The Heavy Hand of the Law.

Tomorrow there will be a massive student protest in London. They will be protesting against the massive tuition fee hike they’re set to pay in 2012 which leaves them at least £27,000 in debt before they’ve even started their working life.

Tories and other unaffected citizens will no doubt condemn them for protesting. “Just take it on the chin” they’ll say. I wonder if they’d take £9,000 a year leaving their bank accounts on the chin. To be fair, some of them are so rich they probably would.

Exceptional.

It has now been revealed by the universities across the country the fees that they will be charging students to study at their university in 2012.

Now, I already covered in my previous blog on April 1st (Cruel Intentions) which Northern universities were charging the full amount, or at least very close to it. At the time they were: Manchester, Leeds, Leeds Metropolitan, Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores, Aston, Birmingham, Coventry, and Loughborough.

Towards the end of that particular blog I said the following:

“Should the likes of Salford, Manchester Metropolitan, Sheffield or Sheffield Hallam succumb to charging £9,000 a year then the North of England might as well give up.”

Cruel Intentions.

It was revealed last week that more universities had thrown their hats into the ring of nine hundred tenners and stated their intention to charge forthcoming students the maximum tuition fee available to them.

There are now 24 universities that have stated their intentions in terms of fees. Possibly most significant of all of last week’s announcements was the one made by Manchester University.

Yes, the pompous older sibling of the three Manchester universities became the first Northern institution to state their intent to charge the maximum tuition fee of £9,000 a year. Incredibly bad news for the North West.

Surprise Surprise.

Earlier this week I was sat at home minding my own business browsing the BBC News website when I came across a story so shocking I had to put down my brew to avoid any unnecessary scolding.

Cambridge ‘planning to raise fees to £9,000’

Vive les étudiants!

I turned on the news this week to find the French out in force again. Taking to the streets rioting, destroying buildings, injuring each other. They’re absolute maniacs, you can say what you like about them but at least they have some fight left in them!

But then on closer inspection, after reading BBC News’ ticker, I found that these weren’t images of the French at all, they were Brits! Actual Brits doing something about the gigantic cuts. These Brits were, of course, students. It was only a matter of time before someone got up and did something, rather than taking the beating lying down like everyone else seems to. In the 80s it was the miners, last Wednesday it was the students.

In a nutshell around 50,000 students and lecturers marched through Westminster peacefully until a small group burst forwards holding aloft an effigy which was obviously burned to a cinder much to the applause of the crowd. After that happened it all got a bit ugly. You know once you see someone in a balaclava that it isn’t going to end particularly well.

And it didn’t. Placards were burned resulting in masses of smoke covering the crowds, and the protestors somehow smashed their way into the Conservative Headquarters, where staff were evacuated. Some clowns even got on to the roof and decided to launch a fire-extinguisher from up high. It was ugly, well by British standards it was ugly.

The images were quite interesting to watch, mainly because there was such a diverse bunch of people involved. There were the extremists in their balaclavas and there were regular students responding to what they were witnessing, some with excitement, others with infinite fear. No one really knew how to respond. Those who did respond did so with violence, which pretty much ruined it for everyone.

Naturally people have condemned them for their actions, mostly the Daily Mail’s readership but others have too. The president of the NUS, Aaron Porter, came out and said none of these events were planned: “This action was by others who have come out and used this opportunity to hijack a peaceful protest.” It is true, you can’t just blame students for all of this, it was the work of a minority who may or may not have been students. Although some unions have come forward and refused to condemn their actions.

The newspapers were full of it, everyone was talking about it, radio phone ins became popular again. People seem split on the issue, some branding it a disgrace, others saying they were left with no choice. I personally think, though they were wrong to go as far as they did, it was okay for them to show some aggression. After all, we’ve had countless protests from students in the past. Try to name one. Difficult isn’t it? That’s because all that happens is a peaceful stroll through Westminster, followed by everyone going home, having tea and resuming their lives, changing absolutely nothing, solving absolutely nothing. It seems sometimes this violence is the only way to get noticed. If there was no aggression on Wednesday where would this story be? Page 36? It probably wouldn’t even have run on some news networks. Becoming aggressive forces the media to turn its ugly head and take notice.

