Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Scrapping of graduate endowment hits setback

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
13 December 2007
A BILL to scrap the fee paid by students once they graduate, a flagship policy of the Scottish Government, has been thrown into uncertainty after MSPs yesterday voted to reject it.
Members of Holyrood's education committee recommended the principles of the legislation to abolish graduate endowment should not be agreed when the proposal comes before the entire parliament next week.

The eight-strong committee was split evenly
, with Labour and Conservative members voting against the proposal and Nationalists and Liberal Democrats backing the bill. It was rejected on the convener's casting vote.

The bill aims to end the £2,289 charge, introduced in 2001 and paid by Scots who graduate in this country.

The committee's decision indicates that next week's vote is likely to go right to the wire. Labour MSPs are now expected to vote to reject the bill next Thursday. And the Tories have said they will not support it.

The Scotsman understands the Lib Dems will back the SNP. And if independent MSP Margo MacDonald and the Green party supported the legislation, the outcome would depend on the decisions of just two MSPs.

The move to scrap the fee is part of the Scottish Government's bid, and a key manifesto promise, to move from a system of student loans to grants.

The SNP has argued very little income is generated from the endowment as most of those eligible to pay add it on to their student loan and effectively delay payment for several years.

The stage-one debate of the Graduate Endowment Abolition Bill will take place next Thursday followed by a vote by MSPs.

However, in yesterday's committee vote, which was held in private, convener Karen Whitefield used her casting vote against ditching the fee. The Labour MSP said the estimated £17 million it would cost to scrap the charge could be invested in higher education.

"The committee believes that the funding required to be foregone so that the graduate endowment can be abolished would be better invested in other methods.

"This would help to retain a competitive edge in the delivery of high-quality higher education and to widen access including, for example, more funding directly for universities and in the current system of bursaries.

"The committee remains unconvinced that the removal of the graduate endowment goes far enough in removing barriers to access to higher education."

Last night Fiona Hyslop, the education secretary, said she remained committed to scrapping the fee and was "disappointed" by the committee's decision.

Murdo Fraser, the Tory education spokesman, said: "No evidence has been produced to prove that abolishing the endowment will have a beneficial impact on widening access to higher education. In this respect, the SNP has totally failed to make any sort of coherent case."

Robin Harper, co-convener of the Greens, said his party favoured a return to grants.

He said: "Greens have opposed tuition fees from the start, no matter how they've been rebranded. They meant students from low-income backgrounds are deterred from taking part in higher education. We'll be delighted if our votes help secure the abolition of fees."



The full article contains 522 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

 Ayrshire Scot™,

13/12/2007 01:29:20

Labour are a disgrace. They were complaining about students being affected by not writing off loans, but now vote against scrapping the endowment.

2

subrosa,

13/12/2007 02:00:56

#1 Exactly. Well at least students will know not to trust them or the tories. This is being done to undermine the SNP government of course, it's nothing to do with common sense. It's done purely to undermine Scotland's students.

3

Comment is Free,

U.S. 13/12/2007 02:10:09

I disagree with the Labour and Tory position on this. Granted that my education debt is in the U.S., my opinion will not carry much weight.

With the current debate within New Labour as to how exactly much of Labour they want to carry-over to the new Party, I can see why they would have voted down the proposal of scrapping the endowment. Fewer people who graduate from Unvesity = a larger pool of potential trade unionists. For New Labour, this could simply be a numbers game for future votes.

For the Conservative and Unionist Party this is explicable under similar but different parameters vis-a-vis New Labour. The Conservative and Unionist Party are having an identity problem as well. They are not certain how to be Unionist and Scottish at the same time. Scrapping the endowment could be seen by the Conservative and Unionist Party as a way to keep Scotland from getting a comparative advantage against England in the Education Market. Therefore, voting against scrapping the endowment could be seen as retaining parity for England with Scotland in the Education Market.

What is confusing to me is, why wouldn't all the political parties in Scotland be doing everything they could do to put the long-standing Scottish tradition of a culture of education to excellent usage in the modern age?

What does become clear in all of this is that the SNP really are consistently the only Party currently sitting at Holyrood, with the intention of a Royal Flush for Scotland, whereas the other Parties seem to want to give Scotland only a few of the key cards.

Best wishes to the people in Scotland who are suffering under the credit crunch and education debt that we are suffering under in the U.S. Hopefully things will turn out for the best in both places.

Cheers!

4

,

13/12/2007 02:59:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Scullion,

Canada 13/12/2007 02:59:53

Forgive my ignorance but I've read some conflicting reports as to the amount of tuition paid at Scottish universities.
How much is a typical 4 year undergraduate program in, say, general arts e.g. history? To this figure do we then add this final "endowment" of $5,000?

