Can Labour pay for university fee cut?

Please Christ fix the poor excuse for a means-tested maintenance loan system before doing anything with tuition fees...

Reply 82

Izzyeviel

19

Original post by spleenharvester

Please Christ fix the poor excuse for a means-tested maintenance loan system before doing anything with tuition fees...

How would you fix it?

Reply 83

Original post by Izzyeviel

How would you fix it?

In my opinion it should either be a) an entirely fixed quantity depending upon the relative livings costs of the university you are looking to attend, or b) same as a, but with a smaller percentage (than the ~40% now) being means tested.

The reasons for this is that a lot of people are currently falling through the net, admittedly myself included. A heavily means-tested loan assumes that parents are both able and willing to support their child financially. In reality, this is often untrue, as parents may have other important financial commitments or simply not want to support their child. As a result of that, someone from a poorer background will be far better off loan-wise than someone from a richer background who does not receive any financial support.

Myself, for example - my annual outgoings at university (rent, food, all of it) come to £6300 (in some of the cheapest accommodation I can find on a strict budget). My maintenance loan is £4100, which is £2200 lower than my outgoings, due to my parents being financially loaded. However, they will not support me financially, so I have to work a 60 hour-week job over the summer in order to not land myself in immediate debt. Whereas someone from a poorer background who also does not receive financial support will not need to do that. This has made it extremely difficult for me to be able to volunteer in order to apply for graduate entry medicine, as that time is now taken up by full time work.

Not to mention the max loans are completely excessive. I have friends who are getting max loan + grant which is £1500+ greater than their annual outgoings. There is literally no reason why that is necessary.

Thought about this long and hard so I'm very open to discussion. :tongue:

Reply 84

CJKay

19

Original post by Rakas21

According to league tables.

And according to you the same rules don't apply to the British university system?

Reply 85

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by spleenharvester

In my opinion it should either be a) an entirely fixed quantity depending upon the relative livings costs of the university you are looking to attend, or b) same as a, but with a smaller percentage (than the ~40% now) being means tested.

The reasons for this is that a lot of people are currently falling through the net, admittedly myself included. A heavily means-tested loan assumes that parents are both able and willing to support their child financially. In reality, this is often untrue, as parents may have other important financial commitments or simply not want to support their child. As a result of that, someone from a poorer background will be far better off loan-wise than someone from a richer background who does not receive any financial support.

Myself, for example - my annual outgoings at university (rent, food, all of it) come to £6300 (in some of the cheapest accommodation I can find on a strict budget). My maintenance loan is £4100, which is £2200 lower than my outgoings, due to my parents being financially loaded. However, they will not support me financially, so I have to work a 60 hour-week job over the summer in order to not land myself in immediate debt. Whereas someone from a poorer background who also does not receive financial support will not need to do that. This has made it extremely difficult for me to be able to volunteer in order to apply for graduate entry medicine, as that time is now taken up by full time work.

Not to mention the max loans are completely excessive. I have friends who are getting max loan + grant which is £1500+ greater than their annual outgoings. There is literally no reason why that is necessary.

Thought about this long and hard so I'm very open to discussion. :tongue:

Only 1500? I have heard of people at my un, that after all their grants, loans and bursaries have in excess of 10k, cheapest accommodation and frugal living is maybe 6-7k, and 10 is more than enough for the most expensive accommodation and very comfortable spending ability

l am a fan of the first option, will be complicate to make it hard to abuse, but I should have to bare the burden of increasing MY future income, not my parents. I also think the terms are too soft, - it shouldn't be written off and assets should be siezed on death if necessary

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 86

Original post by Jammy Duel

Only 1500? I have heard of people at my un, that after all their grants, loans and bursaries have in excess of 10k, cheapest accommodation and frugal living is maybe 6-7k, and 10 is more than enough for the most expensive accommodation and very comfortable spending ability

Posted from TSR Mobile

Precisely. Even if they just reduced the maximum loan by ~£1500 and increased the minimum loan proportionally, I think an awful lot of people would be in a better position.

Reply 87

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by spleenharvester

Precisely. Even if they just reduced the maximum loan by ~£1500 and increased the minimum loan proportionally, I think an awful lot of people would be in a better position.

live added an extra bit since

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 88

Original post by Jammy Duel

l am a fan of the first option, will be complicate to make it hard to abuse, but I should have to bare the burden of increasing MY future income, not my parents. I also think the terms are too soft, - it shouldn't be written off and assets should be siezed on death if necessary

Agree totally on the first part, I think it would just give far more equal opportunities for people across the board.

As for writing the loans off - complicated issue, but I suppose it would address the rather tentative issue of "mickey mouse degrees", many of the graduates of which will not get a job with and simply will not pay back the majority of their loan.

