tax. Income is a fairer way of paying for University education than tuition fees (which now will be paid back at commercial rates of interest). It is also fairer that a graduate tax, expecially as some graduates will be working alongside people in the same payscale who will not have a degree, though the graduate will be paying 9% more.

The Browne report is not seeking a fairer alternative laissez faire pricing of education does ensure that our brightest get a fair deal. The rich already pay to ensure their young go to the best schools, to get the best results, to go to the best universities. To then ensure that we also price smartest A Level students from the state sector out of the course of their choice, which meets their abilities, is not liberal and is not democratic.

Those who manage to get to Oxford or Cambridge from the state sector already do so at a great disadvantage. To place them at a further disadvantage as the Browne Report allows, is not why I stood for election. This is battle I have been fighting since the Thatcher Government of my undergraduate days moved to bring in loans rather than making the maintenance grant a fair and workable system. The campaign for fair student finance is one that runs through my political veins as deeply and any Lib Dem policy thread, if not deeper.

I signed the NUS Pledge as did every Lib Dem MP. I am standing by my promise to the students of Linlithgow and East Falkirk and I will continue to ensure that Liberal Democrat MPs do the
same.

The Browne report far exceeds what was envisioned when the coalition deal was signed. A lifting of the cap on tuition fees was one thing, a removal of it all together is not what we envisioned. The goalposts have moved and with it the game. Our Lib Dem MPs should take this on board and do the right thing and vote against allowing the removal of the cap. This is how we show we mean to give a Fairer Deal for Students.

There is now a Facebook Group called Lib Dems Against Scraping the Cap, in which I have joined other PPCs, AMs and others.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

A short story set in a browne brick thatched college...

...and I hope a work of Fiction.

Cross posted on Liberal Democrats in Northern Ireland

Sitting in his rocking chair in 2050 Stephen Glenn is talking to his eldest great-nephew about to head up to Belfast Metropolitan College rather than Cambridge University or Oxford University, where 40 years earlier he would have been smart enough to go.

It was Thatcher what started it you know?

I was there a fresh-faced young student back then, with hair, stop your sniggering. No where was I? Oh yes I was a fresh-faced student. Back then there was what was called a maintenance grant.

No. That wasn't what paid for your education that was actually what was given to students dependent on your parental income to actually help you afford to live away from home at the University of your choice.

Fees? Oh they were all paid for you didn't pay a sausage everything that was required to teach you was paid for by the Government. The only requirement was that you had the right results at school to prove you were smart enough for the course. It was the learning power that was good enough to determine where you went not you parent's earning power. How do you think Granda and Granny and Great Aunt Jacqui managed to get to St. Andrews?

Me? No I went to Kingston.

No, it wasn't because I wasn't smart. I was pretty smart I just didn't dedicate all myself to academic achievement. I was smart enough to get by at a top-level, if I'd done less extra-curricular stuff I'd have achieved a lot more. Anyway we're digressing.

Any way Baroness Thatcher. Yes she is still around. Maybe there is a painting of her somewhere that keeps her hanging on. But she wasn't a Baroness then, merely the Prime Minister. Her Government, sorry Her Majesty's Government, of which Thatcher were head, Mícheál would kill me if he were here for such a slip, decided to bring in student loans instead of grants.

So your great-uncle. No me! Not your other great-uncle, and thousands of others marched on Westminster shouting 'Grants not loans."

Why? Well we knew that if we started to give out loans to fund people's higher education it was just the top of the iceberg. For starters the richer students would not take out loans anyway, mater and pater, would see them through with their silver spoons in their mouths since birth. So it would only be the poorer students who would end up accumulating debt.

Also although they were only going to limit loans initially to a certain proportion of the maintenance grant amount and at a rate below commercial rates of interest for repayment, this would slowly be eroded. There was also going to be the incentive that once people borrowed money to feed, clothe, accommodate and transport themselves, some government would then make them also pay for the education.

We shouted that at the time. We? Oh the National Union of Students and students in general. Oh yes Students were Unionised back then, before the riots of 2011, when David Cameron decided he couldn't allow political activity on University Campuses outside of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions*.

Haha. No on the pretence that the other Universities weren't capable of engaging in sensible civilised political debate.

Anyway slowly but surely changes happened. First there was the removal of grants altogether and all the maintenance coming from loans or parental contribution. Then they brought in Tuition Fees, which again could be paid for by loans. Then the Liberal Democrats helped get rid of Tuition Fees in Scotland.

Yes, I was part of that. You've seen the pictures. Me with Charles Kennedy, Nick Clegg and Jo Swinson the first Liberal Democrat Prime Minister for 100 years.

