12th March
We're paranoid. That's what you reckon. And if you are one of those people who trust politicians, thinks they are all honest and beyond reproach, you will still be thinking we're paranoid by the time you've finished. In fact, just why are you reading this if that's what you think?? For the sane people, I'm sorry, but we've got a conspiracy theory and (some of) the facts to back it up. If you've been with us since the start, this will give you deja vu, but as the whole scenario stinks of repeatage, why not. We'll start you back in the mid nineties, the creation of the New Labour project, and the end of the fairytale.
The Labour party has controlled NUS since 1983, and for the most part that wasn't a bad thing. They were the only campaigning body to force a U-Turn out of Thatchers second term Govt, then beating out tuition fees. Unfortunately the reformers got in charge of the party nationally, and that meant NUS too. The New Labour project was borne of frustration. After four general election defeats they decided the only way to beat the Tories was to become the Tories. The Old Labour values of Unionism, Progressive Taxation and Nationalisation, basically Socialism went out the window, just at a time when the country wanted those things! In came career blaggers and the business lobby. This is where NUS came into it's own. It had been used for some years by the party as a training ground for the MPs, Councillors and Union Leaders of the future. Now the party had a task on its hands. It had to clear out the old deadwood, the socialists. To do that NUS must do it's bit in providing 'On message' clones.
NUS also had to undergo the same painful changes that Labour did. The removal of Clause 4 of Labours' constitution, the principle to have Nationalised Industries, had to go. It did. In much the same way, New Labour NUS leadership decided there was no point in campaigning for grants. Strange they decided that before they were abolished. Maybe they got a sneak preview of Tony's plans. Well what they (NUS Presidents Murphy, Fitzsimmons and Twigg) did get were places on the Labour benches. If you needed more convincing, they all voted (as MPs) to get rid of grants and bring in tuition fees.
A fortnight before the last election Blair said he had 'No Plans to Implement Tuition Fees'. When he brought them in he said he was 'Implementing the recommendations of the Dearing Report' Dearing said fees yes, but keep grants. NUS sat on the sidelines. They didn't even call a national demonstration- something you might have expected in the face of the biggest attack on students ever!
Why this is relevant now is that NUS is still controlled by Labour. Although most of the time Owain James will say he is Independent, sometimes the party make him admit he's a Labour member for their purposes. He has done, on the face of it an about turn, saying now he wants to fight for grants. Besides the fact that these people say one thing in public and another when they talk to Ministers and the like, this again is a blag, NUS have been 'Lulled' into fighting for the wrong thing again. In 97-98, not fighting for the grant immediately put the Union in a weak position. How could they justify saying yes to grant abolition, but no to fees, which would affect fewer students? Also the point of not fighting on the grant immediately split the Union in two.
Well this time NUS has swallowed David Blunketts statement that "There will be no Top-Up fees in the next parliament." It's not a promise, or a pledge, it's just a press statement, much like Blair's 'No Fees' one in 97. Meaning NUS is not going to fight on this issue. But it's going to happen. And I'll tell you why it's going to happen.
Quite simple. The Universities want it and the Government wants it. The Government want anything that means they pay less money out. When I say the Unis want it, some do. The Russell group is a group of the 14 'Ivy League' Unis that want to charge top-up fees. They will report after the election, much like Dearing did in 97. The Aldwych group is an alternative group that is meant to 'counter' Russell, and is made up of Student Unions from the Russell group. It is a closed shop, and bearing in mind these are the richest Unis, and it was NUS leaders from these SUs who said 'We don't need grants', it is highly likely both will say, let's have top-up fees. It will only mean those 14 Unis can charge top-up fees at the start.
And what will happen then? Well what is happening now. The poorer Unis are cutting back as they are desperate for cash. Lincs & Humberside, De Montford and Wolves have all said they are closing a campus. Aston has found another way out. They are to be merged with (taken over by) Birmingham University. And guess what. They have already put tuition fees of £2,000 in their budgets for 2003-4. How come? Because by then they'll be part of a Uni allowed to charge fees. Knowing that several 'New' Unis are in the mire financially, it is highly likely more will be bought up by fee paying institutions, eventually making them all fee paying institutions. After all, mergers and acquisitions is what you get in a 'free market'. What do you mean you don't believe it? Surely you don't trust politicians and people who want to be politicians?
