Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Teenage students lose high court battle to overturn tuition fees rise

Poll

What is your reaction to the article?

The 17-year-olds argued that allowing universities to charge students up to £9,000 a year contravenes human rights and equality legislation.

Lord Justice Elias and Mr Justice King, sitting in London, ruled that Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, had failed "fully to carry out" his public sector equality duties before implementing the regulations.

But the judges said it would "not be appropriate" to quash the rules because there had been "very substantial compliance".

It was argued on behalf of the teenagers that the fees increases would erect "a barrier" to higher education and threatened to widen the gap between rich and poor.

The judges were told that the case raised important equality issues, and the less well-off, the disabled and members of black minority ethnic groups would be particularly hit.

Click here to read the full article

All I can say is that I am glad this case has been ineffective. There are too many selfish students who simply ignore facts, such as the ease of repaying these loans and thanks to a certain government the degree has been devalued. If the increase of tuition fees deters students from pursuing certain degrees, I am glad. Plus, it is quite frankly laughable that they feel this is a breach on their "human rights" or "equality".

What are your thoughts on the issue?

(edited 12 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

bishbash72

It annoys me how things that patently have nothing to do with human rights are accused of contravening human rights.

Reply 2

Productoflabour

I enjoyed their spirit. I mean it's pretty cool, or at least I think so. However, this was doomed to fail. It doesn't erect a direct barrier to education as in a "no girls allowed" policy so there argument was pretty weak.

With regards to the judgement that Cable and the people in BIS failed to research and implement correctly it's hardly a surprise that their incompetent is it?

Reply 3

Logi

I disagree with the tuition fee rise but I'm also pretty glad they lost. Human rights legislation should not be lessened in this manner.

Reply 4

tehforum

Yeah, I wasn't expecting much.

They had their minutes of fame, now they can go back to grovelling privately about tuition fees.

:colone:

Reply 5

Notethis

Haha, hilarious. I hope they lost a lot of money.

Reply 6

Indian_Prince

well they did get quite far :tongue:

Reply 7

Steevee

What next.

23 year old man raises case against Porsche and partners for erecting barriers to the possesion of new and classy cars, arguing that the working class and minority groups would have their ability to own sweet ass rides severely hampered.

Reply 8

GETREALDOOD

Well if students want free uni places i want them to buy me a new car cos i cant see the difference

Reply 9

Snagprophet

I don't understand how black people are meant to be hit. Are black people incapable of getting jobs?

Reply 10

Electrodude

Good grief. These disgusting and heartless replies makes me sick!

Well fought for the teens... If they keep going, then maybe they'll win.

Reply 11

marcusfox

In my opinion, if anything is unfair, it is the situation as regards those students who took out a loan under the new terms (post 1998) years ago.

After all, their unpaid loan amount increases in line with inflation and interest rates, but their repayment threshold does not.

For example, a salary of £15,000 was pretty decent back in 1998, but now, in 2012, inflation adjusted it should be a little over £21,000, but the repayment threshold remains at £15,000.

The loans these students were suing over offer much better repayment terms.

(edited 12 years ago)

embarrasing.

WHAT DO WE WANT ..... FREE STUFF ..... WHEN DO WE WANT IT ..... FREE STUFF

I want a new guitar, so should everyone else pay for it? I mean, I make money from what I do with the guitar and pay taxes (hehe) with it, so surely the state (public) should subsidise that because I am inputting into the economy, right?

These two jokers need to sort out their whole attitude if they think the tuition fee rise is discrinimatory (to groups progressives think shouldn't even be labelled differently ...... oh that student oxymoron) and a violation of human rights (which one?).

Or would someone here care to explain why tuition fees are a violation of the above words and I should be listening to these well-meaning but mis-guided people.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 14

Snagprophet

Maybe assault cases should be treated as Human Rights violations, unless only criminals have human rights.

Reply 15

tehforum

I had to stifle a laugh in bed to avoid sounding like a madman.

Rep for you sir

that chant was hilarious

Original post by prog2djent

WHAT DO WE WANT ..... FREE STUFF ..... WHEN DO WE WANT IT ..... FREE STUFF

I wan't a new guitar, so should everyone else pay for it? I mean, I make money from what I do with the guitar and pay taxes (hehe) with it, so surely the state (public) should subsidise that because I am inputting into the economy, right?

These two jokers need to sort out their whole attitude if they think the tuition fee rise is discrinimatory (to groups progressives think shouldn't even be labelled differently ...... oh that student oxymoron) and someone a violation of human rights (which one?).

Or would someone here care to explain why tuition fees are a violation of the above words and I should be listening to these well-meaning but mis-guided people.

Reply 16

Infallible

Good, maybe it will bring then down a few pegs. Do they have to pay the costs? If so, that is an expensive lesson to be taught - get it?

Reply 17

welshmun

Very substantial compliance? Did they see the protests?

Reply 18

prog2djent

Original post by tehforum

I had to stifle a laugh in bed to avoid sounding like a madman.

Rep for you sir

that chant was hilarious

Reply 19

hungryaardvark

Original post by IB_19

All I can say is that I am glad this case has been ineffective.There are too many selfish students who simply ignore facts, such as the ease of repaying these loans and thanks to a certain government the degree has been devalued. If the increase of tuition fees deters students from pursuing certain degrees, I am glad.

I'm sorry, i just had to respond to this...

Judging from the tone of the above paragraph, university funding is not an issue for you. Fair enough, i wouldn't hold that against you at all. But think about this. A friend of mine is also applying to do medicine. He got 4 interviews, but 4 rejections afterwards. Thankfully, his biochem application was accepted, but thanks to the tuition fee rises he can't afford to pay the 20 grand fees that aren't covered by a student loan (he's drawn this conclusion based on the fact that vince cable has said that the current system for grad entry is being scrapped next year). Result: he's now being forced into fields he's not really interested in.

I kinda agree that degrees have been devalued of late, but what is happening here is that students are being forced not to take a degree because they come from a poorer background, rather than because they are less intelligent. that is not a valid hurdle to overcome.

Of particular concern for me is that the tories announced that along with the fee rises would come (in time) special places set aside for students who could afford to pay greatly increased fees. You see what this means? it means that if you are VERY rich, you get access to the pool of regular places plus a bunch of extra places that are only accessible to the ultra rich. that is not at all acceptable.

Bottome line: increasing the value of degrees=good. doing this by filtering out all the poor people=unacceptable.