I understand when the discussion becomes uncomfortable or even emotional between local fees vs international school fees. Yes, it's about the money. But money to keep the university from getting into the red. Money to prevent courses from being shut down because they have lesser students, and hence vacancies to even be offered in Clearing! Local fees are subsidised and insufficient to keep the running of the universities, and places have to be given to international students who pay 3.79 times more. I think the rhetoric of £££ being the key motivator like it's evil to make money is just not helpful. The UK govt could channel more funds to universities, perhaps and then the universities don't need to look to international students to pay the bills. Isn't the recent marking boycott a symptom of the situation that academic staff are underpaid by universities because they cannot afford to pay more, and the govt isn't subsidising enough? Some universities didn't seem to be dragged down by the marking fiasco because their teachers didn't really participate in the boycott, and because they are paid higher salaries, and this is because the universities can afford it, from having a sizeable population of international students?