Skip to main content

Student Fees and the NUS Pledge

There is rightly a debate about the signing of the NUS pledge by Lib Dem MPs, including myself, and what happens now about the Browne Report and any subsequent proposals.

The pledge said:
“I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative”

It is clear from that pledge that the objective is to have "a fairer alternative". The question, therefore, is whether the government's proposals are, indeed, a fairer alternative.

The test is whether they have moved from being effectively a tuition loan to what is a capped progressive graduate tax (or graduate contribution).

I am still not sure that they are progressive enough and have raised this with the government, but in defence of the proposals:

a) Up front fees are scrapped for part time students - this is important.
b) 30% of graduates pay less under the Browne proposals than under Labour's proposals.

The proposals are far more progressive than Labour's. If the option of a penalty free up front payment or advance is taken away then they become a taxation system rather than a fees system particularly given that different people pay different amounts depending upon their income.

However, more work needs to be done.

Comments

Red Rag said…
That is the biggest political cop out ever. The pledge did two things. "Vote against a rise in tuition fees" AND "pressute the government to introduce a fairer alternative"...that is an alternative to tuition fees.

If you can hide a broken pledge behind a play on words, it shows the Tories really are rubbing off on your party.

PS Cameron and Osborne cheering enthusiastically and back slapping and shaking Vince Cables hand after his speech on the broken pledge has got to be the Lib Dems lowest ebb in the coalition.....up to now.
Mike said…
It really is shameful that the Liberal Democrats should be so disingenuous. To pledge no increase in fees, but then suggest that an increase in fees is what was really intended as a "fairer altenative" is outrageous.

Liberal Democrats will be punished in the local elections next May. In the next door constituency (Solihull) three Lib Dem councillors have already left the Liberal Democrat group.
Pensfold said…
The Lib Dems should plead guilty to breaking their pledge.

However, they can justify doing so by coming up with a better (if more complicated) solution.

Lib Dems should own up to Lord Browne coming up with the better scheme after having spent a long time investigating his more complicated options.

Popular posts from this blog

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…