And everyone noticed. Even mayor Boris was forced into action saying he was: “appalled that a small minority have today shamefully abused their right to protest” and that those involved would “face the full force of the law.” I’m sure they’re quaking in their boots Boris. This is a justice system that gives a paedophile 18 months behind bars for grooming and sexually assaulting a girl under the age of thirteen.

Nobody agrees with the fire-extinguisher incident. But who really cares if a bunch of students vandalised the Conservative HQ? It’s covered on insurance isn’t it? I do feel sorry for the 50,000 students who were there as most of them were peaceful in their protest but now, because of a small minority, they’re all labelled as scum. I have to say it was amusing seeing the police doing seemingly nothing about it, having to ask nicely for the students to get off the rooftop. They were so timid they make Mr Jingles look like freaking Danger Mouse!

Of course the police have been criticised for not having enough numbers, which I find ironic. All that does is subconsciously highlight the strain they’re going to feel soon enough when an estimated 40,000 to 60,000 jobs could disappear. Ouch.

If they allowed it to happen, who could blame them? They could be out of a job before Christmas, is it worth putting yourself in danger for that? Is it worth putting yourself in danger for anything? Take the military, they’re out there fighting for our country and dying for our country, and what do they get in return when they come home? A P45 of course! More ouch.

In the end, these events have brought forward the cause of the students in the country, exposing further the deep cuts that are being sliced through the education sector. It is probably the most dangerous budget to cut, because you are literally dicing with the future. Future doctors, teachers, nurses, scientists, police, civil servants, and all other professions are all being jeopardised by these cuts and rises in the university fees. The future needs funding or the UK will be in serious trouble in years to come.

In a decades time we could find ourselves in a country where skilled workers are a thing of the past and people will be being immigrated in to fit the requirements of jobs Britons are no longer able to satisfy. It’s easy to see why the students aren’t happy about it, they have every right to feel betrayed, especially by the Liberal Democrats who signed a pledge before the election promising they would not vote in favour of a rise in tuition fees. They’ve changed their tune.

The annoying thing for me is that most the people who sit in parliament making these decisions all received their education for free. So why should new students have to pay for it when they got it for diddly squat? I wonder if the MPs would be in favour of a new piece of legislation saying that all MPs who didn’t have to pay for their tuition will now have to fork out 10% of their wages between now and the end of time. 

Somehow, I don’t think that legislation would be approved.

A pledge too far.

Well it’s been a fair few months now of the coalition government in Britain, and I’m not so sure it’s a coalition anymore at all. This week saw Vince Cable, a Liberal Democrat MP and Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, who before the election promised, along with all other Lib Dem MPs, that he would not vote in favour of a rise in student tuition fees, backing just that. A rise in tuition fees.

This is a party who have always opposed student tuition fees full stop. Yet now they’re speaking out in favour of Conservative legislation attempting to raise the tuition fees cap from £3290 to unlimited. Yes, that’s right, unlimited.

You have to feel for British working families who have been smacked in the face with a cricket bat yet again. It’s just relentless at the moment for them. The change in housing benefit, with some people having to fork out hundreds of extra pounds a month just to stay in the house they own. The change in the child benefit system which seemed to have good intentions but instead decimates certain families across Britain. And now this.

Think about it, under the proposed scheme, a seventeen year old thinking of going to university will now have to pay around £7000 a year for the privilege. Now, if that seventeen year old is in the upper class bracket of Britain then that’s fine, the parents can simply open up their wallet or money sack and hand out the sum that is required. So what if the seventeen year old is of a much poorer background, one where neither parent works, and hence cant afford to send them off to university. Well there will be financial help for them. Which is a good thing.

Now imagine the same seventeen year old, who is from what is known as middle Britain where both parents are working (hard I might add). Financial support probably won’t be there for them, at least not as much, so a loan will be in order. Realistically you’re looking at around £30,000 of debt before you’ve even worked a day. And that will have to be paid back, with a higher rate of interest than was previously given.