Anyway then came the Browne report. Instead of merely increasing the cap on tuition fees it called for the removal of it altogether. Mere months after all the Lib Dem MP and other candidates including me had signed a pledge that we would vote against any rise recommended by Browne when his report was published. My Cameron had asked those same MPs to promise to abstain, rather that vote against if after decades for some of campaigning against this movement to the rich being able to afford the best education carried on.

They were good men and women. Initially it was only 30 but their number grew as the pressure from the party faithful grew. It grew large enough that with all the opposition parties we would have beaten the raise in Tuition Fees but then Ed Miliband told his troops to march through the aye lobby. Many did but a few hung back and joined the Lib Dems in the noes lobby. Sadly it was heavily won and since then smart kids like you, and your dad have found it really hard to get to a good University. Indeed you are the first Glenn family member in 4 generations not to go to University, despite you being smarter than all of us, with the possible exception of your granny. Simple because we cannot afford to send you to Queen's and the University of Ulster sadly got absorbed into it during the worse days for Higher Education.


Update: There is now a Facebook Group called Lib Dems Against Scraping the Cap, joining other PPCs, AMs and others.

* Nice subtle play on words here as these two institutions are not unions in the sense of the common man's vernacular.

Open Letter to Lib Dem MPs


Dear Nick Clegg and Lib Dem MPs,

Like all of you I signed a pre-election pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees and to seek to introduce a fairer alternative.

Like most of you I probably had a picture taken signing it. As you can see from the picture I signed it right next to the name of the Deputy Prime Minister up in Perth at conference.

I'm pleased that in light of the Browne proposals at least 30 of our Liberal Democrat MPs are prepared to honour the pledge that they signed before the election by voting against. I am ashamed that Vince Cable last night tried to persuade them otherwise and neglect what the people who voted for them said they wanted.

Greg Mulholland has said:

"I am trying to make it clear to government that we simply wouldn't accept a rise in tuition fees. I hope that the government will heed the message and will come up with a proposal that isn't an increase to fees."


That is what we agreed to. We have delivered on fairness to students here in Scotland and again at the weekend decided to maintain that is a challenging debate to change, I which Tim Farron also spoke strongly in favour of student. We have stood by this principle for a long time and now is not the time to compromise on such a long held position. Indeed this sort of standing up for our principles might just be the sign that tells the media we are not the Tories lapdogs, we are not Tory-lite, we are our own party.

Student funding is something we have long been distinctive on. I'm proud of that fact and that students and their families recognise that. We're now the ones to fight that corner. Let us stand up and be counted in doing just that.

Stephen Glenn
2010 Westminster Candidate Linlithgow and East Falkirk


Update: There is now a Facebook Group called Lib Dems Against Scraping the Cap, joining other PPCs, AMs and others.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Once Upon a Time in a Polytechnic Not Too Far Away...

Episode IV: A Dying Hope*

When I was only two Margaret Thatcher took away free school milk, yet somehow I still got mine through my primary school days. When I was a student and I was old enough to do something about it she started to completely phase out grants for students and replace them with loans.

So it was that one of my first campaigns and indeed I think my first public march was on Westminster in the late 80s shouting for 'Grants not Loans'. The basic argument is the same that the more people have to pay for their own education the more you price out those with ability from the poorer areas of our country who might just make a difference to our world.

I'm going to cite an interest in this as one of those who wouldn't have gone to university without assistance was the son of late french polisher and a quality controller in a shirt factory. He lived in a two up two down without an inside toilet, bathroom or telephone. The only advantage he had over some on the other side of the Derry walls was that as a protestant he would have a vote when he came of age. Because that person was the first of the Glenn's to go to university my father. He went on to a career in teaching when he affected the lives of many and inspired them either to take maths seriously or to get involved in computers when they were still a novelty and then beyond.

The issue of fees has been a hot potato in Lib Dem conferences for a number of years now, not least because we delivered the removal of top up fees in Scotland when we were in coalition. So therefore imagine my shock when Vince Cable today announced that he was asking Lord Browne to look into the idea of a graduate tax as a matter of 'priority'. Seeing as we stood on a platform of removing fees for students when we could afford it to suddenly start talking about a graduate tax is a reversal in our commitment to education.

I also recall that Vince defended the VAT rises with a glib comment that he never stood in front of the VAT Bombshell poster. Well lucky him. However, I was proud to be there for the launch of that poster in Glasgow. I still say that VAT is a regressive tax and has no place in a progressive society that looks out for those least able to look after themselves. Especially as even those who don't pay income tax pay some VAT.

