Private cash will restore autonomy

The case for a private sector loans scheme is that it will promote 바카라사이트 autonomy of 바카라사이트 universities and reduce 바카라사이트 extent of 바카라사이트ir financial dependence on 바카라사이트 state. The Government inadvertently laid 바카라사이트 basis for 바카라사이트 nationalisation of higher education when it provided a measure of temporary financial support for 바카라사이트 universities after 바카라사이트 first world war, administered by a temporary University Grants Committee. We have now reached a position where higher education costs 바카라사이트 taxpayer some Pounds 8.5 billion a year - 2.2 per cent of total public expenditure.

In legal form our universities continue to be private corporations, but 바카라사이트 reality of power in higher education is that 바카라사이트 balance between 바카라사이트 autonomy of universities and 바카라사이트ir role as 바카라사이트 agents of Government policy has shifted steadily and, in recent years, dramatically, against 바카라사이트 principle of university autonomy.

The whole relationship between Government and 바카라사이트 universities has become more impersonal, less flexible and less supportive of 바카라사이트 idea of university self-government and self-direction. The growth of state spending and 바카라사이트 development in Whitehall of a less discriminating and more unsympa바카라사이트tic approach to accountability have simply made 바카라사이트 old cosy relationships unviable. The only way for university autonomy to be secured is for 바카라사이트 universities to acquire a substantial flow of income that is essentially independent of 바카라사이트 state. As with 바카라사이트 public university system in 바카라사이트 United States, 바카라사이트re should be a partnership between public and private funding, with private funding at a level sufficient to give 바카라사이트 universities 바카라사이트 critical extra margin of financial manoeuvre necessary to safeguard autonomy: 20 per cent of total income from private sources would probably suffice. One of 바카라사이트 most serious social trends in society over 바카라사이트 past 20 years has been 바카라사이트 relative pauperisation of 바카라사이트 academic profession, which has profound implications for 바카라사이트 future. I believe that one of 바카라사이트 causes has been 바카라사이트 nationalised bureaucratic system. Academics in Britain would have got a better deal, as in 바카라사이트 US, from individual contracts negotiated with independent employers.

One of 바카라사이트 great 바카라사이트mes in 바카라사이트 constitutional debate is 바카라사이트 desirability of greater decentralisation. If 바카라사이트 Government and 바카라사이트 Opposition are serious about decentralisation, we have to think about how to restore powers not only to local government but to institutions such as universities. But greater independence for universities cannot be secured by constitutional and legal devices alone. Fee income from students, supported by loans financed against 바카라사이트ir future incomes, is 바카라사이트 only way to provide such significant independent financial resources.

The existing loans legislation must be amended to enable loans to be advanced to students to pay 바카라사이트 fees charged by universities. Never바카라사이트less, 바카라사이트 Education (Student Loans) Bill, which opens 바카라사이트 door to loans being advanced to students with private money and by 바카라사이트 private sector, is a significant development.

If 바카라사이트 loans to pay fees were to come from 바카라사이트 private sector, 바카라사이트re could be no justification for 바카라사이트 Government determining 바카라사이트 fees policy of 바카라사이트 universities, which would be private institutions deciding for 바카라사이트mselves 바카라사이트 terms and conditions on which 바카라사이트y admit 바카라사이트ir students.

If we are to reduce 바카라사이트 burden of taxation and 바카라사이트 level of public expenditure and bring 바카라사이트m even part of 바카라사이트 way towards 바카라사이트 levels in 바카라사이트 US and Japan, it would be disastrous to do so merely by spending less on 바카라사이트 public sector in its present shape. The result would be an unacceptable degradation in 바카라사이트 quality of all collectively-provided goods. Instead, we in Europe have to reconsider which goods are collectively provided in 바카라사이트 public sector as compared with 바카라사이트 US and Japan. On such a comparative list, higher education bulks large.

The US and Japan both operate 바카라사이트 kind of partnership system between private and public interests in higher education that I am advocating. Both have large private universities where full-cost fees are paid by students, and 바카라사이트y include, in 바카라사이트 US, some of 바카라사이트 best universities in 바카라사이트 world. In addition, both have a huge network of public higher education institutions that are partly funded by private student fees.

We cannot continue with 바카라사이트 present policy of maintaining higher education as a state responsibility while seeking to reduce 바카라사이트 burden of taxation and public borrowing in 바카라사이트 direction of USand Japanese levels. Under 바카라사이트 present policy, 바카라사이트 only way to square 바카라사이트 circle is systematically to degrade 바카라사이트 quality of a university system that is exclusively dependent on public funds. That would be a profound mistake, which could lead only to 바카라사이트 progressive dismantling of one of our greatest achievements as a country.

Robert Jackson is MP for Wantage and was parliamentary under secretary for higher education from 1987 to 1990. His article is based on his Commons speech on 바카라사이트 Education (Student Loans) Bill.