Personally I disagree, as with the tuition fee raises, there are going to be a lot of people who retire before paying the tail end of their loan. Plus what about families, etc? There would be consequences of trying to seize thousands upon thousands of pounds if someone died suddenly, for example. I think it's a rather tricky road to go down.

If I remember correctly, something changed recently meaning they can change rules even after people have graduated, as to how much people pay back per month. I think if the system began bursting at the seems, that would probably be their first port of call. :smile:

Reply 89

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by spleenharvester

Agree totally on the first part, I think it would just give far more equal opportunities for people across the board.

As for writing the loans off - complicated issue, but I suppose it would address the rather tentative issue of "mickey mouse degrees", many of the graduates of which will not get a job with and simply will not pay back the majority of their loan.

Personally I disagree, as with the tuition fee raises, there are going to be a lot of people who retire before paying the tail end of their loan. Plus what about families, etc? There would be consequences of trying to seize thousands upon thousands of pounds if someone died suddenly, for example. I think it's a rather tricky road to go down.

If I remember correctly, something changed recently meaning they can change rules even after people have graduated, as to how much people pay back per month. I think if the system began bursting at the seems, that would probably be their first port of call. :smile:

At the very least they shouldn't be written off until, at the earliest, retirement. Personally, I would like to see them not be written off until death given that some, even in retirement, will have incomes above the threshold, although admittedly these people will have probably paid it off long ago. Upon retirement (or retirement age, whichever is higher) interest should be decreased to just inflation (or zero in the case of deflation); as long as you're earning you should be paying. Obviously, this will all come with a decreased interest rate. As for seizure of assets on death, well I suppose you could include a provision such that there must be a certain amount that cannot be seized, so as to be able to cover funeral expenses.

As for families, are there not already rules in place for private loans? In essence, what I want to see is the student loans being treated more like a private loan, not a namby pamby "you can pay it off, but you don't have to if you're an idiot" sort of thing. At the last policy social I went to the policy (without the seizure of assets on death) was not unpopular (in that it passed, but not with too significant a majority), admittedly it was a Conservative social :biggrin:

(Where we advocated raids against Norther France when it got to the "silly" ideas at the end)

Reply 90

If Labour reduced the tuition fees at least graduates would be able to pay a lot more of their loan back! I'm paying a stupid amount of tuition to only have 7 hours of contact time a week!

Reply 91

Original post by Browniesandcoke

If Labour reduced the tuition fees at least graduates would be able to pay a lot more of their loan back! I'm paying a stupid amount of tuition to only have 7 hours of contact time a week!

Did you not research the course? Or are the tuition fees value for money?

If neither, why'd you accept the offer? :s-smilie:

Reply 92

I'm hoping to teach at the end of my degree, but even then I will pay another £9000 for PGCE on top of the £27000! Why should potentially great teachers be put off with such high tuition fees! Degrees in nursing are funded so why shouldn't trainee teachers get funded.

Reply 93

Original post by Browniesandcoke

I'm hoping to teach at the end of my degree, but even then I will pay another £9000 for PGCE on top of the £27000! Why should potentially great teachers be put off with such high tuition fees! Degrees in nursing are funded so why shouldn't trainee teachers get funded.

Evidently you aren't put off....

Or aren't you a potentially great teacher?

Reply 94

No i'm not put off and i'm protesting for lower tuition fees!
Are you even a student?

Reply 95

Original post by Browniesandcoke

No i'm not put off and i'm protesting for lower tuition fees!
Are you even a student?

No, just an NUS cardholder these days.

You're not making a very good case for it. Most protesters don't voluntarily pay up to the thing they are protesting about.

Reply 96

I have no choice if I want to be a teacher! I don't see why people are saying paying £9000 a year not including living costs is okay?! My university student union are protesting for lower tuition fees and why shouldn't they?

Reply 97

Original post by Browniesandcoke

I have no choice if I want to be a teacher! I don't see why people are saying paying £9000 a year not including living costs is okay?! My university student union are protesting for lower tuition fees and why shouldn't they?

Yes you do, you can teach without a PGCE. And even if you want to go down that routel since you can get a £25k bursary for doing a PGCE it doesn't sound too terrible.

Especially since you don't pay the fee upfront anymore.

They can do whatever they like, I'm just saying you're not making a very good case.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 98

You have to have QTS! £25000 for those that do a maths or science degree yes but not for other subjects!
Who would even be able to pay it upfront though. By putting up tuition fees they contradicted the main issue with schools today, that children from low income backgrounds achieve much lower than rich kids and the national average. Many college students are put off by the debt.
You can say what you want about me.

Reply 99