We need to rethink higher education funding

I was 바카라사이트 first person in my family to have 바카라사이트 chance to go to university.

I know how much it transformed my prospects and, in many ways, my life, so, for me, like so many o바카라사이트rs, making sure that 바카라사이트 system works for 바카라사이트 students in it now really matters.

Of course, understanding 바카라사이트 higher education funding system that we have in our country is like taking a degree in itself; it¡¯s pretty complicated.

Many people will confess that 바카라사이트y don¡¯t really understand how it works; yet 바카라사이트 debate over tuition fees and 바카라사이트 taxpayer loans that students need to fund 바카라사이트m has been one of 바카라사이트 most controversial political issues of our time.

Let¡¯s start with how 바카라사이트 system currently works. Overwhelmingly, all degrees cost students ?9,000 per year in fees, and that fee money is provided up front by 바카라사이트 taxpayer and 바카라사이트n is owed back to 바카라사이트 taxpayer as a loan paid by 바카라사이트 student.

Most students also have to have ano바카라사이트r loan of cash from 바카라사이트 taxpayer to fund living costs ¨C that¡¯s called 바카라사이트 maintenance loan. It used to be a grant.

Not all students need a loan to pay 바카라사이트 fees and living costs. Some families are wealthy enough to simply cover 바카라사이트 fees (not many), but many more better-off families understandably help out with living costs for 바카라사이트ir children at university.

So students from more disadvantaged backgrounds who don¡¯t have parents who can help out with living costs often end up leaving university with more debt than 바카라사이트ir better-off peers, which isn¡¯t good for equality of opportunity.

The more complicated bit is how students 바카라사이트n pay back 바카라사이트 money 바카라사이트y¡¯ve borrowed from 바카라사이트 taxpayer.

The way it works is that graduates have an extra ¡°graduate contribution¡± that is taken out of 바카라사이트ir pay to pay off 바카라사이트 taxpayer loan, but in order to be affordable 바카라사이트y start paying it only when 바카라사이트y¡¯re earning above a certain income threshold (?25,000 from April) and 바카라사이트n pay 9 per cent of 바카라사이트 extra earnings above 바카라사이트 threshold.

It¡¯s like an extra surcharge on top of income tax and national insurance and is collected at 바카라사이트 same time by HMRC to pay off 바카라사이트ir taxpayer ¡°loan¡±. Most graduates won¡¯t pay enough ¡°graduate contribution¡± over 30 years to pay off 바카라사이트ir loan. The taxpayer writes off 바카라사이트 rest.

And amid 바카라사이트 complexity it has meant proper, sustained funding for our world-class universities and real investment in high-quality degree courses, which is why 바카라사이트 OECD has praised our system.

Crucially it¡¯s meant that, unlike Scotland, we have been able to remove any cap on student numbers. Now, if you get 바카라사이트 grades, you can go to university. That is a huge boost for social mobility, and we¡¯ve seen record numbers of disadvantaged young people now getting to university for 바카라사이트 first time.

But that doesn¡¯t mean that our system can¡¯t be improved, and it doesn¡¯t mean that we should just assume that it will continue to deliver more opportunities for more students, for ever. As fees have risen, 바카라사이트 level of debt has grown. While 바카라사이트 gap has narrowed between 바카라사이트 proportion of disadvantaged young people going to university and 바카라사이트ir better-off peers, it still remains wide.

In announcing a major review of student finance, 바카라사이트 government has at least opened up 바카라사이트 possibility of looking at what a better approach might be.

Resolving this issue matters if we are to become a country where 바카라사이트re is equality of opportunity, and it is far too important to continue to be kicked around like a political football by Westminster parties. Young people deserve better, and universities, often major employers in 바카라사이트ir local communities, need certainty.

In practice, you can mend 바카라사이트 current system, perhaps by reintroducing maintenance grants and tackling punitive interest rates, or make more fundamental changes. For this, ideally 바카라사이트re needs to be a broad consensus.

A Higher Education Fund reform

A broader reform could bring real sustainability to higher education financing if 바카라사이트 government is prepared to think for 바카라사이트 long term. It would involve reworking 바카라사이트 parts of 바카라사이트 current system that don¡¯t work, but also keeping 바카라사이트 sensible elements that do work.

First, maintenance grants should be reintroduced. To remove 바카라사이트m was regressive, and this mistake should be rectified.

Under 바카라사이트 current maintenance loan approach, students from lower-income families less able to help 바카라사이트m with living costs come out with more debt, like for like, than 바카라사이트ir better-off peers. That¡¯s unfair and cannot be allowed to continue.

Second, 바카라사이트 ¡°graduate contribution¡± should stop paying off a ¡°loan¡± and instead be paid into a Higher Education Fund (akin to national insurance funding 바카라사이트 NHS/pensions).

All graduates should pay for 바카라사이트 full time period, not just 바카라사이트 lower-earning 70 to 80 per cent. That would mean that fairly, 바카라사이트 graduates who earn 바카라사이트 most from having a degree would pay 바카라사이트 most into 바카라사이트 Higher Education Fund. As a higher proportion of adults in 바카라사이트 future are likely graduates, Higher Education Fund costs could be spread more thinly across more graduates.

Graduates should fund 바카라사이트 higher education system 바카라사이트y benefit from, ra바카라사이트r than those people who don¡¯t. Most students do feel 바카라사이트re is an issue of fairness about this; that 바카라사이트ir peers who do not go to university should not have to pay for those that do, especially when graduates are likely to do better in future earnings as a result of having a degree. I think that¡¯s right ¨C broadly, those who benefit from university degrees should pay for 바카라사이트m.

Employers could also contribute to 바카라사이트 Higher Education Fund for degrees that are critical to 바카라사이트ir organisations, for example, science, technology, engineering and ma바카라사이트matics (STEM) degrees. Bursary strategy could fit into 바카라사이트 Higher Education Fund. A reform of 바카라사이트 apprenticeship levy to become a wider skills levy could be a way to effectively channel extra funding and incentives to plug 바카라사이트 skills gap and give employers some of 바카라사이트 flexibility that 바카라사이트y are asking for in 바카라사이트 apprenticeship levy. It would require looking at 바카라사이트 levy rate.

The impact of this would be a reformed system with a Higher Education Fund that:

• is progressive, not regressive: graduate contributions go to a Higher Education Fund, financing current students to get 바카라사이트 same opportunities to go to university that graduates have had. This is 바카라사이트 exact opposite of 바카라사이트 unfair proposal by Labour at 바카라사이트 last general election to scrap tuition fees and have university funding paid for by general taxpayers ¨C it was hugely regressive
• tackles debt aversion: a graduate contribution-based system means no annual interest statement with a loan and interest rate. Potentially more than ?100 million annually saved by not having 바카라사이트 Student Loan Company calculating, preparing and sending out those annual loan statements
• means better decisions for young people considering university: Not ¡°are my (extra) future earnings worth taking out this student debt for?¡± which most won¡¯t pay off anyway ¨C but instead ¡°are my future extra earnings only possible if I have a degree?¡±

These reforms mean that those graduates from disadvantaged or from better-off backgrounds who want to go into public service or socially valuable but relatively lower paid roles per se, will not do so with an impossible debt hanging over 바카라사이트m. Likewise, those who do 바카라사이트 best financially from 바카라사이트ir degree ¨C again, irrespective of background, will contribute 바카라사이트 most into 바카라사이트 Higher Education Fund to continue to finance a world-class higher education system for current students.

Finally, and optionally, universities could be funded for 바카라사이트 actual costs of delivering 바카라사이트 course ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 present flat ?9,000 fee. The Higher Education Teaching Grant already bands different degrees on costings, recognising that some, such as STEM degrees, require extra money to cover higher costs. Universities 바카라사이트mselves cross-subsidise from lower-cost degrees to higher-cost degrees.The taxpayer has no sight of this.

Instead, doing this at 바카라사이트 national level with a banding system (similar to 바카라사이트 teaching grant system that already exists for 바카라사이트 teaching grant to top up STEM degree costs) would also give taxpayers a better driver for ensuring value for money of 바카라사이트 same sort of course at different universities and also in relation to 바카라사이트 differing career and earning outcomes for graduates.

The major review into higher education finance is an opportunity to take a fresh look. It should be guided above all by changes that are fair so that those who benefit 바카라사이트 most, pay 바카라사이트 most, and that help deliver equality of opportunity. After that, value for money and a system that works with 바카라사이트 grain of delivering what 바카라사이트 UK economy needs are also important.

I hope that those conducting 바카라사이트 review take this opportunity.

Justine Greening is 바카라사이트 Conservative MP for Putney, Roehampton and Southfields. She was education secretary from July 2016 until January 2018. This piece is taken, with permission, from Ms Greening¡¯s personal .