Tuesday 30 November 2010

Those Bloody Students!

For the third time this month, the students of the country took to the streets to protest the educational 'reforms' proposed by the Coalition Government. Students are largely upset at the prospect of paying up to £9,000 per year in tuition fees as a response to the The Browne Report. The typical ill-informed, knee-jerk response goes along the lines of:

"I pay my bloody taxes for these bloody students to sit on their arses doing nothing at second-class universities, only for them to end up scanning my shopping!"

There's more to it than that. A lot more. This post will only attempt to scratch the surface on the web of lies and spin which have resulted in the protests.

First, the Benefits

I should point out some of the positives that the report brings to the table, for there are two sides to every story, and most of the time both bring worthwhile additions:

  • The lowest bracket of repayment is suggested to be raised from £15,000 to £21,000. 89.1% of graduates currently earn over £22,000, according to Prospects.
  • Part-time students will get extra support. This is something long overdue, and is especially beneficial to working, single-mother students whom have it hard enough already.
  • The tiered system can potentially go a long way into making sure people contribute what they are supposed to.
  • No up-front payments have been suggested. If implemented this would massively decrease the number of poorer students who could afford to attend university (although I still remain confident the Government will say they cannot afford to loan the full amount in an attempt to reduce their long-term shortfall).

Criticisms of the Browne Report

In a letter to the Telegraph, senior academics from across the country criticised the Browne Report and proposed an alternate method which has been well received and suggested elsewhere: a Public Commission. They argue the Browne Report is rushed, will be likewise rushed into Parliament, and poorly-implemented at that. Concerns of the Higher Education Policy Institute, that the long-term costs of this are ignored (we'll be waiting for a return on each now-higher student loan for a longer period of time) are echoed. The idea that the market can dictate courses through a supply and demand model is challenged. The The Guardian has concerns this will hit universities hard. The Welsh Assembly is willing to absorb some of the price rises to tuition fees.

Fib Dems

The Liberal Democrats, despite their pre-election pledges, have seemingly abandoned their principles in the presence of power. They have faced a lot of criticism during the protests, especially Nick Clegg. So much in fact they are on a PR (read "damage limitation") campaign to say that they are considering making sure their pledges to oppose increases in tuition fees are met by abstaining from voting. That act is not congruent to the promise, and will not go down will amongst the public. Interestingly, if our Deputy PM and Business Secretary (whom is also the Secretary of State responsible for universities) abstain, what does that say about a government whose upper echelons can’t even agree? No confidence comes to mind.

The Kyriarchy

The idea that devastating austerity measures are justified by the belief that the private sector will pick up the debris from a systematic mass public sector redundancy program, in order to recover from a recession caused by risk-taking bankers (who knew the Government would carry the burden of their risks and bail them out, of course); whom themselves operate as if it’s business as usual – has been widely rejected.

At a time like this, where we should be investing to stimulate growth rather than disproportionately hitting the poorest with ideologically-driven cuts, we should also be investing in education. Education has the ability to break all boundaries. The Browne Report is a miscalculated step to reducing government spend in the short-term, whilst ignoring the cost to the funds in the long-term; representing a major shift on a gradient towards America’s education model, where the kyriarchy keeps itself afloat at a disregard to the rest of society.

Where can this money come from? The tax avoiders, of course! Reports are circulating that Sir Philip Green, the boss of Topshop, paid his wife in Monaco a dividend of over £1 billion in order to avoid a massive tax. Protesters have voiced concern about this by demonstrating outside the Oxford Street Topshop branch. UKUncut claim this tax avoidance alone could pay for 32,000 students at £9,000 per year. Vodafone, whose antics in the tax field were first exposed by Private Eye, have been the victims of a series of protests across the country. Vodafone’s response was to close their shops, deny they are not tax dodgers (their £6 billion bill was 'settled' by agreeing to pay 1/6th of that). Channel 4 has suggested that Osborne, our chancellor, has questions to answer about his tax status.

That money could be used towards education. Or allow the kyriarchy to continue its privileged dominance over society. We're all in this together.

Show Your Support!

Support is coming in from all sides. Paul O’Grady and even Noam Chomsky have come out in support of the protests and occupations respectively.

Support the protesters! Support the occupations! Ignore the media lies about them being thugs, these are our future doctors and lawyers fighting for what matters for society. The Tories cheer cuts, the students hold lectures.

Coming Soon

How a supposedly democratic and free country responds to peaceful protests.

No comments:

Post a Comment