May launches review of high UK university fees, promising fairer deal

[webfact]

May launches review of high UK university fees, promising fairer deal

By Paul Sandle and David Milliken

 

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May talks at the Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, February 17, 2018. REUTERS/Ralph Orlowski

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain could reduce the burden of university fees on students and bring back grants for their living expenses, Prime Minister Theresa May will say on Monday, under pressure to lure younger voters a year after they cost her parliamentary majority.

 

May's predecessor David Cameron, a fellow Conservative, tripled the cost of tuition for students from England and Wales to 9,000 pounds a year ($12,640), many times higher than the fees other EU countries charge their citizens. In 2016, the government also phased out all grants to help poorer students with living costs, replacing them with loans.

 

The opposition Labour Party says it wants to eliminate student fees and restore grants.

 

May's Conservatives, or Tories, have long defended their approach, arguing that requiring students to pay helps fund more places so more people can study, and puts more of the burden of the cost of higher education on those who benefit most from it.

 

Students do not have to make payments on their loans unless they earn above a minimum threshold, although they continue to accrue interest. Unpaid balances are wiped out after 30 years.

 

But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt. Young people voted heavily against the Conservatives in an election last year that surprisingly erased May's majority, forcing her to form a minority government.

 

May will acknowledge that Britain now has "one of the most expensive systems of university tuition in the world", and pledge to make it fairer, according to excerpts from her speech released in advance by her office.

 

"All but a handful of universities charge the maximum possible fees for undergraduate courses. Three-year courses remain the norm. And the level of fees charged do not relate to the cost or quality of the course," she will say.

 

The review "will examine how we can give people from disadvantaged backgrounds an equal chance to succeed", including looking at grants for poor students, her office said.

 

Education Secretary Damian Hinds said on Sunday that students could be charged variable tuition rates depending on the economic value of degrees in the subjects they study.

 

"What we need to look at is the different aspects of pricing, so the cost to put on the course, the value it is to the student and also the value to our society as a whole and to our economy for the future," he told BBC's Andrew Marr show.

 

The opposition said such a system would only serve to lock poor students out of the best-paid professions.

 

"Charging more for the courses that help graduates earn the most would put off students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds from getting those same qualifications," Labour education spokeswoman Angela Rayner said on Twitter.

 

"So much for the PM's talk about social mobility. The Tories really haven't grasped the reality of social mobility."

 

Earlier on Sunday, a parliamentary committee said the government should cut the interest rate it charges on student loans, which are pegged at 3 percentage points above retail price inflation. The current rate of 6.1 percent is higher than most banks charge for mortgages or unsecured personal loans.

 

The British parliament's Treasury Committee said the use of RPI as a benchmark was unfair, and the 3 percentage point premium introduced in 2012 was hard to justify.

 

"The government must reconsider the use of high interest rates on student loans," said Nicky Morgan, Conservative chair of the cross-party committee.

 

($1 = 0.7120 pounds)

 

(Reporting by David Milliken and Paul Sandle; Editing by Peter Graff)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-02-19

[isaanbanhou]

When I attended university in the UK most students were on grants.  I believe in the 70's if you were intelligent but poor you could better your life.  I was a foreign student and paid my own way.  A good education should not be for the wealthy only, it should be merit based.  Canada and America seem to have a system of helping keep the rich stay on top. Unless of course you play a sport and then universities bend over backwards to attract you.

[billd766]

When I left secondary modern school in 1959 none of us expected to go to uni for free or for pay.

 

Only grammar schools kids went.

 

If we were very lucky we could get an apprenticeship and perhaps day release and/or night school at colleges.

 

quote " But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt."

 

Granted we didn't have the debt but then again nobody in those days believed that they had the "right" to expect to go to the university at the taxpayers expense as they seem to demand nowadays.

 

I often wonder how the Labour opposition party expect to pay the bills for all the things that they promise will be free or nationalised IF they ever get into power.

 

Just borrow it or print more worthless money as they always do and after they are kicked out blame the Tories for cutting expenditure to pay back the loans. (As they always do)

[RuamRudy]

55 minutes ago, billd766 said:

When I left secondary modern school in 1959 none of us expected to go to uni for free or for pay.

