It’s always been this way, hasn’t it Stephen?  You’ve always tried to do a good job, making sure everything was done right so it came out just perfect.  Unfortunately being a minister is just like playing sports at school, and this time you were the last one picked for the team.

BY BEN FINCH

So finally your chance came.  You worked towards this for years.  You became a councillor at 22, a doctor in international relations at 29, MLA and Mayor (double-jobbing, naughty naughty) at 26 and then your chance to shine arrived.  You became Minister for Employment and Learning.  You had been giving your opinion on university funding for such a long time.  You had the expertise.  You were going to do this right.

But you were the last one picked, no-one else wanted because it’s like the wrong grail in Indiana Jones that turns everyone into skeletons.  They’d all committed themselves to a freeze in tuition fees.  You hadn’t, you were open to suggestions, reasonable, and pragmatic politics.  Just as we’d expect.

But now it’s like those first few weeks at school when you’re forced out onto the pitch on a freezing cold, wet Saturday morning.  You’ve trained with the rest of them, you’re feeling fairly confident.  But now they’re kicking the ball around you and you can’t respond.  Suddenly papers you’ve tabled on fees, but decided not to discuss are leaked with a different spin; £3,290’s the favourite, not your recommended £4,500.  And to make things worse, sources claim it’s only to cover for some debacle with the DUP and Red Sky.

The ball’s been passed around you.  But it’s all right, you can track back.  Keep a cool head, chase it up and you’ll make the tackle.  But their best players are working in partnership and before you know it they’ve played a through ball that leaves you for dead.  The Cloyne inquiry’s been announced, there’s been violence on the streets.  Suddenly, the first minister and his deputy announce, without informing you, their commitment to capping fees.  You panic, you don’t answer your phone, a spokesperson for DEL utters a wry laugh when they hear no-one’s answering.

So go to the BBC, they’ll help. Just don’t appear flustered.  Get your message across clearly and calmly and you’ll stop them scoring.

“This is good news for students isn’t it?” asked the Beeb.

“Well discussions are still ongoing and no decision’s been taken yet.” Well said Stephen. Well said.

“Oh, so OFMDFM have jumped the gun?”

“Erm… No… Just… No decision’s been taken yet.”

Hard lines, you’ve been outplayed.  Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness didn’t say freezing fees was official Stormont policy, but they may as well have.  Any increase will now be seen as a major U-turn and on your head be it.  It’s the sort of thing that affects every family in the land, and they’re all struggling enough as it is.   You may as well call it full time, announce that the cap on fees is staying and figure out the details later.

Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness today restated the pledges in their election manifestos to keep tuition fees at the current level.

BY BEN FINCH

Speaking at a press conference they confirmed fees would be maintained at £3290 for students beginning courses in 2012. They stated that the only rises would be in line with inflation.

Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster Stephen Farry, Minister for Employment and Learning and Alliance MLA, said: “We haven’t come to any firm decisions.

“We need to be clear what the funding regime is going to be.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Employment and Learning (DEL) said: “Discussions are still ongoing at DEL, there’s lots of detail still to be worked out.” It appears today’s statement was made without the knowledge of the department. DEL is the department responsible for universities.

Farry denied that Robinson and McGuinness had “jumped the gun.”

Jason O’Neill, president of QUB Students’ Union, said: “It’s fantastic to hear an official announcement from the First Minister and Deputy First Minister that fees will be kept at the current rate.

“This will ensure that Northern Ireland can maintain it’s place as a region in the UK which has the highest proportion of students from low income backgrounds.

“Now the onus is on the executive to ensure that £40m shortfall in the DEL budget is filled so that the provision of higher education is kept to a high standard.”

Queen’s were not prepared to make a statement. The Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister were unavailable to comment.

On 22^nd June, QUB Vice Chancellor Peter Gregson provided a brief summary to Senate on the Russell Group submission to the Browne Review. However, Shane Brogan, Students’ Union President at the time, believes that the summary failed to adequately describe what their proposals would mean for students.

BY KERRI-ANNE CAMPBELL

Due to the recent emergency budget, it is inevitable that there will be substantial reductions in university funding from government sources. Shane Brogan stated that Queen’s Students’ Union understands this but he believes the report to be a “systematic attempt to remove the shallow façade of fairness in the current fees system”.

If implemented, the report would see graduates being forced to pay back student loans earlier, the removal of any form of government support for student loans, and students bearing most of the costs of their degree, which the Russell Group set at being between £7,000 and £14,000 depending on the subject.

