Sic transit gloria LMU

[nmg]

Following some irregularities, the UK Border Agency has revoked London Metropolitan University's visa license. Not only can the university no longer recruit overseas (non-EU) students (a major source of income for all UK universities, and one of the few things that stops them from going bankrupt), but their existing overseas students have been told

Comments

[valkyriekaren]

I suspect they will be required to either merge with another University/FE institution (possibly one of the University of London ones?) OR accept an offer from a private company. In the interests of the free market I doubt the Government will want to specify which, but those will be the options. I think an offer from a private company is more likely - most other universities will not want the administrative stress and financial risk of taking on an institution which is believed to have been mismanaged.

[swisstone]

With the major players in the University of London (King's, LSE) pondering their moment to follow Imperial's lead and go fully independent, I doubt that a merger with any UoL constituent is on the cards. If there is to be a merger, it's likely to be with South Bank or University of East London, or something like that. But what I suspect will happen is that once all the legitimate overseas students (and expect a lot of them to be declared illegitimate and sent home as part of this process) are found new homes in other London institutions (and they will be), the same piecemeal reallocation will happen to the students, staff and assets of LMU (ironically, this might be good for the Women's Library, which was facing an uncertain future).

[steer]

If there is to be a merger, it's likely to be with South Bank

Christ, what would you call that... London Mank?

I don't see what slightly rubbish London unis would gain from merging though, especially when quite geographically disparate. Plus, London Met is pretty toxic at this stage. I *think* it's no longer greylisted by UCU -- though that would be a laugh wouldn't it?

"Hey new colleague."

"I'm sorry, my union forbids me to collaborate with someone from your university."

[swisstone]

I didn't say I thought a merger was on the cards - just that a merger with another new university was more plausible than with an institution of the UoL. I think the government would like to see LMU fail, as it sends out the message that they will not come to help any other university that gets into trouble.

[akicif]

I don't know enough to answer the poll, but this does look rather a mess: at least with the University of Wales mess last year it was "only" external institutions whose degrees the University was validating that were actually being naughty....

[swisstone]

Poor Malcolm Gillies - after being driven out of City by the governors, he's spent the last year trying to turn London Met into what the Government would like all Universities to be (Business Schools-cum-Technical Colleges, with as much as possible outsourced), only for the Government to decide that LMU should be the sacrificial victim to send the message to everyone else that they must reduce their international student contingent. For I am pretty sure that this is what's going on here, and LMU have been targeted because their past infractions have marked them out to Whitehall as an institution that is going to fail anyway.

It's also worth noting that this story broke in the Sunday Times at the weekend, at which point various Home Office spokesmen and Ministers came on and said that no decision had been taken, and the ST had got it wrong. In other words, lied through their teeth.

[steer]

You think it's an instruction to reduce overseas students quota or you think it's an instruction to get serious about staff doing vetting on students. I think it's more designed to seriously put the frighteners on universities... not that we can do so much but still... My guess is that if some student turns out to be involved with terrorist activity (one last year had a UCL connection IIRC) they want to be able to say "all proper procedures followed".

I mean it may be about getting overseas students quotas down but they must surely realise that this would kick a leg out from most universities which have suffered from funding cuts anyway.

I don't see what the government loses from overseas students really... they fund universities which the government is clearly not prepared to do. The risk is that some are using it to get a visa which looks bad for the government.

[nmg]

I don't see what the government loses from overseas students really... they fund universities which the government is clearly not prepared to do. The risk is that some are using it to get a visa which looks bad for the government.

I think that this is the Tories pandering to their xenophobic roots, nothing more, nothing less.

[steer]

You could well be right... but does this really help much? I mean if it's a measure to control immigration it's a very ineffective one on its own. On the other hand, I bet some uni administrators in charge of vetting foreign students are screaming like scalded cats today. Expect to see a lot more stringency on admissions to ensure they are compliant. I know a few people essentially take a "...and the horse you rode in on" attitude to the requirements that the borders agency tries to put on unis and deal with it simply as a "are they qualified and do they have the money" issue (which I suspect I would do had I a say in admissions).

[drdoug]

I have Ideas about all this but am on holiday so officially Don't Care. With another administration I'd give the benefit of the doubt between cockup and conspiracy but this smells like deliberate policy.

One quick thing - Buckingham has long been seen as beyond the pale but it stands out in your list as being a charity, not a for-profit company with a legal obligation to maximise shareholder value. Which almost certainly means it wouldn't (couldn't) touch a financially sunken London Met with a bargepole. Alas.

[nmg]

You're spot on re: Buckingham, but it was included on the grounds that it is the best-known private university in the UK.

(I'd have included Grayling's New College of the Humanities, if it wasn't so laughable)

[drdoug]

The distinction between Buckingham and previously publicly-funded universities is much less than it was: for most subjects - and off the top of my head, I think for all the ones that Buckingham offers - the full costs are met through upfront fees paid back through the student loans system.

Have you seen this? http://www.wonkhe.com/2012/08/31/seriously-deficient-or-whither-london-met-or-wheres-willetts/
Captures a lot of my thoughts, including pointing out that Willetts may be very smart on policy but is increasingly evidently not a big hitter politically.

Also interesting to see that one London-based university making a hasty bid for the fees of the 2000-or-so overseas students cast adrift by London Met is ... Glasgow Caledonian! http://www.scotsman.com/news/education/university-

[pwilkinson]

As I'm an employee of LMU, I'm going to be careful what I say, but

[nmg]

Thanks for the clarification. I hope that it doesn't come down to the worst-case, obviously.