Its Labour's selfish hypocrisy that's the enemy of poor students getting to University

At last the Coalition has started fighting back at the muddled thinking and just plain ignorance of much of the "make taxpayers - including poor people who never went to Uni" pay instead of the future middle class.

There is a spectacularly good offer for financing University education with no risk and nothing to pay unless you succeed.

So the future careerist left wing hypocrites are left with just one self for filling and self serving argument. "The idea of debt will put off poor students" - well it might when you say it like that without explaining all the safeguards and no win no pay parts of the government loans offer. In fact its the left who are putting poor students off by wilfully misinforming them and running scaremongering schemes. But then what's new - the left's relationship with poverty has long been that of a drug pusher with his clients.

Now its true that anyone who aspires to go to University should be able to see through the naked political manipulation of the NUS and Labour cases - after all why do we want stupid people at Uni. ( And by the way weren't many of those interviewed over the last few weeks depressing for the shear scale of their ignorance. )

But we should all be supporting fair opportunities to succeed for all - like the Coalition is doing.

Lets also remember, if by some awful disaster, Gordon Brown had carried on as PM they would have been implementing the Browne review instead, and all the selfish careerist student politicians who hope to be Labour parasite MPs one day would have played their opposition down as it impact their future snouts in the trough of what we now call politics.

University degrees haven't suddenly got more expensive - but they do need to get more effective

Its worth remembering that all the current fuss is about funding, not buying.

I have to confess to being uneasy about how the middle class is being set up as the fall guys for some of the provisions required to bribe the Lib Dems into coming along to join the rest of us on planet fiscal reality.

But in principle those who chose degrees and study them should also pay for them. After all who else will or should pay ?

What worries me is that I suspect many top Universities are really charging rent on the names and the access to top employers those names provide ( combined with the self reinforcing alumni effect in recruitment ).

Could better University level degrees be delivered at lower cost and in a shorter time ?

Yes of course ! ( no pun intended. )

However would those degrees perform their real function as the sorter for the next step on the career ladder ?

As things stand probably not. And that is the problem with these reforms.

Like the split between rail track and operating companies a similar split is required for tertiary education if its performance is to be improved in academic terms, rather than as a form of ensuring that certain groups hold access to the top careers and jobs. ( Though I should say that I refute that its just a zero sum game here - better use and education of our population in relevant fields will improve the lives of everyone and the economy ).

For example, it should be possible for anyone to sit Oxford degree level exams - without having to pay for their tuition. Perhaps someone else can provide that part better and at lower cost.

Indeed the exams should be arranged so someone could finish an Oxford degree in two years rather than three - if they are able.

This is the truly radical reform, and perhaps one I've heard hinted at if not directly mentioned by David Willets before !

But without this reform the effectiveness of our education system won't improve and some people with ability and drive won't get their chance ( aka social mobility will stall yet further than it did under Labour ).

See also some reflection on the second great change in University funding - Labour's student fees by GuyTheMac. ( The first was of course student loans ! )

The SNP play the tuition fee card

The SNP are playing the tuition fee card. Singling out, from the entire European Union, only English, Northern Irish and Welsh students as needing to pay fees at Scottish Universities. ( Scottish students get their fees paid by the English ).

This is all paid for out of the supper generous Barnett formula which provides the outstanding subsidy that Scotland wallows in with its soviet style public sector and many flavours of parasitic left wring parties and trade unions.

Now the SNP respond with their economic argument that Scotland is a net contributor. I have 3 initial points on these issues:

1) So what if that's true ( which I think it isn't ). If Scottish nationalism is just a cheque book exercise where they think they can gain personal riches by ditching the Welsh and Northern Irish ( which the UK definitely do subsidise ) then they are despicable rouges who should be thrown out of the Union as the cads they have shown themselves to be. The English have never hesitated to help - now some of them calculate they might gain some temporary advantage in short changing the Union.

2) The Oil is running out - fast - much faster than the SNP is telling people. But see 1 - if Scots are just thinking where to get the largest bung of unearned subsidy from - the sea bed or the English - then they should be thrown out of the Union anyway.

3) Clearly this decision cannot stand along with the Union. What will Gordon Brown do ?

4) David Cameron should stand up for the English.

5) Points 1,3 & 4 are probably exactly the response the SNP were hoping for.

PS This is a major part of Blair's real legacy. He helped destabilise the Union - just for his own personal political glory.