University tuition costs to hit £36,000
Students face paying up to £36,000 for a three-year degree course under plans for the most radical reform of universities in 50 years.
Virtually all taxpayer funding will be removed from the majority of degrees and students will have to borrow tens of thousands of pounds to cover the doubled cost of courses. Universities will have to charge at least £7,000 a year to cover the loss of central government funding and some elite degrees are expected to cost up to £12,000 a year.
These are understood to be the key findings from a long-awaited review of university funding conducted by Lord Browne, the former head of BP. The recommendations have been welcomed by senior ministers after the peer delivered them his report at the weekend.
The Government is now drawing up plans to offer large “mortgage-style” loans to students to cover the increased costs of their studies. Many graduates will spend almost an entire working lifetime repaying the money. The new system is set to be introduced in 2012.
The current practice of effectively interest-free loans will be scrapped for all but the lowest earners with a new “tiered” system of repayments. Lord Browne is expected to allow graduates to repay their debts early and avoid the higher interest charges. However, ministers may prevent early repayment as the Liberal Democrats believe that higher earners should pay more for their education.
Sources said that anyone earning more than £21,000 a year will face interest of about two per cent more than inflation on their debts. They will be able to borrow money to cover their tuition fees plus about £4,000 annually for living costs. Some graduates on the most popular courses at the best universities could leave university with debts approaching £50,000. It is expected that graduates will have to repay their loans at a rate of about nine per cent of earnings each year. The debts will only be written off after 30 years.
Senior government sources insisted last night that the new system was designed to protect lower earners and not deter those from poorer backgrounds from going to university. Only about 40 per cent of university graduates will repay their entire loans - including interest - with the rest of the debts being written off by the Government.
About one in five low earners will actually pay less than under the current arrangements.
It is thought that students from many middle-income households, earning up to about £60,000 annually, will be given government grants to help with the increased costs.
However, according to calculations by this newspaper, a person earning £60,000 a year will face monthly payments of about £300 to cover a cheap degree and living costs. This would rise to more than £600 if they were charged £12,000 annually for their university course.
The Daily Telegraph understands that the plans to increase costs will be accompanied by a major drive to improve the quality of universities.
Lord Browne’s report is also expected to recommend that:
* Only students meeting a “minimum entry standard” - to be set by the Government - will qualify for government loans;
* There will be a 10 per cent rise in places, with popular universities free to expand as they wish and weaker universities contracting or closing;
* Universities will have to provide “student charters” that will include commitments on teaching and class sizes. Those charging higher fees will be expected to give stronger commitments;
* Universities will have to publish figures showing the average salary and employment prospects for graduates;
* Students will be able to study part-time and receive government funding, allowing those from poorer backgrounds to work and study.
Under Lord Browne’s blueprint, universities will be free to charge as much as they wish for degrees - with students better able to assess the value of their education by gaining more information about their career prospects.
Sources said last night that the system would discourage universities from charging more than £6,000 or £7,000 annually. Above this, they would only be able to keep some of the extra money raised, with a large portion returned to the Government.
It is expected that central government funding for universities will be almost entirely removed. In future, taxpayer-funded central grants are likely to be heavily targeted and only available to courses in medicine, science, technology and other specialist areas.
David Cameron yesterday urged the Liberal Democrats and Labour to support the proposals. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, will today make a statement to MPs about Lord Browne’s report.
However, some Lib Dem MPs, including Greg Mulholland and John Leech, have already pledged to vote against any fee increase, prompting fears of a split in the Coalition. Yesterday, Mr Cameron said Lib Dems would have to accept a “compromise” to guarantee high standards of university education.
The Browne Review is also likely to provoke outrage among student leaders and academics.
Pam Tatlow, the chief executive of Million Plus, which represents new universities, said: “High earners working in the City are likely to be able to pay off their loans much earlier and will therefore avoid incurring higher interest rate charges. Meanwhile, those in the 'squeezed middle’ will end up paying not just the original loan but much more in interest and will pay for longer.”
Mary Bousted, the general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said they had “grave concerns” about an unlimited rise in tuition fees and any rise in the rate to repay them. “If either of these were adopted they would severely damage higher education in the UK, leave students burdened with huge debts, discourage poorer students from going to university, and discourage graduates from becoming teachers and other moderate- to lower-paid professions,” she said.
Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said some families could be left “thinking the unthinkable and choosing which child to send”.
Source
No. No.
At this rate, we're going to revert back to having a tiny minority who can afford it, which is beyond ridiculous. Why not have a Graduate Tax? Why not make us pay for our degrees when we can actually pay?
