With both Charles Clarke and Margaret Hodge making comments about the validity of certain degrees and institutions, mostly followed by official retractions, you may have found it difficult to imagine just what the message DfES were sending out about what they think degrees are for. With the subtlety of a brick they have made it clear with an advertising campaign telling students how to find out about the changes to HE funding. The image they chose to illustrate the point that the cost of HE is changing? A mortar board with a barcode. If still you doubted the motivation of DfES was to create 'Chequebook Education', batty old fruit-loop and Minister for HELL (Higher Education & lifelong Loaning) has stepped into the spotlight saying 'We will create a market'. Just to put the amount students will pay back into perspective, with a repayment level through tax of 9% of income once graduates pass the repayment threshold, at 42%, their total tax burden will be higher than millionaires who pay 40%.

It seems Hodge isn't a great fan of new universities, quite amazingly stating that allowing the Russell Group to charge full top-up fees and new unis not would mean that any rational student would ever choose a former poly;
"The wool has been pulled over people's eyes for too long. By asking everyone to pay the same tuition fee regardless of the university they go to we have been implying that the benefits of every university are the same. They are not."

"By enabling universities to charge differential fees we are lifting the wool from people's eyes, recognising difference, diversity and the premium that some universities give you over others. This is an economic justification for allowing some universities to charge more than others. If potential students thought and acted rationally, then they would be willing to invest more in universities that offered them a better return on their investment."

"There is a wider economic reason for differential fees. We need our universities to have more independent sources of income so that they can afford to pay their lecturers more money, modernise their facilities and compete with their international counterparts. This is not just about economics. There is a moral case behind differential fees as well."

"You cannot talk about the moral case behind differential fees without recognising the fact that this government will make sure that access is placed centre-stage. We are passionately committed to protecting students most in need and to encouraging even more students from non traditional higher education backgrounds to aim higher."

Charles Clarke had also been in trouble following on from Margaret Hodges' comments about 'Mickey Mouse Degrees', when was reported to dismiss medieval historians as "ornamental" and suggested the state should not fund them. His poster makes it clear that every degree will have it's market price, just the same way you can buy your baked beans at Kwik Save or M&S. The other thing that is noticeable about his poster campaign is that next to the statement 'The Cost of Higher Education is Changing', there is a little asterisk. The small print that goes with it? 'Some of these proposals are subject to Parliamentary Approval'. Some? Well, yes the government could let universities raise tuition fees in the next parliament without having to seek the backing of MPs. As we've pointed out before the Labour manifesto commitment from 2001 which said "We will not introduce top-up fees and have legislated to prevent them" was a load of bollocks on both counts. Currently, universities can actually charge top-up fees if they wish, however, any money above the £1,100 would go direct to the treasury. 87 Labour MPs have signed a motion against top-up fees, enough if they and all opposition MPs voted against to mean the Government would lose, but a deal by which the treasury paid all or part of top-up fees back could be completed without a vote.

Besides the Tories coming out against not only top-up fees but tuition fees full stop (See Chris Neville-Smiths' analysis), UK manufacturers are warning universities against charging higher fees, as are the British Medical Association. Health care professionals are now calling for similar deals for them as new teachers get- wiping out of loans and paying of fees. This still whilst NUS see nothing positive in the tory plans.

Charles Clarke has revealed details of the Access Regulator which will operate once top-up fees come in, and surprise surprise, it's not going to be an independent body, but part of HEFCE. OFFA as it will be called is meant to ensure higher participation of students from poorer backgrounds, with Margaret Hodge saying openly there will be targets and then having her boss Charles Clarke insisting there wouldn't. Hodge had quite specifically said;
"I am going to do a target on closing the gap. I'm actually going to set a target - where we want to get to by 2010."
Then Clarke was forced to say;
"An overall target would be inappropriate and we have no plans to introduce one".
Just as well as many of the Russell Group are missing their targets by a mile, and they were going to be fined for missing targets! Hmm- Need to keep an eye on that one…

While Clarke has been outlining his ideas for OFFA, Universities UK have started investigations into whether it would be illegal under the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act. A Section of the act states that the secretary of state cannot tailor funds to universities according to "the criteria for the selection and appointment of academic staff and for the admission of students".

