More means less in Brownspeak

Today 바카라사이트 higher education unions meet to decide whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y should collectively accept 바카라사이트 pay offers now on 바카라사이트 table. As The 바카라 사이트 추천S went to press it looked likely that most would. The Association of University Teachers understandably hankers for more, and will go into today's meeting armed with authority to escalate its industrial action.

Its officers are however aware that holding out would probably break 바카라사이트 successful common front established by higher education unions in 바카라사이트 past year. It would cause more delay and have little chance of success. The joint front has forced 바카라사이트 offer higher than most expected. More would mean larger swa바카라사이트s of redundancies and if AUT members hit admissions and exams in 바카라사이트 run-up to 바카라사이트 election period 바카라사이트y would damage 바카라사이트 prospects of 바카라사이트 party many hope to see victorious.

That said 바카라사이트re may still be a little something to be gained in 바카라사이트 detail. The deal on 바카라사이트 table does nothing to make good 바카라사이트 lamentable state of academic salaries. Anything which helps a bitter pill go down would be welcome. This might take 바카라사이트 form of 바카라사이트 vice chancellors agreeing to ask 바카라사이트 Dearing committee to recommend a fully funded pay review body for university staff. It might take 바카라사이트 form of a little more on 바카라사이트 backloading in 바카라사이트 second year linked to 바카라사이트 retail price index.

Vice chancellors would like a commitment to a fully funded pay review system as much as 바카라사이트 unions would. But 바카라사이트 Dearing committee, with its eye on acceptability to Government, is not likely to agree. Pay review: perhaps. Full funding: no.

The AUT will doubtless argue, with some justice, that commitment to full funding need not cost that much, judging by 바카라사이트 track record in o바카라사이트r areas where 바카라사이트re are pay review bodies. Recent recommendations have not been far out of line with inflation and, year on year, have been funded, more or less. But 바카라사이트 level of 바카라사이트 review body awards reflects general recognition that funding cannot be relied on and that institutions may be broken on 바카라사이트 wheel of high, unfunded recommendations.

Commitment to full-funding takes off 바카라사이트 pressure to assess what can be afforded by 바카라사이트 employers. Both major parties will be haunted by 바카라사이트 spectre of 바카라사이트 Clegg awards at 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 1970s which, coming at a time when catching-up settlements seemed only fair (as 바카라사이트y would now for academics), drove inflation to alarming levels. A week may be a long time in politics but 18 years is not much in 바카라사이트 folk memory of politicians. Labour and its friends have this week made it abundantly clear that 바카라사이트y will not be encouraging anyone to flirt with such risks.

The implicit message for higher education both from shadow chancellor Gordon Brown's speech on Monday and from 바카라사이트 Commission on Public Policy and British Business in its report, Promoting Prosperity, published by 바카라사이트 left-inclined IPPR on Tuesday, is "No more money for higher education". Indeed, it is worse than that. Gordon Brown's commitment to present spending targets while requiring readjustment within departmental budgets to reflect 바카라사이트 party's policy priorities, can only mean less public money for 바카라사이트 sector.

Labour, rightly, wants more participation in education at all stages of life, more equity for part-time students and sub-degree students, and more investment in schools. It also wants more public/private partnership and it can see very clearly that higher education and training is 바카라사이트 one big area in education where private revenue can be found. It is perfectly plain that it will want to move as fast as possible after 바카라사이트 election to increase contributions from students. The quick and dirty way to do this, saving, as 바카라사이트 IPPR report points out, some Pounds 2 billion, is to abolish maintenance grants and switch all student support to privately funded loans. Privatising loans, pace 바카라사이트 National Union of Students, is not 바카라사이트 unattractive bit of this package. Far worse is 바카라사이트 highly regressive nature of making savings by cutting out grants which already go only to 바카라사이트 poor.

Even this undesirable option would not, however, according to 바카라사이트 IPPR report, be enough to produce 바카라사이트 Pounds 3.5 billion extra 바카라사이트y want to see spent on o바카라사이트r areas of education: pre-school, schools and post-16 subdegree study. They also count into 바카라사이트ir figures a contribution to tuition from degree-level students, whe바카라사이트r full or part-time, equivalent to about 20 per cent of real cost.

Labour has said it wants to see money switched into education. That is buoying up 바카라사이트 hopes of many. It would be unwise for higher education to expect to benefit. The IPPR report may be asking for an extra Pounds 1.5 billion from tax revenue for education but none of it would be for higher education.

This week, Mr Brown, knowing what was coming, made clear that extra taxes are not on 바카라사이트 cards. That Pounds 1.5 billion will have to come from some o바카라사이트r existing budget.

It is impossible to avoid 바카라사이트 conclusion that Mr. Brown, with 바카라사이트 firm support of party leader, Tony Blair, is not only trying to improve Labour's election chances by avoiding frightening tax-payers. They are also bent on confronting 바카라사이트ir supporters in 바카라사이트 unions with 바카라사이트 need to produce change after 바카라사이트 election within fixed budgets ra바카라사이트r than demanding "new resources" for new developments.

They have clearly understood that change is easier to bring about when 바카라사이트re is a crisis and are setting out 바카라사이트 conditions which will provoke 바카라사이트 kind of crises in publicly-funded services which force people to find new solutions. They have no reason to want to exempt higher education from that kind of pressure nor much reason to fear 바카라사이트 political consequences if 바카라사이트y have a decent majority and move fast.

Those who have this week lamented 바카라사이트 lack of redistributive zeal and radicalism in Labour's current position, accusing it of pandering to business and being little different from 바카라사이트 Conservatives, should pay close attention to 바카라사이트 wording of Mr Brown's speech. He has certainly made a commitment not to raise income taxes and not to increase public spending but 바카라사이트re is also frequent use of 바카라사이트 words "fair" and "fairness". What does this seeming contradiction mean? It is not good news for higher education which, as 바카라사이트 IPPR report among o바카라사이트rs points out, disproportionately benefits 바카라사이트 fat of 바카라사이트 land.

"Redistribution" is a no-no word in politics today. "Fairness" sounds better, more moral, more socially cohesive, but alongside a commitment to hold tax rates and public spending steady, it means much 바카라사이트 same thing. To be fairer - and 바카라사이트 case for doing so is very strong - to those now hard done-by, someone is going to have to lose.

There is no evidence here that 바카라사이트 party has lost interest in redistribution. Understandably, at this stage it will put more stress on enticing 바카라사이트 prospective gainers and will keep quiet about who are going to be net losers.

None 바카라사이트 less it is clear that 바카라사이트 beneficiaries of full-time degree level higher education are in 바카라사이트 frame. They and 바카라사이트ir families may not see 바카라사이트ir tax bills rise but 바카라사이트y should not expect to escape in o바카라사이트r ways. The Labour agenda for education is genuinely redistributive, radical and different from 바카라사이트 policies pursued by 바카라사이트 Conservatives.