By Donal Blaney, Chief Executive and Co-Founder of the Young Britons’ Foundation.
Paul Goodman’s ever-insightful analysis on Lord Browne’s proposed tuition fees/graduate tax hybrid is bang on the money. Sadly the coalition seems set to fall into the trap that so many consensus-builders do: we end up with a bugger’s muddle that pleases nobody. If so, a once in a generation opportunity will be missed.
The reality is that the Conservatives could and should advocate a truly radical solution along the lines of the Party’s 2001 election manifesto pledge that said:
“Our universities used to be the best in the world. Many of them still have a formidable reputation, but they are under threat from interference by politicians and uncertainty over their funding. Conservatives want our universities to be free to shape their own character and specialisms, competing with the world's best for students and research funding. To achieve their independence they need to have their own resources. We will therefore create permanent endowment funds for Britain's universities.”
Back in 2001 it was envisaged that the permanent endowment funds of £1.3bn would primarily emanate from the Exchequer. In these tough financial times that option is no longer open to any government.
Why not instead incentivize donations to universities (and, frankly, all educational institutions) in a manner akin to the United States, whereby donations are tax-deductible and thus benefit the donor? That way those alumni or other philanthropic individuals who wish to endow particular educational institutions could do so. Companies could do likewise. These donors would receive meaningful, direct and tangible tax benefits in exchange for their philanthropy – a situation infinitely preferable to the current system whereby charities receive a kick-back from the Treasury.
Just as occurs in the United States, those whose families can afford to send their offspring to university will pay for them to do so based on a free-market system, with the cost depending on the university and course chosen.
And just as occurs in the United States, with minimal bullying of universities by state or federal government, those students who are particularly gifted or from the poorest backgrounds will benefit from scholarships and bursaries – thus ensuring access for all who deserve a university education.
After all, why should the overtaxed and underpaid tea lady or the dustman pay for a child from a wealthier family to spend three years partying under the guise of studying an all too often worthless degree? Where’s the fairness in that, Vince?