It would also mean that the protection of the ability to access higher education would be eroded through the abolition of the cap on fees, allowing the most elite and highest quality universities to charge unprecedented fees that put them beyond the reach of many students. This would mean that Queen’s would become like the Ivy League Universities of America.

The report also proposes a number of unfair models to finance student debt involving the Private Sector, many of which transfer substantial risks to students, and again reduce fairness and equality within the higher education sector.

“The proposals are a complete abdication of a university’s responsibility to work in the best interests of its students, and are blatant attempts to channel government money that currently support the poorest and most disadvantaged students, away from them and into university funds,”said Brogan.

He raised a number of comments relating to student fees during Gregson’s report. The university and Russell Group propose a model that is “free at the point of entry”, and where this is technically true in terms of fees, it fails to acknowledge the hidden costs that the university applies throughout a degree.

According to Brogan, the report also failed to address the fact that the average student who started at a NI university in September 2008-2009 can expect to graduate with an average debt of £13,299, a 30% increase on the previous year. This figure is predicted to be more than £15,000 by the time QUB students who started in September 2009 have graduated.

To help pay for the substantial cost of higher education, students in Belfast have one of the highest part-time employment rates during term time of any UK university town.

Russell Group is currently lobbying for a move away from the cap on fees, while at the same time acknowledging the fact that an increase in student fees would inevitably make students reconsider enrolling in university. The Vice Chancellor’s report quotes the initial findings of the Browne Review, which found that students are often deterred by fees.

Vice Chancellor Gregson claimed that a substantial portion of the population supports those that currently benefit from Higher Education and are responsible for contributing. This is recognised by those involved in higher education. However, over the past year all parties, bar that of the relevant minister, have refused to endorse an increase in fees, with both Sinn Fein and SDLP actively committed to their removal.

Brogan said, “The Student’s Union is disappointed that the Report has failed to acknowledge the only fully evaluated proposal put forward to the review by the National Union of Students. The National Union of Students propose a progressive and fairer way of funding student and graduate contributions and protects students from grossly unfair and inevitable debts, by providing a tax on graduates, meaning that the students who benefit most from Higher Education and good quality teaching contribute more over their career. It also proposes a fairer system of students support and ensures that all income streams are fully exploited.”

Brogan went on to say, “It is in no uncertain terms that the proposals of the Russell Group are strongly rejected by the SU and the wider student body at Queen’s, with a record 1,242 voting in a referendum on the issue on 27 May. 1,193, or 96% of them voted against the proposal.”

A confidential government report has recommended that university tuition fees should not rise, and that access to student grants should be extended. The review delivers a crippling blow to QUB’s support towards increasing students’ fees.

BY LORCAN MULLEN

The interim report is the result of a government review, chaired by Joanne Stuart, head of the Institute of Directors in Northern Ireland. The review was designed to offer an objective examination of tuition fees for political debates on the future of higher education in Northern Ireland.

Considering evidence provided by universities, students’ unions, and other concerned parties, Stuart’s review advises that the cap on tuition fees should remain, and that access to grants should encompass more students from middle-income homes.

The report also undermines the whole rationale behind the existence of tuition fees as a source of funding. It states that the review body “found it difficult to link the additional income generated from the introduction of variable fees with an improved student experience.”

“In essence, students are customers and will rightly demand a high level of service and the ability to see how their money is being spent… If serious consideration is to be given to increasing the fee cap, then the HEIs will need to be able to show the improvements to the quality of the student’s educational experience,” the report asserts.

The tuition fees system, introduced in 2006, currently requires students to pay £3225 per year of university study, increasing with inflation. Queen’s University, as part of the ‘Russell Group’, have led calls to more than double this figure. The stance has had political support from the Business Secretary Lord Mandelson (responsible for UK university policy), and lobbying group the CBI.

Stuart’s review echoes the complaints of student campaigners; that the additional income from increased fees has not been honestly accounted for in the expenditure of universities.

“Currently, only a portion of the income generated through the increase in student fees in 2006 has been ring fenced for reporting purposes…it is therefore difficult to report exactly on how the revenue has been spent and any improvements that have been made as a direct result of the additional income. There should be greater transparency of how additional income from fees is being spent,” the report concludes.

However, the document dismisses the common argument that increased fees restrict access to lower-income students. The draft review finds that “there is no evidence of an adverse impact on participation or in subject areas as a direct result of the introduction of variable fees”.

The final report will be read by the department for employment and learning’s Sir Reg Empey, and will also be presented to the Assembly’s DEL committee. An extensive consultation period will follow the report’s publication, ahead of any decisions on the future shape of the system. It is unclear how the Stuart Review will impact the fees debate, in light of the Government’s proposed University funding cuts.