Virtually all taxpayer funding will be removed from the majority of degrees and students will have to borrow tens of thousands of pounds to cover the doubled cost of courses. Universities will have to charge at least £7,000 a year to cover the loss of central government funding and some elite degrees are expected to cost up to £12,000 a year.
These are understood to be the key findings from a long-awaited review of university funding conducted by Lord Browne, the former head of BP. The recommendations have been welcomed by senior ministers after the peer delivered them his report at the weekend.
The Government is now drawing up plans to offer large “mortgage-style” loans to students to cover the increased costs of their studies. Many graduates will spend almost an entire working lifetime repaying the money. The new system is set to be introduced in 2012.
The current practice of effectively interest-free loans will be scrapped for all but the lowest earners with a new “tiered” system of repayments. Lord Browne is expected to allow graduates to repay their debts early and avoid the higher interest charges. However, ministers may prevent early repayment as the Liberal Democrats believe that higher earners should pay more for their education.
Sources said that anyone earning more than £21,000 a year will face interest of about two per cent more than inflation on their debts. They will be able to borrow money to cover their tuition fees plus about £4,000 annually for living costs. Some graduates on the most popular courses at the best universities could leave university with debts approaching £50,000. It is expected that graduates will have to repay their loans at a rate of about nine per cent of earnings each year. The debts will only be written off after 30 years.
Senior government sources insisted last night that the new system was designed to protect lower earners and not deter those from poorer backgrounds from going to university. Only about 40 per cent of university graduates will repay their entire loans - including interest - with the rest of the debts being written off by the Government.
About one in five low earners will actually pay less than under the current arrangements.
It is thought that students from many middle-income households, earning up to about £60,000 annually, will be given government grants to help with the increased costs.
However, according to calculations by this newspaper, a person earning £60,000 a year will face monthly payments of about £300 to cover a cheap degree and living costs. This would rise to more than £600 if they were charged £12,000 annually for their university course.
The Daily Telegraph understands that the plans to increase costs will be accompanied by a major drive to improve the quality of universities.
Lord Browne’s report is also expected to recommend that:
* Only students meeting a “minimum entry standard” - to be set by the Government - will qualify for government loans;
* There will be a 10 per cent rise in places, with popular universities free to expand as they wish and weaker universities contracting or closing;
* Universities will have to provide “student charters” that will include commitments on teaching and class sizes. Those charging higher fees will be expected to give stronger commitments;
* Universities will have to publish figures showing the average salary and employment prospects for graduates;
* Students will be able to study part-time and receive government funding, allowing those from poorer backgrounds to work and study.
Under Lord Browne’s blueprint, universities will be free to charge as much as they wish for degrees - with students better able to assess the value of their education by gaining more information about their career prospects.
Sources said last night that the system would discourage universities from charging more than £6,000 or £7,000 annually. Above this, they would only be able to keep some of the extra money raised, with a large portion returned to the Government.
It is expected that central government funding for universities will be almost entirely removed. In future, taxpayer-funded central grants are likely to be heavily targeted and only available to courses in medicine, science, technology and other specialist areas.
David Cameron yesterday urged the Liberal Democrats and Labour to support the proposals. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, will today make a statement to MPs about Lord Browne’s report.
However, some Lib Dem MPs, including Greg Mulholland and John Leech, have already pledged to vote against any fee increase, prompting fears of a split in the Coalition. Yesterday, Mr Cameron said Lib Dems would have to accept a “compromise” to guarantee high standards of university education.
The Browne Review is also likely to provoke outrage among student leaders and academics.
Pam Tatlow, the chief executive of Million Plus, which represents new universities, said: “High earners working in the City are likely to be able to pay off their loans much earlier and will therefore avoid incurring higher interest rate charges. Meanwhile, those in the 'squeezed middle’ will end up paying not just the original loan but much more in interest and will pay for longer.”
Mary Bousted, the general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said they had “grave concerns” about an unlimited rise in tuition fees and any rise in the rate to repay them. “If either of these were adopted they would severely damage higher education in the UK, leave students burdened with huge debts, discourage poorer students from going to university, and discourage graduates from becoming teachers and other moderate- to lower-paid professions,” she said.
Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said some families could be left “thinking the unthinkable and choosing which child to send”.
Source
No. No.
At this rate, we're going to revert back to having a tiny minority who can afford it, which is beyond ridiculous. Why not have a Graduate Tax? Why not make us pay for our degrees when we can actually pay?