NUS ATA: Why we need a fairer funding system

Securing a fair Higher Education Funding system is the priority campaign of the NUS this year.

At ATA last week, we listened to a presentation from Aaron Porter, NUS Vice President (Higher Education) on why securing such a system is so vital in ensuring that a university education is available to everybody that has the ability.

The HE funding debate, all began when top up fees were introduced. The biggest threat that we as students will face in the coming year, is the potential lifting of the cap on top up fees, which could see students from 2010 onwards paying even more than they already do for basic tuition.

The political landscape has changed significantly since the last time we had this debate back in 2006 (see picture of the national demo on the right). We now have a new Prime Minister and all political parties are reviewing their stance on HE funding.
Devolution also means that we now have different funding arrangements across the British nations.

In line with these developments, NUS National Conference this year decided to focus it's argument on securing a fair funding arrangement for students, rather than pursuing the battle for free education- which in the current political climate, is neither suitable, nor realistic.

The 2009 review on top up fees will consider how graduates should contribute to the HE sector, and additionally how the HE sector should be funded. It shall also consider International student and postgraduate student fees.

-> The current funding system is regressive in nature
-> The more you earn after graduation, the less you contribute to repaying your student loan
-> England needs a fairer funding system

As Aaron so rightly said, higher education- one of the best drivers of social mobility should not transform into a market where there are winners and losers.

The student movement this year, will therefore focus on keeping the cap on tuition fees, and opposing the marketisation of education.We must also recognise that HE in this country, is significantly underfunded.
The NUS are calling on...

-> The English % contribution of GDP on HE should be in line with the OECD average
N.B- We spend 1.1% of GDP on HE, the average for the OECD is 1.4% and the highest contribution within the OECD is 2.2%
-> There should be a structured business contribution to the HE sector
-> Commercial rates should not exist on student loans
-> Part time students should be entitled to a more proportional amount of student loan

We were shown a graph on the amount of money spent per student, per year from 1948-2008 (and beyond) ------------------------------------>

As you can see, when state contribution was at its highest, in the 1970s, up to £11,000 was spent per student per year.

By 1998, just £5,700 was spent per student per year. The rationale behind tuition fees was to decrease the level of state funding.

Since the introduction of "top up fees", the level of state contribution has been stable.
The key question in this debate is where the money is going to come from in the future?

Keep checking back for more information regarding the national campaign on HE funding on the 5th of November....