Protests, Walks-Outs & Sit-Ins – Played and Betrayed by the Coalition
The nationwide protests and demonstrations against the cuts to university funding speak for themselves. The vast majority of students feel used, played and betrayed by the promises of the pre-election pledge that Mr Clegg and his party swore adherence. Although were students at blame too?
Of course we could rant on all day about this topic, perhaps rightly so, although we (the student voters) should have made a more informed and realistic decision at booths early this year.
Despite being the flagship of policy of the Lib Dems, we should have anticipated that the practicalities of scrapping fees were simply implausible. Mr Clegg’s party has not been in power since 1945 and were somewhat desperate to enter the political limelight again (which is the objective of all parties). The Lib Dems coaxed the conception that they were the student-friendly party, the party for change and for the future, echoing the ‘Yes We Can’ attitude of their counter-parts across the Atlantic.
Nick Clegg seemed to have a way of convincing us that the ideal could be a reality (if you put a cross next to their name on the big day). However in hindsight, in the middle of a global recession, could scrapping the fees have been applicable?
Perhaps if the Lib Dems secured a majority in the ballots, yes they could have implemented their pledge and abolished student tuition fees. However in an era where neon 50% of post-16 year olds are entering higher education, the ramifications of free university education would mean a significant increase in entry requirements, thus countering the number of young people in HE. In this respect, perhaps it was a good thing that Mr Clegg is only the deputy.
Political parties have a long history of promising the Earth and delivering Earthworms, perhaps sceptical analysis should have been exercised more rigorously on a personal and communal level when contemplating ‘which party is in my best interests’. Without critiquing UK politics too much, our democracy ensures he who shouts the loudest is heard, not he who has the best ideas for the future of the nation. Although none of the candidates seemed to have a coherent and feasible idea for the latter, only time will prove me wrong.
The fact of the matter is, as Douglas Murray, Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion pointed out on ‘Young Voters’ Question Time’ on BBC1 Wednesday 24th that funding for university education has to come from somewhere! When HE education was free for students it was funded completely by the taxpayer, a system which seems absurd nowadays as 50%, not 4% of the population now attend university. The Lib Dems were frankly capitalising on populist hope rather than acknowledging the realities of current affairs.
Yes, it was wrong of the Lib Dems to abandon their flagship policy, even if it was impractical; it was still the policy that clinched many of their votes. Nick Clegg now admits ‘I should have been more careful’ before the election about signing the NUS pledge … although this will serve as little comfort to the students who voted for him. It is somewhat baffling that Clegg has shot himself in the foot by essentially betraying his primary voter-base, nonetheless I would bet my tuition fee that Clegg will not be re-elected at the next General Election! In fact we may well see a new leader of Lib Dems before then.
SIB:PR 
Good topic to pick (you should write about things you’re interested in).
I can understand how you – and many other students – feel. But I’m not sure you have got this right politically.
It was the last Labour government that introduced and then increased fees, and in last months had announced reduced funding for higher education.
The Browne review was also begun by the Labour government and is now being amended and adopted by the Coalition.
There will be no universities for students to attend unless a new formula can be reached to fund higher education.
The argument is that it’s fairer for those who benefit to pay (general taxation would mean a nurse’s taxes being used to fund a lawyer’s daughter to train to be a doctor). How is that fair?
You are of course right to pick on the Lib Dems, but they didn’t win the election. They’re in a coalition and are having to argue and reach agreement within a Conservative majority government. The Lib Dem manifesto has been replaced by a coalition agreement.
Of course the pledge is awkward for Lib Dem MPs – who still may abstain on the vote (though this would in practice mean resigning if they’re in the government).
The politics is complicated – but the economics is very clear. Universities need more money is they’re to continue providing a high quality education (and compete internationally).
Thanks for the feedback Richard!
I agree with you that despite it being advocated as ‘fair’, if graduates are being targeted and taxed to fund universities, this would be a greater deterrent than the increased student debt (at least a debt can be paid off, tax is for life!).
Yes I targetted the Lib Dems in as a devil’s advocate of the students (not that I am a legitimate student spokesperson!) because although there is a Coalition, many students used their vote on Nick Clegg because of his flagship policy that made his party different! This is why students feel so outraged.
Although as you say ‘they are having to argue’ to reach agreement with the Tories, but there seems to be a lack of passion and motivation now that they have comfy green leather benches to sit on.
Perhaps one positive of the review is that the repayment income threshold will rise to £21K per annum as opposed to the current £15k and an increased scholarship funding for under priveledged students – let’s count our blessings.
The point of my blog was to try and encourage critical assessment of political policies in future (no doubt this will already transpire after the cuts) and be more realistic, rather than idealistic.
I welcome your views – and think you’ve expressed them well (much more clearly than I did in my hurried comment above). You are certainly entitled to your view – as are the student protesters.
Speaking personally (and ruefully), I only wish more students had been occupying my lecture theatre at 2pm on Thursdays for the last two months.
Setting aside the important question of who pays, I doubt we’d disagree that we’re all seeking the same outcome: high quality universities teaching an up-to-date curriculum to bright, committed students. That has to be in everyone’s best interests.
Pingback: The Double-Edged Sword of Coalition Government « SIB:PR