Its All Kicking Off Outside Tory HQ

Hank_Rearden

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Yes, this is the real inflammatory reason. Cleggy & Co spent an awful lot of time canvassing the student vote on the basis of being the only party wanting to eliminate fees.

I would agree that that should be the inflammatory reason - except that the protest was outside the Tory HQ....

Hank_Rearden

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I notice that a lot of the usual suspects are absent from this thread. Perhaps they have been evacuated from their office?

Maybe they're at work while the civil servants are messing about online....;)

hethmar

I wonder how many of those thousands actually voted? I bet 75% are just a day out rentacrowd

I havent read the ins and outs but my understanding was that the £9k was the absolute top capped limit unis could charge and not the "norm".

quantic

I learned more in my 3 week work placement, then I did in my 3 year degree.

Just saying...

1984ReturnsForReal_2

quantic wrote: »

i learned more in my 3 week work placement, th[strike]e[/strike]an i did in my 3 year degree.

Just saying...

...................

tomstickland

Tuition fees are preferable to a graduate tax. At lease you could pay them off and be done with them.

yorkshirekev

hethmar wrote: »

I wonder how many of those thousands actually voted? I bet 75% are just a day out rentacrowd

I havent read the ins and outs but my understanding was that the £9k was the absolute top capped limit unis could charge and not the "norm".

The last attempt to create a market in fees failed as all universities soon gravitated towards 3k per year. There is no reason to accept that the same will not happen again.

Universities will always want the most money that they can. Any fall in numbers will probably be topped up by a more aggressive approach towards recruiting students from further afield.

Rochdale_Pioneers

yorkshirekev wrote: »

The last attempt to create a market in fees failed as all universities soon gravitated towards 3k per year. There is no reason to accept that the same will not happen again.

Universities will always want the most money that they can. Any fall in numbers will probably be topped up by a more aggressive approach towards recruiting students from further afield.

And don't forget that the increase in fees goes hand in hand with a massive drop in public funding. Universities need to set fees at £7k just to cover the lack of money they're going to get. So I also expect most of them to set fees as high as they can.

Generali

Unfortunately this is what happens when Labour wreck the country. The Tories are left try to sort the mess out.

FWIW, I think education should be provided by private institutions that are paid for mostly out of taxpayers money. It should be possible to be educated to Masters level without having to pay a single fee IMO.

trenchwars

nearlynew wrote: »

What I find suspicious is the weak response from the police. They are more than capable of sorting out this sort of thing if they want to. I smell a rat.

Tinfoil hat time. Just a few months ago the police were warning that cuts to the policing budget might lead to civil unrest:

http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/09/police-cuts-lead-widespread

! Now all of a sudden we have a mini-riot on our hands. Could the police have deliberately provided a weak response to this incident to highlight their point? Could they even have employed "agent provocateurs" to stir-up trouble in the crowd? There have been allegations that they have used this tactic in the past:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/10/g20-policing-agent-provacateurs