The bottom line is, despite the window dressing that OFFA will provide, there will be the precedent of the years before it is up and running when Unis could charge fees. Yes that's right, Margaret Hodge, has left the cat out of the bag again, saying that before 2006 when the fees will come in, there would not be time for a new regulator to judge how effective a university's access policies were. For some reason known only to her, Hodge said that despite the fact HEFCE already had figures which show top universities currently failing on access that it would be impossible to use those statistics.

Not surprisingly, most universities have stated they intend to charge the top rate and Charles Clarke is set to ignore one of the most senior advisers at DfES who has produced research, which again unsurprisingly, has shown that top-up fees will widen the class divide, which it also shows has been growing since the introduction of fees and grant abolition. 13% of children from the lowest social class went to university in 1991-92. Ten years later after Blair & Blunkett had done their thing it was 7%. In his report, Steve Machin, director of the Centre for the Economics of Education at the DfES, concludes that government plans to increase access to higher education for children outside the middle classes will fail without the introduction of generous grants and scholarships.

Coventry VC, Michael Goldstein pointed why things have been going wrong and will continue to do so under the new plans;
"Under the new proposals, everyone will have to pay the full fee charged. Less well off students will be faced with a much worse situation than now - and these are the very students the government is seeking to attract into universities. This is madness. The proposals are a huge gamble: that students will not be put off from going to university even more by the prospect of accumulating massive debts on graduation. If fees are to be £3,000 or 4,000 a year, rather than just over £1,000 now, the debt burden on graduation will be massive."

DfES, The future of higher education: what it means to students and parents
BBC, Can university admissions be regulated?
Ananova, Scrapping student fees 'disastrous', warns Blair Hospital Doctor, Plans for top-up fees will leave graduating doctors debts of 'up to £35,000'
Guardian, 'Why should the state fund universities?'
Independent, Universities plunge into debt as funding crisis worsens
BBC, Dearing warning on fees 'cartel'
Guardian, Majority against top-up fees
BBC, What the strategy says
NUS Online, OFFA in place to rubber stamp top-up fees
Guardian, An appeasing offa
NUS Online, 85% will not go to university if their debt is £20,000
Telegraph, Top universities face fines for lack of 'poor' students
Times, Universities 'must show they are open to all'
BMA, top-up fees threaten doctor numbers, BMA warns
National Student, An OFFA we can't refuse?
NUS Online, NUS response to government HE white paper
Guardian, Legality of access regulator questioned
Independent, Universities may form top-up fee 'cartel'
Observer, Top-up fees 'will widen class divide'
Guardian, Universities to levy fees before access deal
Guardian, Bad review by Mandy Telford
Guardian, Funding council to oversee university regulator
Sky, HIGHER EDUCATION ROW
Independent, Class gap target for universities is ditched
Guardian, Row over student class gap
BBC, U-turn over university targets
BBC, Ministers halt university targets
ePolitix, Top universities to lose funds
NUS Online, Hodge reveals that universities can levy top-up fees before Access Regulator is established
NUS Online, Government forced to backtrack on 30% figure
Guardian, Universities to levy fees before access deal
Guardian, Blair loyalist speaks out against student top-up fees
Personnel Today, Manufacturers oppose college fees hike
Guardian, Clarke denies medieval history slur
Guardian, Clarke dismisses medieval historians
Guardian, Make deal to halt fees rebellion, Clarke told
Guardian, Funding council to oversee university regulator
Guardian, Backbenchers say plan is a betrayal
Guardian, Morris backs the poor in blast at top-up fees
Guardian, Top-up fees plan could bypass Commons
BBC, Debt 'deters poorer students'
BBC, Universities need higher fees - Blair
BBC, Clarke to 'sell' university fee plans
Times, Students flock to America to beat fees
Independent, £3,000 top-up fees are 'just the start', universities warn
Labour Party, Why we are right to reform higher education
BBC, University chiefs ponder fees dilemma
Universities UK, Student Debt
Independent, Former polytechnics join rush to levy top-up fees
Independent, Why three students at Oxford University refused to pay their tuition fees
IC Coventry, Student fee hike is madness
Independent, Graduates face 'higher tax than millionaires'

@nti copyright 2003 www.educationet.org