Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 30 September 2010

30 Sep 2010 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Higher Education

Smith, Margaret LD Edinburgh West Watch on SPTV

I will give Murdo Fraser a statistic. When the charges that the Conservatives want to introduce in Scotland were introduced in Australia, participation in higher education by males from the poorest backgrounds decreased by 38 per cent. We already have a lack of equality in educational choice in Scotland. Reintroducing fees, whether up-front, top-up, deferred or whatever, would serve only to exacerbate existing inequalities. We want to open up opportunities, not close them down.

I agree with Murdo Fraser that we are nowhere near to where any of us wants us to be. That is why we need to have proper debates, and why we welcome the publication of the green paper and the continuing consideration of ways in which access to university education can be widened for all who are able to attain that level. We remain whole-heartedly committed to supporting social mobility through education.

Mike Russell was right: there is no silver bullet. Parental income should not be seen as a golden key to higher education. That is why we cannot follow the course that is being plotted by the Tory party and Labour, which want to see the reintroduction of fees in Scotland. Make no mistake: in spite of the improvements to student support and an end being put to tuition fees and the graduate endowment—the Liberal Democrats fought for those policies—Scotland’s students are still struggling. We can see that in NUS Scotland’s “Still in the Red” report.

We recognise that the findings of the Browne review of higher education funding south of the border and any subsequent UK actions will need to be considered by the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament in due course. However, until that review is published and we know the consequences for Scotland, we should not make substantial assumptions or jump to conclusions. We will not know exactly what financial circumstances we face until the comprehensive spending review is delivered and the Scottish budget is fully revealed. That is why we support the proposal to publish a green paper on the future of higher education funding by the end of the year. Whatever the findings, I am sure that the green paper will spark open and productive discussion. Crucially, I should add that we welcome the comments of the First Minister at First Minister’s question time last week on the green paper not including a return to tuition fees. We acknowledge, of course, the real problems that our higher education institutions are facing, and we are aware that there are issues, but we are not willing to pass the burden on to our young people as a tax on learning.

Scotland has a world-class and world-renowned higher education system. It is in our hands to ensure that we not only maintain that system, but improve it. We know that Labour’s recession has hit hard. Times are tough and cash is tight, but we need to protect and support our education system so that we can build on our existing excellence.

It is not only students who benefit from higher education; our economy is directly and indirectly boosted by good graduates, research funding and the attraction of business here because of such things. Graduates already tend to pay more tax because they tend to earn more. They pay a graduate contribution all their life if they are able and lucky enough to get the kind of salaries that most graduates get. Such salaries tend to be higher than those of dustbin men.

The Tories seem to think that they can regulate which degrees are economically useful and prioritise them. I am more inclined to agree with John F Kennedy, who suggested that we

“think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation.”

At the Tory education conference, Liz Smith said:

“We start from the premise that the status quo for funding in Scotland is no longer tenable and that the decision taken by the Scottish Government to return to ‘free’ higher education was the wrong one.”

The Liberal Democrats disagree. We say that that is the wrong premise. We believe that lifting the burden of tuition fees and the graduate endowment was the right thing to do, and that it remains the right thing to do.

I move amendment S3M-7109.1, to leave out from “believes” to end and insert:

“welcomes that, thanks to the actions of the previous and current administrations in Scotland, full-time Scottish higher education students studying in Scotland pay neither tuition fees nor top-up fees; notes the ongoing Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance in England and Wales; recognises that the Scottish Government will need to consider any outcomes of this review and the potential impact on Scottish universities, which have a global reputation for excellence, and welcomes the Scottish Government’s commitment to bring forward a green paper on higher education following publication of the review.”

09:54

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 30 September 2010

In the same item of business