Wes Streeting - NUS Vice President (Education) and President Elect

The incoming NUS president writes an open letter to all Students in England on NUS funding campaign plans.

I am extremely proud to have been elected to represent students as the new President of NUS. But I am under no illusions as to the enormity of the task that lies ahead.

In just a few months, we will have a huge fight on our hands: to rescue our higher education system from being corrupted by market forces, and to prevent a future where the most esteemed universities are only accessible to the very rich.

Next year's review of higher education funding will be our first chance since 2004 to fight the immoral and unsustainable top-up fees system, and we must be prepared for the battle that lies ahead.

In this article, I want to set out what I think will be the direction for NUS on funding issues in the next year or so, and to clarify some important points that have been misrepresented in the press about the new policy of the national union in this area.

First of all, I would like to point out that we still believe that higher education should be free for students. It isn't ludicrous, it isn't offensive and it isn't selfish.

But, sadly, for students in England it isn't realistic, or credible, and it doesn't have any chance of being endorsed by any British government under Gordon Brown or David Cameron.

It's painful to say it, especially for someone who was there on the night in 2004 when we got to within five votes of stopping top-up fees, but the only way to get a good deal for students in this forthcoming review is to accept the notion of a contribution to the costs of higher education, made after graduation, while making clear that the principle behind this still stinks.

Yes, Scotland has found a way to provide free higher education for all - but unfortunately for English students there is no Scottish National Party majority in Westminster or anything like the number of supportive MPs we'd need to score a similar victory.

And we must remember that Scottish students' victory over fees will come at a price. We need to bear in mind that when students pay less, the income of the sector falls.

On the one hand, it clearly isn't in the interests of students for money to be taken out of their pockets, whether before or after graduation.

But on the other hand, it also isn't in the interests of students to be educated in an under funded system, by under paid teachers, and with second-rate facilities and learning resources.

This is essentially the dilemma that NUS, and student officers around the country, have been wrestling with over the last few months, culminating in an historic change of policy endorsed by our Annual Conference on April 2.

Delegates at our conference voted to stop simply arguing for "free education" in England, and decided instead to consult with our members and bring to the table some radical, imaginative solutions that will be better and fairer for students than regressive and damaging market forces.

Only if we do this can we sit down at the same table with the vice-chancellors and the captains of industry, and have our policy taken seriously by the government.

There are those who will accuse me of being a sell-out - in fact there are plenty of them - but I think the real sell-out would be to knowingly sit on the sidelines with a placard when the decision is taken to lift the cap to ten thousand a year; and if we aren't on the inside arguing against this, there will be very little to stop it.
 
Some commentators in the press have seized on our debate at conference, and the outcome of that debate, as evidence that we have dropped our long-standing opposition to top-up fees.  In reality, accepting top-up fees is categorically not what we have done.

Let me be clear: we are prepared to accept the notion of a graduate contribution to the costs of higher education.

But we remain absolutely opposed to several key aspects of the present system, which we believe are detrimental to students and have the potential to be hugely damaging to higher education if that system is continued and extended.

We want the forthcoming review to be about finding an alternative to top-up fees that is fairer for students, but still generates the kind of income the sector so badly needs. At the same time, we need to find ways to restrain and reverse the market logic that has been allowed to run riot within government policy during the last few years.

If we are going to do this, students will have to change the way they view their own contribution. Students need to feel that that we contribute to the costs of our education system, not that I pay a fee for my course.

We should think about future graduates working together to give back to higher education, not about an army of individuals, each paying off a sky-high loan.

Top-up fees remain an appalling system and NUS is going to work to bring them down. With your help, we can come up with a credible alternative to bring to the table, and I firmly believe that this time, we can win.

Wes Streeting | Vice President (Education) and President (Elect) 

Please note that the views expressed here are those of the individual and are not endorsed by Pugwash Online or The Union

Comments have been closed for this article

 

 

If 'we got to within five votes of stopping top-up fees' back in 2004, how is it that there is not 'anything like the number of supportive MPs we'd need to score a similar victory' to that in Scotland, and why on earth (as has happened in Scotland) is it not 'realistic, or credible'?!?!?! 
 
C'mon Wes, stop contradicting yourself! 
 
And maybe if you hadn't voted to back the forcing of those kids into education and training that really don't want to, we might have some cash to spend on those that do!

Sarah Blatchford - Wed, 30 Apr 2008