There's little difference in difficulty between universities

Why would those being employed to ensure comparable standards are being made state that? I'd say so long as the course is accredited and it's required to go into a field say medicine, psychology, law,engineering exc they'll be of a very similar standard. IMO these are the only people who should be attending uni anyway. It should be entry into research/ professional roles only not just something people attend for the sake of it.

Look, I don't want to offend anyone, but suggesting that academic subjects are studied to the same depth at every university is not only nonsense but very unfair and misleading. This is how people get chips on their shoulders and why, increasingly, students are upset when they get rejected or drop out.
Academic subjects can be studied with endlessly deepening rigour. If not, how could a degree be any better than a GCSE? Intellect doesn't end at undergraduate level and I'm distraught that a number of people on this site seem to think that their subject can be encapsulated by a text book or instructed coursework.
Oxford and Cambridge, I can guarantee you, are not for people who need to be taught like this.
Having said that, why is any student taking a degree who expects to be taught? This is higher education, and you should not expect to be fed from a spoon. If academia is not for you, try something else!

I sincerely hope your grasp of logic, social welfare and diplomacy are signs that you have yet to graduate.
Education exists to educate the members of a society, not just to produce vocational devotees like yourself.
The case for more advanced and abstract courses has never been more clearly presented than in your own words.