RUK fees: Behind the headlines

In introducing this policy the cabinet secretary Michael Russell said it gave him no pleasure and he would rather no student, whatever their domicile, had to pay fees to study in Scotland. Universities Scotland described the Scottish Government’s decision as a tough and difficult choice. It’s fair to say there are no enthusiasts for the necessary increase to fees paid by students resident in the rest of the UK.

As fees are published and newspapers rush to reduce detailed announcements to a single sensationalist headline of £9,000 a year, I’m concerned that much is being overlooked. Central to these concerns is the reason why these changes are necessary in the first place. This is a decision the Scottish Government had to make in response to the UK government’s decision to transfer the majority of the costs of university education to the individual. The Scottish Government, by contrast, chose to keep higher education free for those it represents. As with all devolved areas, it is the Scottish Government’s right to prioritise spending as it sees fit.

For the Scottish Government to continue to subsidise the university education of students who study in Scotland from across the rest of the UK, when the government with direct responsibility for these students does not, would be unaffordable. Worse still, to do so would have brought untenable pressure on places for Scottish students at Scottish universities. This is the second issue: had fees stayed at £1,800, Scotland’s high-quality universities would have been overwhelmed by applicants looking to avoid high fees elsewhere in the UK. With university applicants from the rest of the UK outnumbering Scottish applicants by twelve to one, Scottish applicants would have been squeezed out of Scottish universities. Principals, the Scottish Government and student bodies across Scotland could not have stood by and watched this happen.

In addition, much of the detail in the fee announcements we’ve seen so far has simply been ignored. Three universities have capped their fees in line with the standard (though far from universal) three-year degree length in England. Universities have also highlighted opportunities for direct entry into year two for A-level candidates. In short, no student need be financially disadvantaged by Scotland’s four-year degree. Universities have also voluntarily set out significant new and additional bursary schemes based on household income and academic ability. Finally, at the time of writing, three-quarters of universities are still to announce their fees. Talk of a rush to the top based on a handful of announcements is premature at best and, at worst, damaging. We can expect to see further variety in the announcements to come over the next few weeks.

Scotland’s universities are justifiably proud of the quality of education they offer and the cosmopolitan mix of their student body. It is for these reasons they are in demand from students across the UK and internationally. They want to retain and enhance their reputation in both of these areas. Confronted with the consequences of decisions taken elsewhere, the policy the Scottish Government has brought forward offers universities the best chance of achieving that.