We should reconsider how to give everybody the same right to education

It was the American singer-songwriter Johnny Mercer who said you’ve got to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative. This is no mean feat when considering the Scottish Government’s record on education. The SNP have delivered a clutter of broken promises, from class sizes and student finance to failing to provide all pupils with two hours of quality PE each week. They have offered up a morass of confusion through their inability to properly communicate the Curriculum for Excellence - one of the most significant changes in school education for a generation - and have singularly failed to offer a full and independent review of higher education preferring instead to internalise any review to the navel-gazing of a select, hand-picked few.

This last point is particularly serious. In the face of widening access, tightening budgets and higher student demand, Scottish universities are under intense pressure to maintain their internationally-renowned levels of excellence in teaching and research. Competing university sectors are continually improving and student fees have already given English universities an extra revenue source that Scottish universities lack. This funding gap which is likely to widen once Lord Browne’s review reports back on 11 October. Scotland simply cannot afford to stand still so, in the spirit of Mercer’s words, let me be more positive and offer a constructive, Conservative view of what must be addressed.

Firstly, the overwhelming majority of key stakeholders believe that the status quo for funding in Scotland is no longer viable. This has been compounded by the Scottish Government’s abolition of the graduate endowment.

Secondly, they also believe – albeit in some cases reluctantly – that there must be some form of a student contribution to reflect both the marginal social benefits and the marginal private benefits derived from a university degree.

Thirdly, any new funding system which is introduced will need to satisfy four key principles: 1) it should be needs-blind so that academic merit and not personal wealth or background is the determinant of a university place; 2) any system of repayment should be income-contingent so that the more risk-averse and less affluent are not deterred from university; 3) fees should be variable in order to drive up competition between universities; and 4) whatever system is adopted must preserve or enhance the very important autonomy of Scottish universities from government interference.

Fourthly, on the basis of the principles outlined above up-front tuition fees should be rejected. Notwithstanding Browne’s recommendations our current thinking is to have some form of deferred fee, perhaps even including a ‘package deal’ where students could pay back the costs of their educational tuition and living costs in a combined loan repayment.

Finally, reform of higher education must not be confined to financial matters. Higher education policy needs to be delivered in tandem with those which promote school reform; most especially those which make formal, top quality vocational training a more available option at an earlier age, and those which allow much greater flexibility within the examination system. There is a very strong educational argument for greater flexibility within SQA exams and other non-SQA qualifications and for allowing universities, if they so wish, to look at offering shorter degree courses in Scotland.