Exquisite Life Exquisite Life Research Europe Research Fortnight
Becoming a contributor

About this blog

Small print

« Cuts in Culture conference live blog - 3 of 3 | Main | White Paper Update »

May 12, 2011

What the off-quota fiasco has told us about the HE white paper

This week's off-quota fiasco gives us a pretty good picture of the state the government is in over tutition fees.

Having returned from the enforced break in policymaking during the run up to the May elections, David Willetts and Vince Cable are trying to complete the drafting of the long-promised white paper on higher education. Mid-June is the date pencilled in.

Tuesday's volte face reminds us that a central task is how to deal with the looming overspend on student loans triggered by so many universities setting their fees at £9,000. The off-quota wheeze could have provided significant extra income from UK undergraduates.

This in turn would have allowed the government to cut other spending to the universities without throwing the whole system into crisis. Willetts and Cable would have been spared the need to cut student numbers or spending on science.

The good news is that we can see that universities and the Department of Business Innovation and Skills have not run out of ingenuity. The bad news is that David Cameron has killed off the off-quota option.

Ed Miliband cited this on Wednesday as an example of the Prime Minister "dumping" on his colleagues. What is certainly true is that Cameron's instant political decree has left Willetts and Cable to scratch around for some other way to raise the missing cash.

That makes me worry. Bahram Bekhradnia, the head of the Higher Education Policy Institute, was pretty dismissive of the off-quota scheme at the BIS select committee on Tuesday. Are the options BIS has got left in the locker are even ropier? The gossip this morning is that the core-margin option has been dropped.

Benedict Brogan in the Telegraph has set out two further options BIS is considering:

"The idea, as I initially heard it, was to consider easing the cap on admissions at the upper level by allowing the top establishments charging the full £9000 to let in more top students – those scoring 2 As and B minimum – than they currently are allowed to. And I’m told another change being contemplated would lift the admissions cap on those universities serving the cheaper end of the market. New institutions [offering] inexpensive two year degrees, for example, would be free to allow as many students in as they could cope with."

Those two options would move the system in the direction ministers want it to go, both at the top and at the bottom. But - deep breath Conservatives - they would be a case of regulation delivering a better public service, not the market. And are they viable?

Meanwhile, there's no signal yet from ministers as to the fundamental direction they are going to take in tackling the £9k clustering - is it to be more market faster, or the return of nanny's firm hand of regulation?

And Willetts and Cable have got to come up with something that not only raises money but is socially progressive (to please Lib Dems) and market oriented (to please Conservatives).

And, now that Willetts has reminded Conservatives of his past political blunders, we can be sure that a jumpy Number 10 will want to crawl all over the white paper before allowing it to be published.

Standard And the really big risk hanging over this great revolution, that potential students will turn away from uni now because it is too expensive seems to be becoming more likely by the day. For the media, it is now part of the basic narrative - and the more the papers say it is true, the more likely it is to become true.

The upshot, it seems to me, is that as of today there probably is no plan. And there can't be any realistic date for the white paper.

The agony goes on.

Revised at 9am


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What the off-quota fiasco has told us about the HE white paper:


Interesting analysis. I would have shared this view up until this week actually - I'm increasingly of the belief that the White Paper is imminent (I thought first week of June, Indy says next week!) - and it's going to be a dog's dinner when it comes because of all the political problems you talk about.

Yes, you're right. I should have remembered the option of going ahead with dog's dinner policy. After all, that's what happened in December...

"And the really big risk hanging over this great revolution, that potential students will turn away from uni now because it is too expensive seems to be becoming more likely by the day."

I'm going to say that I don't think it will put students off. Going to university is too ingrained in the expectations of so many people. Teachers will be encouraging them to do it because it looks better for the school if they do. Peer pressure will be encouraging them to do it, no-one wants to be the one person out of their mates who is "too poor for uni". There's likely to be some fall-off, but universities are so oversubscribed, that I think they'll still be full up.

I might be wrong, but I think the media have misjudged this point

@Neuro I agree that you are probably right. And no one knows how big the risk of bad news is. All I'm saying is that that risk of bad news seems to be getting bigger.

Yeah the problem is that we don't know. It could have a strongly negative impact and if it does, the lower ranked i.e less subscribed universities will be screwed - not enough students, so they have to cut prices, and make less money, they get underfunded and lose more students...

This may of course be what the government want to happen. The thing is it wouldn't actually improve university quality, it would just mean we have fewer, bigger, universities, which would decline in quality because they're too big.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment