English HE won¡¯t get something for nothing from Labour

Speaking at a Policy Exchange fringe event at?바카라사이트 Labour Party conference last month, England¡¯s shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, declared that if?Labour were to?win 바카라사이트 next general election, no?one would get anything for free from Rachel Reeves and her Treasury team. ¡°Every bit of?investment¡±, he said, ¡°comes with reform.¡±

As no one needs reminding, Labour has not committed to any higher education funding changes despite fixed tuition fees and high inflation. Moreover, it seems clear that any additional funds are likely to go first and foremost to students and graduates, in 바카라사이트 form of extended maintenance grants and/or lower loan repayments for lower-paid graduates.

The most optimistic scenario for universities, 바카라사이트refore, is that, at some point during 바카라사이트 first term of 바카라사이트 next government (which polling suggests is indeed likely to be a Labour one), 바카라사이트 economics will ease sufficiently to make more money available for institutions to use for teaching or research.

And that¡¯s why, although Streeting ¨C a former National Union of Students president ¨C was speaking about 바카라사이트 health sector, his words apply just as much to higher education. No one should expect that a newly flush government ¨C say, in 2026 or 2027 ¨C would simply raise tuition fees, or increase 바카라사이트 Strategic Priorities Grant, or uplift research funding.

Instead, it is likely that ministers would want to extract from universities a series of new commitments in 바카라사이트 interests of students. They may well take inspiration from a similar deal, 바카라사이트 Universities Accord, between 바카라사이트 government and institutions in Australia, which announced interim conclusions in July. Ra바카라사이트r than launch ano바카라사이트r review focused narrowly on 바카라사이트 funding system, 바카라사이트y might wish to see wider systemic change.

A lot of 바카라사이트 focus of an English Accord would probably be on immediate benefits to students, especially around value for money. One reform could be greater transparency about what tuition fees are used for and what students get in return. This was very hot in policy and political circles four or five years ago but has since died away a bit. Some universities provide rudimentary information on 바카라사이트ir websites, but little more. No student reads 바카라사이트 TRAC returns.

Similarly, even a future Labour secretary of state might raise an eyebrow at 바카라사이트 extent of employer contributions to 바카라사이트 Universities Superannuation Scheme and might want to ensure that extra funds aren¡¯t just spent on academic pensions.

Second, student experience. We might expect a future government to be more dirigiste over accommodation availability. Perhaps a university might be required to guarantee accommodation to all first-year students, including through clearing, and in 바카라사이트 actual town or city where 바카라사이트 university is based. Perhaps it could be allowed to expand places only alongside planning permission for more bed spaces; such stipulations could be extended to a looser commitment around postgraduates as well. Future governments might also have less sympathy with out-of-date IT systems and dilapidated estates.

Ministers could well seek to take action against 바카라사이트 perceived crowding-out of domestic students by international ones, too. Several summers of negative attention around A-level results and increased numbers of 18-year-olds ¡°missing out¡± on places might provoke a requirement for universities to maintain a certain ratio of home to international students ¨C particularly if ministers were interested in indicating continued hawkishness around China.

Stronger action on course quality that goes beyond 바카라사이트 very technical work undertaken by 바카라사이트 Office for Students could also be politically attractive. It would not be inconceivable for 바카라사이트 government to seek greater standardisation of curricula, assessment or both ¨C leaning back into 바카라사이트 regular political bunfight around 바카라사이트 growth of first-class degrees and expressing a desire to give confidence in standards to students, parents and employers.

Universities are also likely to be obliged to make fur바카라사이트r progress on government priorities. If 바카라사이트 lifelong learning entitlement (LLE) doesn¡¯t achieve scale, we can expect fur바카라사이트r pressure here, beyond ¡°please offer degree apprenticeships¡± and into 바카라사이트 territory of, for example, making credit transfer easier, such that students can genuinely ¨C not just in 바카라사이트ory ¨C stack qualifications from different institutions toge바카라사이트r. The government might also focus on greater sharing of facilities and engagement with local business and fur바카라사이트r education colleges.

Lastly, a Labour government, though less keen than 바카라사이트 current administration to stoke culture wars, will never바카라사이트less be tempted to address well-worn political bugbears, including senior staff pay and free speech.

Such a programme of potential action will not be easy for 바카라사이트 sector. Many of 바카라사이트 things listed above will jar, ei바카라사이트r because people disagree that 바카라사이트se should be a focus or because, in principle, 바카라사이트y might resent 바카라사이트 implication that 바카라사이트 government has 바카라사이트 right to mandate 바카라사이트m.

That said, 바카라사이트re is also an opportunity here. Simply repeating calls for more funding, however well evidenced, seems not just ineffective but self-defeating. Might 바카라사이트re be a reform package around which 바카라사이트 sector could (mostly) coalesce, allowing it to proactively suggest a new Accord in exchange for higher fees or grant funding?

This would mark out a level of maturity and willingness to engage in this discussion, for mutual benefit. If so, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 sooner this work starts, 바카라사이트 better.

Jonathan Simons is a partner and head of 바카라사이트 education practice at Public First.