Now imagine that same hardworking family has a fourteen year old child as well. The family will do its utmost to give the education to their eldest, possibly stretching themselves to breaking point in the process. So child number one manages to get through uni, all be it with massive debt, but they make it nonetheless. What about child number two? Can they afford to do it again for them? I think you’re asking a little much.

Okay, so universities will need to find the money from somewhere as the government is slashing the subs they used to give them. But what about the likes of Oxford and Cambridge? Surely they can just charge whatever they want right? They’ll still have demand for places no matter what they charge. Is that right?

The same goes for other universities who may have an outstanding course running at their institution, let’s say music, and if little Jonny wants to learn how to play the clarinet there really well then they’ll have to fork out a heck of a lot more than let’s say a geography student on a less prestigious course at the very same university. Is that right?

The problem with this is, the already huge gulf between the classes is about to become ginormous. Only the rich will end up going to the best universities and will therefore land the top jobs. Leaving the lower classes and anyone North of Milton Keynes to fight over the scraps. This is all well and good but Britain is already haemorrhaging talent, we cant afford to lose much more. Now it will all be about financial clout rather than your actual ability. The talentless amongst the rich will take jobs that talented poorer individuals could have filled, and done a much better job. Which means we’ll need to immigrate more people, because in a few years time we are going to have a very low number of skilled people in this joint.

The other classes aren’t getting off scot-free however, these cuts can be seen as painful for everyone. Though they are necessary, perhaps not to the drastic length they’re going for but still necessary. I don’t think Labour would be doing much different, perhaps they wouldn’t be as severe. I doubt they’d raise the student fees to unlimited status, and their child tax credits policy would most likely be a lot fairer. But we’ll never know, maybe they’d have gone even further, who knows.

What is increasingly worrying though is the way the middle class is having to get hit the hardest, as if they are just the collateral damage necessary in getting us out of this mess. It’s now more beneficial to rent, rather than own your own home. Jobs are disappearing and university education is slowly becoming nothing more than a pipe dream for the working families of the country. It just doesn't feel fair.

Take a quick look at the new reformed child tax credits. Any family with a member earning £44,000 and over can not get any child benefits. It sounds reasonably fair but upon closer inspection you’ll see that it is harrowingly unfair. A family with two working parents, let’s say the husband is earning £42,000 a year, and the wife also £42,000 (because I‘m not sexist). Combined, this family earns £84,000 plus child benefit. Now let’s take another family where husband earns £44,000 and wife does not work (I flipped a coin). Their total earning is £44,000 with no child benefit. Hitting these people ‘because they can take it on the chin’ is bluntly unfair and simply taking advantage of them.

Soon there will be no incentive to earn at all. The UK is heavily reliant on some people’s work ethic. People who work because it’s what they’ve been brought up to do. People who will never turn down work or overtime. People like carers who work tirelessly saving the NHS millions upon millions of pounds every year, and all for little to no reward. And that’s the problem. Britain, instead of rewarding hard work, rewards laziness. People who wont work, because it can’t match what they receive in state benefits. And who can blame them? Why do something for nothing when you can do nothing for something?

But all this doesn’t answer my question. Why are the Liberal Democrats doing this? Their manifesto at the election earlier this year stated the following:

“Britain, for all its many strengths, is still too unequal and unfair, a country where the circumstances of your birth and the income of your parents still profoundly affect your chances in life….
…We will scrap unfair university tuition fees so everyone has the chance to get a degree, regardless of their parents’ income.”

So how do these statements do complete U-turns in five short months? Jumping into bed with a binary opposite political party is one thing. Turning your back on all your core values is totally unbelievable. I don’t understand what they are getting out of this deal any more (apart from unlimited power of course). They were supposed to be there to provide a leash, to hold back the Tories from going totally wild inside the chicken coop. But that leash is starting to look like a pretty yellow bow around the neck, and feathers are flying.

Are they literally doing all this just to repay the Conservative party for letting them sit at the captain’s table? Or do they genuinely feel that the Tories’ policies are right for Britain? Who knows? Not me. Maybe they’re just political chameleons turning bluer by the day. It would be interesting to hear what the late Sir Cyril Smith would have to think about it all.