 

Only grammar schools kids went.

 

If we were very lucky we could get an apprenticeship and perhaps day release and/or night school at colleges.

 

quote " But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt."

 

Granted we didn't have the debt but then again nobody in those days believed that they had the "right" to expect to go to the university at the taxpayers expense as they seem to demand nowadays.

 

I often wonder how the Labour opposition party expect to pay the bills for all the things that they promise will be free or nationalised IF they ever get into power.

 

Just borrow it or print more worthless money as they always do and after they are kicked out blame the Tories for cutting expenditure to pay back the loans. (As they always do)

So would you advocate a return to the old days, when much of the working class was excluded from non-vocational higher education? 

 

Here's a novel idea - rather than making cuts to public services to balance the books, how about the Tories crack down on tax dodging at corporate and individual levels? Oh yeah, that won't happen because they would be shitting in their own nests. 

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

So would you advocate a return to the old days, when much of the working class was excluded from non-vocational higher education? 

 

Here's a novel idea - rather than making cuts to public services to balance the books, how about the Tories crack down on tax dodging at corporate and individual levels? Oh yeah, that won't happen because they would be shitting in their own nests. 

 

Education, in any forward thinking, progressive society must be freely available and of the highest caliber available.

 

The only limitations on people should be their ability and desire. 

 

It's in the country's interests to have more bachelor degree, master's degree and PhDs. And to encourage and and fund research and centers of excellence. But they'd sooner fund Pakistan to go and buy new Chinese warplanes!

 

Corbyn spoke at my daughter's university before the last election - and certainly won her and her peers over. They voted Labor. No fees, no debt, no strings. Not some typical Tory "no fees - but here's all the small print" co-out.

 

I seriously wonder if some of those right wing Tory Bexiters crave for a return to the old class riddled British societies where workers knew their place and little expectations of improvement? The same types who shout about corruption and the law whilst hoarding their off shore investments and tax avoidance schemes!

[Baerboxer]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

When I left secondary modern school in 1959 none of us expected to go to uni for free or for pay.

 

Only grammar schools kids went.

 

If we were very lucky we could get an apprenticeship and perhaps day release and/or night school at colleges.

 

quote " But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt."

 

Granted we didn't have the debt but then again nobody in those days believed that they had the "right" to expect to go to the university at the taxpayers expense as they seem to demand nowadays.

 

I often wonder how the Labour opposition party expect to pay the bills for all the things that they promise will be free or nationalised IF they ever get into power.

 

Just borrow it or print more worthless money as they always do and after they are kicked out blame the Tories for cutting expenditure to pay back the loans. (As they always do)

 

Education, like water, sanitation and health care should be free to the people. They are the nation. 

 

I'm not a supporter of nationalization per se, but that's not the issue. Things can be privatized and still provided free to the people. But government procurement, outsourcing, contract management and direct services are riddled with corruption, inefficiency, ineffectiveness. 

 

Unless of course you want a return to when the first question an interviewee for Oxbridge was asked was which previous family members / generations had attended college there!

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

When I left secondary modern school in 1959 none of us expected to go to uni for free or for pay.

 

Only grammar schools kids went.

 

If we were very lucky we could get an apprenticeship and perhaps day release and/or night school at colleges.

 

quote " But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt."

 

Granted we didn't have the debt but then again nobody in those days believed that they had the "right" to expect to go to the university at the taxpayers expense as they seem to demand nowadays.

 

I often wonder how the Labour opposition party expect to pay the bills for all the things that they promise will be free or nationalised IF they ever get into power.

 

Just borrow it or print more worthless money as they always do and after they are kicked out blame the Tories for cutting expenditure to pay back the loans. (As they always do)

Not quite the same vintage as you but not far off.  I initially went to a secondary modern school but at thirteen managed to get into a grammar school.  From there I got into university.  In those days getting a degree did mean you had  a "shoe in" to most jobs.  However quite a few of my friends (mainly kids from the football club I played for) didn't go to university.  They all had jobs though as there were always jobs available.  Some of those boys became far more successful than me or many of my fellow university students.  In the sixties there did seem to be lots of opportunities.

