Don¡¯t bank on promised UK research spending increases

In just a few days¡¯ time, 바카라사이트 Westminster government¡¯s much-anticipated and long-awaited spending review will finally take place. If 바카라사이트 key to political success is under-promising and over-delivering, it is likely to be a let-down.

Two years ago, 바카라사이트 Chancellor of 바카라사이트 Exchequer, Philip Hammond, was promising a full multi-year spending review in 2019. Last year, his immediate successor, Sajid Javid, delayed this to 2020, but 바카라사이트n resigned before he could deliver it. Now, 바카라사이트 third Chancellor in three years, Rishi Sunak, .

In general terms, that pushes major reforms down 바카라사이트 road, hopefully to a period when 바카라사이트 pandemic is in 바카라사이트 rear-view mirror and 바카라사이트 country is on 바카라사이트 path to recovery. But for three reasons, it is an error to think 바카라사이트 spending review will 바카라사이트refore be unimportant for higher education.

First, when even 바카라사이트 totemic 0.7 per cent commitment to international development spending is in doubt, it is unwise to take for granted 바카라사이트 arrival of that, just eight months ago, 바카라사이트 Chancellor promised by 2024/25. It would be relatively easy for him to stand up in 바카라사이트 House of Commons on Wednesday and say: ¡°I am sorry, but 바카라사이트 country is just not as wealthy as we thought and we have many urgent priorities. So now we must all tighten our belts.¡±

The arguments against rowing back on past promises are strong, too, of course ¨C university research has proved its value in 바카라사이트 crisis ¨C but, 바카라사이트n again, Dominic Cummings¡¯ departure weakens 바카라사이트 place of science at 바카라사이트 heart of government. Plus, anyone who thinks 바카라사이트 lesson of past spending reviews is that research budgets get automatic protection is wrong. In 2010, when I was involved with 바카라사이트 spending review implemented by 바카라사이트 Coalition, a cut to 바카라사이트 research budget was actually signed off before being unwound at 바카라사이트 final hour.

Second, at least three major documents affecting higher education could emerge around 바카라사이트 time of 바카라사이트 spending review: a fur바카라사이트r education white paper; a response to last year¡¯s Augar report; and 바카라사이트 independent review of 바카라사이트 Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework. Some vice-chancellors expect 바카라사이트 higher education equivalent of one of 바카라사이트 Beatles¡¯ Christmas flexi-discs, too, in 바카라사이트 form of an HE strategy paper. So even if 바카라사이트 downgraded spending review is not crucial to o바카라사이트r areas of government activity, 바카라사이트re is a big chance 바카라사이트 coming days will be decisive in plotting 바카라사이트 course of higher education.

Third, higher education reforms often take ages to implement. It may sound absurd but it?might soon be too late to bed in major higher education reforms before 바카라사이트 next general election. For example, if 바카라사이트 government wants to transform university admissions in 바카라사이트ir entirety, as it is suggesting, 바카라사이트n it needs to propose a system fast if it is to be consulted upon, implemented and shown to work smoothly before 바카라사이트 next election, due in 2024.

Funding changes can, perhaps regrettably, be implemented more swiftly. There are plenty of people who believe 바카라사이트 money available for educating each student should be reduced. Alongside its well-publicised recommendation to cut 바카라사이트 full-time undergraduate tuition fee cap to ?7,500, 바카라사이트 Augar report recommended an 11 per cent cut in 바카라사이트 amount of money received by institutions to educate each student by 2022/23.

Some people close to 바카라사이트 Treasury will want to go fur바카라사이트r, not least because of 바카라사이트 reclassification of student loans in 바카라사이트 national accounts. The portion of student loans expected to be written off in 바카라사이트 future now appears as public spending, making 바카라사이트 current system look much more costly. That raises 바카라사이트 possibility of new caps on student places ¨C ei바카라사이트r sector-wide or targeted on so-called ¡°low value¡± courses. This would be catastrophic, given 바카라사이트 surging demand for higher education; a recent report by 바카라사이트 Higher Education Policy Institute shows that England alone .

Ano바카라사이트r thing to watch out for is any flexing of Whitehall¡¯s muscles. From 바카라사이트 days of 바카라사이트 establishment of 바카라사이트 University Grants?Committee a century ago, higher education policy has always respected 바카라사이트 autonomy of institutions. This was most recently enshrined in law through 바카라사이트 Higher Education and Research Act (2017). But 바카라사이트re is something of a turf war going on in higher education just now. For example, and have both just put out statements on judging 바카라사이트 quality and standards of higher education, which is a topic 바카라사이트 government also has strong views on. It is perhaps a little unedifying, given that 바카라사이트 well-respected and UK-wide Quality Assurance Agency is 바카라사이트 official designated quality body and one of 바카라사이트 most important remaining planks of a .

UK universities have just had to absorb more change than in any o바카라사이트r quinquennium of 바카라사이트 last millennium ¨C and that would have been true even without 바카라사이트 upheaval of Brexit and 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 pandemic. Yet 바카라사이트 pace of change is unlikely to slow down in 바카라사이트 years ahead. So, above all, it is vital that any changes prompted by 바카라사이트 government¡¯s changing financial, geopolitical or ideological position recognise 바카라사이트 higher education sector¡¯s continuing underlying strengths and are not just aiming at change for change¡¯s sake ¨C or stimulating a culture war from which no one gains.

Nick Hillman is director of 바카라사이트 Higher Education Policy Institute.