Scottish students might not be directly affected by the increase in tuition fees that their English counterparts face. But they have good reason to protest given the likely introduction of some form of graduate contribution
On November 10, 2010, 2,000 Scottish students travelled to London for the landmark National Union of Students demonstration against the coalition government’s plans to treble tuition fees. As rector of Edinburgh University, I was with them – though, in case you were wondering, that wasn’t me on top of the Millbank Tower with the anarchist flag.
But why were we there at all? After all, tuition fees were abolished in Scotland in 2000. One of the English demonstrators even carried a placard saying: ‘Sod this, I’m off to Scotland.’ Surely, the lucky Jocks should maintain a discreet silence, since they don’t face post-graduation debts of £40,000.
Or do they? For there is great confusion in Scottish higher education right now. There is a presumption among many university vice-chancellors that, while up-front tuition fees will never be restored, some kind of graduate contribution will be introduced by whichever party wins the Scottish election in May. Education Secretary Mike Russell has invited staff, students, and opposition parties to come up with a ‘distinctly Scottish, egalitarian solution’ to the funding problem.
And a problem it will be. Already, the Scottish Government has had to compensate universities for the £3,250 that Scottish students do not pay toward the cost of their tuition. The prospect of meeting the potential top rate £9,000 shortfall per student is causing sleepless nights for university principals. If alternative income is not found, then crisis measures might be inevitable: teaching cuts, the end of the four-year degree, closure or merging universities.Prominent Scottish academics have already warned of a slide to mediocrity.
But the Scottish National Party’s policy remains that tuition fees will not be restored. In 2007, First Minister Alex Salmond even abolished the £2,000 graduate endowment that Scottish graduates paid toward the cost of providing bursaries and student support.
Higher education was one of the big losers in Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney’s November cuts, with the Scottish Funding Council budget reduced by 7%. Universities have said they can probably live with this until 2012, but then something will have to make up for the fees gap with England.
Does the SNP have something up their sleeve? A fiscal sleight of hand that will somehow close the funding gap without having to introduce fees? For a while it appeared as if Russell was minded to introduce some form of graduate contribution, based on ability to pay, through the student loans system.
But since the Browne Report into English higher education funding and the UK government’s £9,000 cap, the word from unofficial Cabinet sources is that attitudes are hardening in the Scottish Government against any form of tuition fees, whether up-front or after graduation. Browne has so polarised debate that even a graduate contribution based on ability to pay might go too far.
It could be that the SNP thinks it can get through to May without having to answer this challenge. After all, Labour is equally reluctant to state what it will do. Or it might be that they believe Westminister will have to subsidise tuition for a number of years yet before the Browne fees are felt, and this will filter through in the Barnett Formula.
Either way, Scottish students aren’t taking any chances. Until they get clarity, they will be out on the barricades with the rest of the student body. Right on, comrades.
Iain Macwhirter is political commentator on the Sunday Herald and rector of Edinburgh University