 

But that was then and today it is very different.  Going to university is very expensive even for those who get a scholarship.  You leave with a considerable debt and now you have absolutely no guarantee of getting a job at all.  In fact a large proportion of graduates end up in jobs that they could have got without a degree at all, but they still have the debt!

 

I have always wanted my son to go to uni and have been saving for some time to help with the costs.  However now I am having doubts about it being the best thing.  The risks are really high and we are now looking at apprenticeships.  The choices are growing and banks, law firms, the media and IT companies etc. are all getting on board. 

 

As for Theresa May, she and the party are acutely aware that the young voters are firmly leaning towards Labour and she needs to do more to attract them over to the Tories.  Hence the new proposals.

[i claudius]

It was Blair and the Labour party that started the rot making all the senior schools into universitys. Like the university for those who can read and write in my old home town .doing courses on films and golf and loads of stupid things that will be as much use to the average person leaving there with a "degree" as having a chocolate spoon to stir their tea.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Education, like water, sanitation and health care should be free to the people. They are the nation. 

 

I'm not a supporter of nationalization per se, but that's not the issue. Things can be privatized and still provided free to the people. But government procurement, outsourcing, contract management and direct services are riddled with corruption, inefficiency, ineffectiveness. 

 

Unless of course you want a return to when the first question an interviewee for Oxbridge was asked was which previous family members / generations had attended college there!

 

quote " Unfortunately things like Education, like water, sanitation and health care should be free to the people. They are the nation. " are NEVER free to the people. Somebody ALWAYS has to pay and it falls directly on the taxpayers to do so. Not every taxpayer and their children get the benefit of higher education and from what I read of the degrees that are available at the universities nowadays not all of them are of benefit to students or the countries future.

 

Government procurement, outsourcing, contract management and direct services are riddled with corruption, inefficiency, ineffectiveness and certainly need looking at . There are many local councils across the UK who have used outsourcing, contract management and direct services have found that they are more expensive in the long term and less effective.

 

As fo Oxbridge I never got there and I am fairly syre that I haven't missed anything by not going.

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, i claudius said:

It was Blair and the Labour party that started the rot making all the senior schools into universitys. Like the university for those who can read and write in my old home town .doing courses on films and golf and loads of stupid things that will be as much use to the average person leaving there with a "degree" as having a chocolate spoon to stir their tea.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

It is true that there was a time when many of the Colleges became Universities and that dumbed down the whole system.  However almost all the uni friends I had ended up in jobs that bore no relationships to their degrees and I was one of them.  It was all about "having a degree" and often didn't relate to any career moves.  

[i claudius]

It is true that there was a time when many of the Colleges became Universities and that dumbed down the whole system.  However almost all the uni friends I had ended up in jobs that bore no relationships to their degrees and I was one of them.  It was all about "having a degree" and often didn't relate to any career moves.  

Yes a bit like our son here you have to have a degree which he now has and its given him a really good job working for a multinational and for a young man a really good salary. Wherase my daugter never went to uni but runs her own succesful business .who can tell?

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[billd766]

14 minutes ago, i claudius said:

Yes a bit like our son here you have to have a degree which he now has and its given him a really good job working for a multinational and for a young man a really good salary. Wherase my daugter never went to uni but runs her own succesful business .who can tell?

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

My niece was the first one I know in the family to get a degree (in business studies). She got a couple of dead end jobs at less than the promised 15,000 baht a month and quit them both and now has her own business making more than that and is her own boss.

[dunroaming]

Thailand is actually a good place to go it on your own.  Mainly because it is affordable to do without having to invest a large amount of money.  My wife's niece opened a hairdressers in Nakhon Sawan with 80,000 baht borrowed from the family.  She now has a second salon  and is doing fine.  She repaid the debt in less than a year.

[Khun Han]

12 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

quote " Unfortunately things like Education, like water, sanitation and health care should be free to the people. They are the nation. " are NEVER free to the people. Somebody ALWAYS has to pay and it falls directly on the taxpayers to do so. Not every taxpayer and their children get the benefit of higher education and from what I read of the degrees that are available at the universities nowadays not all of them are of benefit to students or the countries future.