I'm equally glad to say I've waved a placard saying grants not loans. Kept on fighting to do away with the unfairness of the Students Loans Company. Glad that in Scotland our party has backed a minimum income guarantee for students and that we were fighting as recently as May to do away with top up fees as and when we could afford to do so.

I do not agree with Vince that this is a priority. I object to the fact that he even thinks it is. A student priority at the moment is a way for our recently graduated to find employment, and by that I mean paid employment. Sure internships give skills but no money and that is not what our brightest spent 3 or 4 years to get their Bachelors or Masters degrees to go on to. Having graduated in the last major recession I know how tough that can be.

* Not yet it isn't I'll be fighting on.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Standing Up For Students

Looking at the fine detail of the coalition agreement one thing that did strike me was the omission of any agreement to increase tuition fees. Indeed what there was is a rather woolly statement.

Higher education

We 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.
If the response of the Government to Lord Browne’s report is one that Liberal Democrats cannot accept, then arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote.


Therefore it was with relieve that I saw the following amendment to our special conference debating the coalition deal from Liberal Youth.

Conference expresses its concern that Liberal Democrat MPs who signed the 'vote for students' pledge may be unable to uphold this pledge under the abstention agreement on the Lord Browne report in the 'Higher Education' section of the agreement for a coalition government and expresses its hope that Liberal Democrat MPs can vote against any rise in the cap on tuition fees which isn't index linked.

Conference calls upon Liberal Democrat MPs to ensure that on any decision made on the Lord Browne report, they above all else take into account the impact on student debt.

Conference affirms our aspiration to scrap tuition fees.

Conference also affirms that any vote on tuition fees should not be held as a vote of confidence in the government.

Liberal Youth are incredibly worried that a whole generation of young people from lower-income backgrounds will be shut out of university education all-together if we see even higher tuition fees. Therefore, Liberal Youth are asking you to support this amendment, to reaffirm our stance on tuition fees, and force our ministers to fight for lower fees in the cabinet and allow our MPs to oppose such measures in the commons.


I fully support it, not only does it respect the idea of the new politics and the coalition that we have entered into, but it also allows our parliamentary party who along with myself and many more of our candidates all signed the 'vote for students' pledge.

I have signed their petition in support of this motion and would encourage you to do likewise and if you are attending on Sunday to speak in support and vote for it.

Saturday, January 09, 2010

Tories to Scrap Limited Tuition Fees

While it must be applauded that the Conservatives are going to pay college fees plus £5,000 towards living costs of our fallen heroes it is only small fry in terms of higher education commitments.

This would lift (at an average of 2.4 children) 1411 children for the 558 fallen soldiers killed in service since 1990 out of tuition fees. But the Liberal Democrats remain committed to scrapping tuition fees for all first Higher Education degree qualifications. Further than that the Lib Dems will offer full funding for off-the-job training costs for apprenticeships, improve access to HE for under represented groups, and reform the bursary scheme more fairly across universities.

So while the war heroes memorial bursary that the Tories are going set up is good, it only goes so far as far as fairness goes. The Lib Dems will lift all students out of the first need of this scheme. The second part is a worthy cause for the sons and daughters of our noble dead, something that is due consideration.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Is Tom Harris Jealous of a Party with a Principled Stance on Education

Now I know Tom Harris is a Doctor Who fan, a fan of reality TV shows, but his recent blog post contains the phrase "back in the real world". The post in question is about the Lib Dems pledge to keep our promise to axe tuition fees for students.

In a fit of Kerry McCarthy-esque pique he is saying that the Lib Dems are keeping a meaningless pledge as he says we will not be able to enact it in the next parliament. Strangely his own party therefore have made meaningful pledges in each of the last three General Elections and have yet to "honour them" by his own standards. We still have hereditary peers in the Lords. We still haven't eradicated child poverty. As for the pledge before the first Labour win it was all about education, education, education.

Sadly in England and Wales our students find it is all about finding the money, finding the money, finding the money to pay their tuition fees. Back in their real world the failure of the Student Loans Company to provide many with money this last term is horrendous. University hardship funds are having to cover students that they should not normally have to. If students turn to them later this year with genuine hardship issues the funds will be lower than anticipated.

Harris goes on to say that the only way to fund such a pledge is by reducing drastically the number of people entering further education. Strangely his colleagues in Holyrood didn't take that attitude when they did agree to follow through the Lib Dem policy here. See we hadn't been the largest party in the Scottish Parliament but we were able to follow through on our pledges to some extent over eight years. Also there hasn't been a reduction in the number of people in Scotland doing further education since the dropping of tuition fees, what there has been has been a fall in the proportion who drop out because they can no longer afford to attend.

