Why tuition fees are threatening life as we know it
Today sees the vote on the bill which may see tuition fees in England rise to £9000 in some of the most prestigious universities. Despite this being a decision that will only affect England, this has a huge bearing on the whole of UK as we know it.
The reasoning behind this decision is that taxpayers should not have to subsidize other people's 'lifestyle choices’ - a principle that goes against everything we value in this country.
If we were to apply this rather selfish attitude to say, the NHS - we get a whole load of problems. A 21 year old may argue that he shouldn't need to pay for the NHS, he's never ill. Someone else could argue that the Government shouldn't pay into retirement homes for ex-soldiers, since the Army has never done anything for him. The whole argument makes no sense whatsoever. Which is why the collective responsibility concept of the welfare state and the NHS is so brilliant and so valuable – you get free healthcare from birth, you get education for free, you pay taxes when you get a job, then you retire and the Government pays you a pension.
If the coalition's vote is successful (and sadly, it looks inevitable), are any of our public services really safe?
The NHS could be a target, since the biggest consumers are the young (too young to pay tax) and the old (generally have too low an income to pay tax) the rest of the population shouldn't have to foot the bill. What will this lead to? A dangerous situation where everyone needs private health insurance if they want any sort of decent healthcare. So the poorest get ill and can't get better or support their families, and the oldest get ill and can't pay to get better. Where is the justice in that?
Public transport? Why should you rely on the Government to help you get around because you haven’t been forward thinking enough to learn to drive. One thing’s for certain - if you want to get to Orkney, or you’re under 17, you’re in trouble.
It’s also worth pointing out why this bill will benefit the richest the most. Given that your average student doesn’t have £9000 to spare, he or she will have to take out a loan to pay back these fees with interest added on top. Meanwhile the richest students, many of whom will have benefitted from a private education already – a fast track to university – and a greater disposable income, will be able to avoid higher interest charges by paying back tuition fees quicker.
I feel that entry to higher education should be based on ability to learn, rather than ability to pay. So, why does the Government feel the best way to cut the budget deficit is to exploit young people in pursuit of an education? When they could have close loopholes to collect millions in lost revenue from tax dodging bankers?
In fact, since when were bankers more important the young people’s educations?
“If you think education is expensive, try ignorance” – Derek Bok, American Educator and Lawyer
