Leading academics call for reintroduction of tuition fees

The debate surrounding the re-introduction of tuition fees in Scotland has been given new life following statements made by former University of Edinburgh principal Lord Sutherland and the principal of Aberdeen University.

Speaking to The Times, Lord Sutherland said that tuition fees would improve teaching at Scottish Universities as well as provide a means of funding for poorer students.

"English Universities have had an additional stream of funding and that allows them to do things like go for the staff they want and assure them they will get the working conditions they aspire to.

"I do believe that we have to offer better scholarships to folk of disadvantaged backgrounds because the cost of living in university towns is very high."

His comments were echoed by Professor Duncan Rice, principal of the University of Aberdeen, who agreed that more income for universities was needed and poorer students would benefit from tuition fees.

The University of Edinburgh did not comment on tuition fees explicitly, but did agree with Lord Sutherland on the need for more scholarships.

A spokesperson said: "The University of Edinburgh will continue to work hard to obtain the maximum possible benefit for students from the public funding it is allocated.

"Lord Sutherland is correct to focus on the need for scholarships to support students from poor backgrounds who cannot afford fees and living costs."

Speaking to the Cross Party Group on Higher Education at the Scottish Parliament, Liam Burns, president of NUS Scotland, addressed the issue of tuition fees saying: "Under-funding students is just as much a problem for the future of Scotland as under funding universities. While we don’t know yet if there is a funding gap for Scottish universities, we do know that there are many problems with the student support system in Scotland.

"The current debate about tuition fees is therefore very puzzling to Scottish students, when what we should be debating is how we tackle student hardship, and the worrying levels of commercial debt among students in Scotland.

"…we know other countries fund their universities and students to a far greater extent than we do in the UK through general taxation. To jump straight to students to fund Scottish universities through tuition fees would therefore make no sense at all."

Mr Burns previously criticised the idea of tuition fees through an article published in The Scotsman, where he described them as "an attempt to disguise a call for more money for universities as some sort of altruistic bid to help poorer students into higher education".

The tuition fees debate in England was similarly revived through a Confederation of British Industry (CBI) report calling for students to pay more loans, pay higher fees and get smaller grants.

The report also called for the government to abandon its aim of 50 per cent of 18-30 year-olds to go into higher education, stating that "the focus must be on quality rather than quantity".

Responding to the CBI report universities minister David Lammy did not rule out the possibility of higher fees, but ensured the 50 per cent mark would stay the same.

The recommendations made by the CBI’s Higher Education Taskforce come after Nick Clegg, leader of the Lib Dems, said the party would reconsider its aim to get rid of tuition fees.

Earlier this month, a graduate tax was suggested as an alternative to tuition fees by Malcolm Grant, provost of University College London.

Grant, former head of Russell group of elite universities, said that the current annual fee in England should be replaced by higher graduate tax, payable as a proportion of a graduate's future earnings.

The concept of a graduate tax was previously rejected when top-up fees were introduced in 2006.