Who knows what the outcome of the next Westminster Election will be? It appears that Tom Harris has stopped fighting to win. Even with a little effort from Labour there may be a hung Parliament, which could mean, oh wait, some party may have to negotiate with another to form a workable Government. If that were the case surely certain of their pledges would end up being meaningful.

So if Tom Harris is saying that the Lib Dems should not form pledges to put before the electorate, what does that mean if his party is well behind in the polls from now until May? Does that mean that his party will not have to bother issuing a manifesto as it will be full of pledges they have no chance of keeping or honouring? Of course not.

What Tom Harris cannot stand is that the Lib Dems are remaining true to a long held education policy when over the last 12 years of Labour Government there have been 12 different Education Bills following the shifting sands and a thirteenth was included in the last Queen's speech.

So maybe Tom should look at the "real world" where everything isn't so Red and Blue. Latest opinion polls are showing once again that over 20% are going to vote Lib Dems and in the run up to previous elections that proportion has gone up. In some of those same polls Labour has been within a margin of error ahead of the Lib Dems. As for students I'm glad to see that Tom Harris takes their concerns, their issues so lightly, in the long run they are the people that he will need to re-elect him. Indeed it may be sooner than he anticipates.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

I Think Tory Bear Owes me an Apology

I'm not sure what lessons one recent graduate picked up at his time at Edinburgh University, but he appears to have not attending any lesson on democracy. Yes, folks it would appear that Mr Harry Cole either thinks that the elected dictatorship or politburo approach that the conservative party deal with policy and manifesto writing is the way these things get done.

Earlier this week Mr Cole who blogs as Tory Bear, and doesn't like his readers to remember that, posted an article called Liberal Lies. In it he quoted Nick Clegg saying:

"Ending tuition fees would cost billions of pounds every year. We need to be certain we can afford it before we make any promises."
He carried on accusing Liberal Youth of lying saying:

"Liberal Youth built their entire freshers recruitment campaign around this issue. Proudly boasting that they were the only party who would fight for free education...

"Too bad for Elaine Bagshaw and Liberal Youth that their postcards full of lies and false promises have already been handed out across every university in the country."


He even demanded that instead of going about the business of policy discussion and decision at Lib Dem conference I should apologise to him for calling him as liar after he suggested that the pledge to scrap tuition fees was to be dropped.

What I did know, that Harry didn't, was the composition of the Federal Policy Committee. This is the democratically elected body that formulates the parties policies into a coherent manifesto. Having voted on a number of occasions for some of the members who sit on that committee I know where their Liberal hearts lie and how they would feel on this issue. Actually yesterday during the Fresh Start for Britain: Choosing a Different, Better Future debate some of them took to the podium to speak against certain lines in their own motion.

In fact we don't all need to guess at most of their views because this morning a majority of them have signed a letter in the Grauniad. In it they say:

"Not all our policies make it into the manifesto, which contains a carefully costed programme for a full parliamentary term. The manifesto will shortly be produced by the 29-strong federal policy committee (FPC), after an open and vigorous debate about the priority we attach to different spending commitments balanced against the savings we have identified to pay for them.

"We have yet to have that discussion but, as a clear majority of members of the FPC, we think it would be valuable to clarify now that we predict that our commitment to scrap tuition fees, as part of our plans to create a fairer society, will indeed be included in the manifesto and that the party will be united in strongly campaigning on this in the run-up to and at next year's general election."

So I think that Mr Cole owes me, Elaine Bagshaw and Liberal Youth an apology, not the other way round. We, and others, have been in Bournemouth going about the business of manifesto forming.

The same offer you offered me erroneously will suffice please feel free to apologise, even a Tweet will do.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Fibbing Tory Bears in the Hood Today

I see that Tory Bear is up to his normal scare mongering, telling half truths and well.....fibbing about what the Lib Dems are up to.

He is taking issue with this article published last year prior to Autumn conference which said:

"The leaders of the Liberal Democrats plan to abandon the party's opposition to student tuition fees."


But went on to say:

"[Stephen] Williams acknowledged that he and Mr Clegg were likely to face strong opposition from many in the party who felt that its stance at the 2005 election, as the only mainstream party supporting free higher education, was an important distinguishing factor."


Well guess what Tory Bear before you accuse the Lib Dems lying about the policy you should check how the vote went to ammend the policy or look at policy on the party website.

You see Harry unlike at Tory Party conference the head doesn't move and the body follows. The head may suggest something but the delegates get their say, their vote to take action as the party decides. Not only do we not just want to keep up our opposition to Tuition fees we expanded the scope of that in March of this year.

Who's the fibber now?

It appears that the above advise may also be something that Irfan Ahmed needs to take on board.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails