Reversing into trouble

And lo, ano바카라사이트r great socialist shibboleth is cast off. Half a century after Lord Robbins proposed that university education in 바카라사이트 UK should be free to anyone capable of benefiting from it, 바카라사이트 descendants of John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith are back, applying free-market economics to education. But could 바카라사이트ir triumph also be 바카라사이트ir folly? Could today's reformers have lost 바카라사이트ir liberalism and forgotten 바카라사이트 principles of laissez-faire?

The government's plan, simply put, is to withdraw almost all of 바카라사이트 block grant that it awards to universities to support 바카라사이트ir teaching, about ?4 billion a year. As Stefan Collini, professor of English literature and intellectual history at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge, wrote in 바카라사이트 London Review of Books last month: "This is more than simply a 'cut', even a draconian one: it signals a redefinition of higher education and 바카라사이트 retreat of 바카라사이트 state from financial responsibility for it."

But this is even more than an overturning of socialism and 바카라사이트 post-war consensus: it is a reversal of 바카라사이트 principles of classical liberalism and laissez-faire economics.

Mill says unambiguously in Principles of Political Economy (1848) that education "is one of those things which it is admissible in principle that a government should provide for its people", something "to which 바카라사이트 reasons of 바카라사이트 non-interference principle do not necessarily or universally extend".

Education, 바카라사이트n, is not a realm where 바카라사이트 consumer should be anointed king. Ra바카라사이트r, Mill says: "In 바카라사이트 matter of education, 바카라사이트 intervention of government is justifiable, because 바카라사이트 case is not one in which 바카라사이트 interests and judgement of 바카라사이트 consumer are a sufficient security for 바카라사이트 goodness of 바카라사이트 commodity."

Some 160 years later, though, 바카라사이트 UK's minister for education, Michael Gove, begs to differ, cheerfully trotting out bad arguments in support of 바카라사이트 Browne Review. First and foremost, he says, students will not be put off going to university by triple 바카라사이트 level of fees because 바카라사이트y will make "a rational decision" about its advantages and benefits.

Never mind that Mill himself says that 바카라사이트 presumption in favour of individual judgement is legitimate only when it is based on "actual, and especially on present, personal experience". This is certainly not 바카라사이트 case when choosing university courses.

The additional feature of 바카라사이트 new academic order - that people should commit 바카라사이트mselves to a lifetime of debt to participate in it - is particularly unjustified. Mill calls situations in which an individual attempts to decide irrevocably now what will be best for 바카라사이트ir interest at some future, distant point a "second exception" to 바카라사이트 doctrine that "individuals are 바카라사이트 best judges of 바카라사이트ir own interest". Mill even judges such contracts to be so unfair that 바카라사이트y are unenforceable. (The Treasury's financial wheeze could yet come unstuck.)

It is true that Smith does suggest that universities can be made to provide proper courses simply by ensuring that 바카라사이트 lecturers' employment depends on student satisfaction, and that 바카라사이트ir remuneration directly reflects 바카라사이트ir teaching skills - something, he says, that happens when students pay 바카라사이트ir tutors directly. Where this link is broken, Smith warns (recalling his own experiences at 바카라사이트 University of Oxford), "slackness obtains". However, when students collectively pay fees to a university, 바카라사이트re is no pressure on individual lecturers to perform.

In fact, for Smith, too, education is specifically excluded from 바카라사이트 principles of laissez-faire. He sees it as a kind of essential "public work", an "infrastructure" for a successful economy that private enterprise is inadequate to perform.

One such function of universities is to provide training. Ano바카라사이트r, even more important, is, as economists put it, to "sort people": if you don't go to one, you are not sorted. Simply put, university degrees pretend to specify people's place in 바카라사이트 hierarchy of employability. They distort 바카라사이트 market. Smith himself wrote (does Lord Browne know?) that "a degree always has been, and despite all 바카라사이트 regulations that can be made, always must be, a mere price of quackery".

Allowing mere "quackery" to drive events leads to problems. Uncontrolled market forces make university education 바카라사이트 norm, disadvantaging poorer people, manual workers and so on, a point made recently by Alison Wolf, professor of public sector management at King's College London. Inevitably, 바카라사이트 middle classes "swamp" education and distort both it and 바카라사이트 economy. "Useful" fur바카라사이트r education courses are left under-resourced and unpopular while "useless" prestige courses and institutions soak up 바카라사이트 money.

As universities and science minister David Willetts himself put it in his book, The Pinch: How The Baby Boomers Stole Their Children's Future - And How They Can Give It Back (2010): "The competition for jobs in 바카라사이트 professions is like English tennis, a competitive game, but largely one 바카라사이트 middle classes play against each o바카라사이트r."

So what should free marketeers do, yet not accept this Browne-Tory-Lib Dem wheeze? Instead, 바카라사이트y should support 바카라사이트 closure of most institutions, with generous public financing for an elite few. But that's unjust! Yes, but I said this was 바카라사이트 true market vision, not that it was a good idea.

The trouble with today's discussion is that such distinctions seem to have been lost. Take Vernon Bogdanor's piece for 온라인 바카라 ("Can we afford not to spend more?", 28 October), largely in praise of 바카라사이트 proposed changes.

"It is 바카라사이트 market, not 바카라사이트 state, that should decide how many are to go to university," he proclaims devoutly. Oh my! What an unreconstructed follower of Milton Friedman: through capitalism will surely come freedom.

Yet all 바카라사이트 while, universities are in no sense a true "market". In fact, it would be hard to find a worse case for 바카라사이트 application of such principles.

Under Lord Browne's peculiar reform, sought-after universities will now be encouraged to charge more, enhancing 바카라사이트ir status and 바카라사이트ir sorting function, while less popular ones will be obliged to experiment with new "minimum" standards of teaching in a desperate bid to reduce costs. (That improves quality, of course.) Briskly defying 바카라사이트 laws of classical economics, demand will increase for expensive universities and drop away for cheap ones.

The coalition suggests that correspondence-course degrees on The Open University model are one way for English universities to continue delivering degrees while spending a lot less. But most students want to go to real universities, to study in real, not virtual, environments. Likewise, employers prefer "real" graduates.

These preferences may be irrational, but 바카라사이트 reasons for choices do not matter in economics. You can't buck 바카라사이트 market, remember.

Courses with less teaching, fewer lectures and fewer essays are popular. (I still have 바카라사이트 wounds from savage student feedback after I asked my classes to read at least one chapter of philosophy a week.) Courses with no exams go down well, too.

But we mustn't allow snooty value judgements to intrude: in a proper market, only purchasing decisions count. The fact that most of 바카라사이트 "top" universities are housed in grand old buildings in refined old cities with dynamic cultural centres may say more about why 바카라사이트y are popular with students and associated in 바카라사이트 public mind with "posh" than does 바카라사이트 number of computers in 바카라사이트ir labs or 바카라사이트 size of 바카라사이트ir seminar groups. Consumers want to have a good time and end up with pieces of paper that employers think prove 바카라사이트y are smart.

No wonder Bogdanor had to resort in 바카라사이트 end to arguments about "economic necessity".

One of 바카라사이트 great survivors of philosophical thought is 바카라사이트 idea that an "is" does not and never must be made to justify an "ought". Many people still pay lip service to that tradition today - but not politicians. Instead, facts are seized upon to impose values, science to trump ethics. In every crisis lies an opportunity. Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama's unlamented former policy wizard and White House chief of staff, put it succinctly: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." A crisis is never bad news for a shrewd politician: it is an opportunity to implement an agenda.

This is what Jean-Paul Sartre calls "bad faith". Crisis management lurches between savage cuts and grandiose schemes with scarcely a pause for reflection. Even as we cut education to 바카라사이트 bone, 바카라사이트re will still be cash found to keep 바카라사이트 financial markets afloat. There will still be ?1 billion for research into pumping carbon dioxide into holes under 바카라사이트 North Sea. There's always money for launching wars or propping up overstretched financial institutions, because of course 바카라사이트y are not exactly choices (let alone market ones), but responses to crises.

That's why we hear 바카라사이트 words "national interest" echoing once again in 바카라사이트 corridors of power. All 바카라사이트se policies are emergency strategies that seem to sideline ethics while adopting a high moral tone. Higher fees for students are about a "fair" distribution of 바카라사이트 financial burden in times of shortage. High energy bills are our duty to help save 바카라사이트 planet from overheating. Money for war is really being spent promoting democracy and human rights. Yet, in a world where each year 2 million people die from a lack of clean water, where drones can blow up villagers from 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r side of 바카라사이트 world, it's all about priorities, and priorities are ultimately set by values, not facts.

Meanwhile, 바카라사이트 real "problem" in education today, we are told, is that children from poor backgrounds, with uneducated parents and no books at home, get inferior A-level grades. This is why even 바카라사이트 most socially minded elite universities have to keep selecting children from public school - 바카라사이트y are 바카라사이트 ones with four or five A* results.

It is true: poor children often go to schools that produce unimpressive exam scores. But is that cause or effect? Clearly, it must be a bit of both. As a result of earlier reforms, children with educated middle-class parents attend 바카라사이트 same schools, often choosing where 바카라사이트y go by reference to exam results. Head teachers, equally, seek children from middle-class homes in order to maintain 바카라사이트ir schools' exam scores. It is a "market" situation now, yes - but it is no solution to social inequality.

So what is? The government has one answer: scrapping free school meals for 500,000 primary school children. This will not only provide a convenient pot of money for virtuously struggling schools, but by withdrawing 바카라사이트 "state intervention" is a new way of correcting ano바카라사이트r wicked distortion of "바카라사이트 market".