 

Government procurement, outsourcing, contract management and direct services are riddled with corruption, inefficiency, ineffectiveness and certainly need looking at . There are many local councils across the UK who have used outsourcing, contract management and direct services have found that they are more expensive in the long term and less effective.

 

As fo Oxbridge I never got there and I am fairly syre that I haven't missed anything by not going.

 

"Government procurement, outsourcing, contract management and direct services are riddled with corruption, inefficiency, ineffectiveness and certainly need looking at . There are many local councils across the UK who have used outsourcing, contract management and direct services have found that they are more expensive in the long term and less effective."

 

Bill, you are more correct than you could imagine wrt pricing and corruption. Local government, in particular, fiddles the figures in a similar way to which Carillion fiddled it's accounts, to make PFI tenders look more competitive than public funded ones when they actually aren't. I have business connections with lots of people who are involved in the merry-go-round to which you refer. And I have known people personally in my local borough at councillor level and council manager level, and in Manchester City Council at council manager level. One of the most corrupt people I have ever met is a senior local manager for Co-Operative, a company which (for obvious reasons) works very closely with Rochdale council. After he contracted my company in a few times for his operation, he phoned me up one day and asked me to launder a large cheque from another contractor through my company's accounts for a percentage fee! I refused, and stopped taking calls from him. He tried to harass me for about a year after, including sending his brother (who is police plain clothes) round to my house several times. I got rid of his brother by threatening to make a formal complaint to his senior officer. Anyway, I'm digressing slightly. The debacle that is Carillion is just the tip of the iceberg of what you describe.

 

Btw, before anyone asks. I nor my company have ever had any financial dealings with local or national government. Though I have had dealings with Carillion and similar companies.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Khun Han

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, billd766 said:

When I left secondary modern school in 1959 none of us expected to go to uni for free or for pay.

 

Only grammar schools kids went.

 

If we were very lucky we could get an apprenticeship and perhaps day release and/or night school at colleges.

 

quote " But the system is extremely unpopular with younger voters, angry about being the first British generation to start their careers carrying tens of thousands of pounds of debt."

 

Granted we didn't have the debt but then again nobody in those days believed that they had the "right" to expect to go to the university at the taxpayers expense as they seem to demand nowadays.

 

I often wonder how the Labour opposition party expect to pay the bills for all the things that they promise will be free or nationalised IF they ever get into power.

 

Just borrow it or print more worthless money as they always do and after they are kicked out blame the Tories for cutting expenditure to pay back the loans. (As they always do)

When my father obtained a job ( accountancy ) his parents had to pay the company to train him. He later went on to be relatively prosperous. Far as I know he also went to university. I would expect his parents paid for that as well, if he did, though I don't know if they did.

Jump to the present when decades of government voter bribery has bred a class of young people that expect other people to pay for everything they want.

This latest by May is just that- bribery with other people's money.

It's worth remembering that some very rich people now never went to uni, so all that "social mobility ( at other people's expense )" demands is political blah blah.

The worst thing the politicians did in their rush to require degrees for everything is to make young people think a real job like plumbing or building is only for losers. Destroying the apprenticeship schemes was an appalling mistake.

 

However, it does seem blatantly unfair that the interest charged is higher than that on mortgages. IMO student loans ( capped ) should be interest free, if repaid within say 10 years.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, dunroaming said:

It is true that there was a time when many of the Colleges became Universities and that dumbed down the whole system.  However almost all the uni friends I had ended up in jobs that bore no relationships to their degrees and I was one of them.  It was all about "having a degree" and often didn't relate to any career moves.  

That would be like when I was thinking of becoming an English teacher in LOS. Even had I done TEFL I couldn't get a job here as I didn't have a degree. Didn't matter which degree or what it was in- just had to be a degree, as though that was some sort of magic to make me a better teacher.

BTW, I am a qualified instructor in first aid, but that doesn't count, apparently, while a degree in "hip hop" would.