Skip to main content

The fees disgrace - blame LABOUR

Let's be very clear. It was LABOUR who opened the floodgates to the university tuition fees debacle that is now being imposed on our country. The LibDems have allowed it to happen; the Tories made it happen; but it was Labour who commissioned the Browne report, and it was Labour who set the whole thing up in the first place, by imposing top-up fees. As soon as the argument had been made by Charles Clarke that it was right for students to pay a substantial amount toward their higher education, and that higher education free at the point of delivery was going to be a thing of the past, then full-scale marketization became inevitable. It was only a matter of time. I made this argument at the time, as did Ian Gibson. We have, sadly, been proven right by today's news that the ConDems are going to bring in variable fees of up to £9k.
It is LABOUR who need to take the blame for having created the conditions for this dreadful outcome. (And it is only the Green Party (and the Nats, etc.) who come out of this with clean hands: see http://twitter.com/#!/TheGreenParty)
So: come the next election, let's all be clear about that. If you want to punish the LibDems over this, then there is no point in voting Labour.

Comments

Matthew Watkins said…
As usual for a politican you are missing out some vital information here like the introduction oof the tuitition fees originally in 1998 by Labour was based on the recommendations of the Dearing inquiry see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2004/jan/27/tuitionfees.students/print. Commissioned by the Conservative governement under John Major. So I think you'll find is has been driven as part of the ideological conservative (protect the rich screw the rest) agenda for the last 14 years. I don';t believe labour would accept the recommendations of the Browne report in the way that the conservatives have because they were committed to seeing more students going to universities unlike the conservatives who only want it for the priviledged few. Claiming that the Green Party would do any different is hollow as you won't have to carry through on your promises, just like the Liberals never thought they would so they too promised the world and surprise, surprise once they are given to opportuniy to stand by their promises they show that they have the least integrity of any party in this country.
Rupert why don't you show you have some integrity, put your money where you mouth is and come on the demonstration against the cuts and Browne review next weds will you, I will be there in the midlands camp, why don't you come and say hello.
Regards,
Matthew Watkins BSc MSc PGCE
Rupert said…
Thanks Matthew. I'll have to meet you another time, I'm afriad; I can't be on the demo, I'm afraid, as I already have a madly-busy week at work and with other events. I have signed various petitions and so on against Browne, as well as blogging etc etc on it.
I don't appreciate your 'As usual for a politician' jibe. I am well aware of the facts behind Dearing; but did Labour _have_ to implement Dearing? No; they CHOSE to do so. Just as I believe they would have chosen to raise the cap to about £8k, if they had held on at this May's General Election.
So, let's skip the personal jibes and campaign together against this bastard child of Browne, Charles Clarke, and David Willetts.
Rupert said…
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n21/stefan-collini/brownes-gamble
This is superb.

Popular posts from this blog

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...

Stansted: a reflection

The key question, in relation to protsts like that at Stansted last week, is: which side are you on? Are you on the side of big corporations profiteering from completely unsustainable climate-destructive behaviour? Or are you on the side of people with no vested interests just making a non-violent stand, at considerable cost to their own time and money, for the sake of all our futures? It doesn't seem to me a hard judgement to make... Rupert Read Green Party Councillor, Norwich, and Lead Candidate for Eastern Region for the Greens in the 2009 Euro-elections. DID YOU KNOW: A vote of about 10% across Eastern Region on June 4 2009 would be enough to get me elected to the European Parliament... http://rupertsread.blogspot.com