Browne Review to Recommend £10,000 Tuiton Fees

At what point did Lord Browne think that this was a good idea?

After practically being told by Vince Cable in July to find in favour of a graduate contribution scheme, effectively meaning all he had to do was use the NUS model (or a very close approximation of it), and knowing that a rise in fees would be politically impossible for the Lib Dems, hard to sell to most Labour MPs, and would've only been brought in by the Tories with a majority government; why on earth did he go for the cap on fees to be lifted to £10,000 or even higher in some circumstances.

This plan would only benifet Russell Group universities as it is only those institutions that would be able to charge the full amount and still retain their level of applicants, whist simultaneously pricing out poorer students (a group that are under represented in these institutions already) and creating a market in fees within the sector.

Now some might say that this is a good thing, but they fail to realise that university is about much more than what you learn in the classroom, it's about the whole experience of what the university have to offer. The most obvious and easy to quantify is the sports teams and societies offered at an institution. The richer institutions are able to fund training, pitches, coaches and equipment without much extra input from the students; whereas at the less well funded universities aren't able to provide these extras, and if they are available then it's probably been funded by the students, or are of a much lower quality.

Even if the Lib Dems agreed to abstain on a vote to raise tuition fees then there are a number of MPs that have vowed to rebel and vote against the proposals (not least because every single one of them signed the NUS's Vote For Students pledge), and Labour and the other opposition parties; smelling an opportunity to defeat the government; would almost certainly vote in the negative also. Add to that a few absentees from the government benches from those Conservatives with doubts over the policy (yes there are some) and it could be just too close to call.

Lets see what Cable and Willetts make of the report, but surely it won't be taken as gospel.

JR

Climate Change - No Pressure

Today a video was released by the 10:10 climate change campaign. It's funny, but horrifyingly sickening at the same time. Effectively the plot introduces us to a few groups of people; a school class, office workers, and footballers. They are each told about the 10:10 campaign and asked if they planned to take part, being told there's no pressure. Those who weren't bothered or refused to take part were told it's their choice, and then the campaign proponent presses a red button on their person and those people explode!

If I'm honest, I didn't mind what happened to the adults, but I found the scene with the school children quite disturbing, especially since the children that didn't want to take part were blown up in front of their classmates by their teacher.

Here is the video;

The video was taken off the 10:10 website this evening, being replaced by an apology and a further message that read;

At 10:10 we're all about trying new and creative ways of getting people to take action on climate change. Unfortunately in this instance we missed the mark. Oh well, we live and learn.

Great publicity stunt or massive own goal?

JR

Labour: The Next Generation

Something I knocked up quickly. I think it's quite good!

JR