6

,

13/12/2007 03:37:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

,

13/12/2007 03:44:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

Desert Hawk,

UAE 13/12/2007 04:13:24

Having gone through university in the early 80s on the joys of the grant system, I feel very sorry for the kids of today who leave with massive debts from University. As a working class kid I probably would not go today due to the level of debt. If you are a dosser or single mum or an asylum seeker you get, go to university or college and you come out with a huge weight around your neck. Funny old world isn't it?

9

subrosa,

13/12/2007 04:25:03

I see the comments have been deleted from the article concerning the police wanting more money to protect VIPs. It was open earlier. Disappointing.

10

donald,

weegieland 13/12/2007 07:28:56

I see the comments have been deleted from the article concerning the police wanting more money to protect VIPs. It was open earlier. Disappointing.

Scrap the Queen.

11

Boy Wonder,

13/12/2007 08:36:26

Give it a day or so and the Hootsmon will try to convince us the SNP reneged on their election pledge, without the Tories or Labour being involved!

12

Nick_Byrne,

Glasgow 13/12/2007 09:23:38

Some people have an odd idea of what freedom of speech is.

Believe it or not, it is not the right to post whatever the hell you like on a newspaper's website.

Try living somewhere where freedom of speech is actually curtailed and you'll see the difference.

But anyway.

I actually believe the Lab/Tory position of this has some merit.

Scrapping the endowment won't create any new university places, it won't affect the disadvantaged as they don't pay it and it is substantially less than having to fork over tuition fees.

Plus aren't we always being told the average graduate salary in Scotland in now over £20,000 (not that I noticed - still no where near that) so it shouldn't really hurt a graduate.

No doubt I be attacked for saying this.

13

Nick_Byrne,

Glasgow 13/12/2007 09:26:33

No doubt I be typing like a pirate?

14

connaughtboy,

13/12/2007 09:26:44

Fiona, to decribe this as a "setback" is sensationalist nonsense. The Libdems and the Greens will support it. The Government will prevail.

15

Seannair,

Oban 13/12/2007 09:41:52

It is not surprising to me that someone who approves of comment about the Westminster government being moderated should also think that Karen Whitfield and her colleagues would recognise a principle if they sat on it.All three Labour members of the committee enjoyed free university education.

16

james 1st,

nz 13/12/2007 09:46:29

well i support the snp but i dont think that this is a good policy. people should be willing to pay, they have recieved the education which is an asset for life

17

Flora S,

Edinburgh 13/12/2007 09:46:34

Nick Byrne comments that the "disadvantaged" won't pay the graduate endowment fee. It is true that some groups of people, for example disabled students, are exempt from paying the fee, but those from disadvanted families or circumstances are not necessarily exempt. They will be required to pay in the same way as those from wealthier and more advantaged backgrounds.

Make the student support system simple and transparent, but don't force people into higher education that won't help in the long-term. Ask anyone about the value of a degree these days, does it guarantee a well paid job with lots of prospects? What about vocational courses and trade apprenticeships? Bring back the balance needed in education. The graduate endowment just adds to the complexity of a system that is not serving the needs of Scotland's people and its economy.

18

HughB,

Edinburgh 13/12/2007 09:53:33

This is a flawed system which will cause an even bigger disaster than the credit crunch.

Graduates may tend to earn more, but they also pay more tax, which itself contributes to the education system (oh sorry, I forgot that any tax collected from Scotland goes south).

With the amount of debt and soaring house prices, the economy will collapse totally, probably within the next 10 years. The so called "experts" can't add things up, can they. They want to keep salaries down, they want us to spend more, and they want house prices to keep going up. It just doesn't make any sense at all. It makes even less sense to burden young people with massive debt before they've even started (although debt which is massive for the young is nothing relative to the money being raked in by these policy makers).

19

connaughtboy,

13/12/2007 10:20:39

#16 james

Why should people pay twice? They will be paying taxes for the rest of their lives. Imagine we applied the same means testing to the NHS, there would be an outcry.

20

Gregor Addison,

Scotland 13/12/2007 10:39:36

The final decision on the plans will be made by the full parliament. Surely that means it will get through with Lib Dem support.

21

connaughtboy,

13/12/2007 11:29:44

Karen Whitefield used her casting vote against ditching the fee. The Labour MSP said:
"
"The committee remains unconvinced that the removal of the graduate endowment goes far enough in removing barriers to access to higher education."

Interesting quote from the Labour MSP there. So, what she is really saying is that there are barriers to accessing higher education and that the SNP proposal will help to remove these but more is needed.

Ermm. Sounds like a strong indictment of the 8 year Lab/Libdem Executive. Hope she doesn't get Wendy angry for saying this........

22

Makes Sense,

13/12/2007 23:03:45
The education committee, which is scrutinising the legislation to abolish the endowment, was evenly split on whether to back it, but it's convener, Labour MSP Karen Whitefield, used her casting vote against the bill.
23

Eve,

Scotland 13/12/2007 23:14:36
The Labour and Conservative members are behaving like a bunch of eejits. Few students upon graduation enter in to well paid job, because the well paid jobs want experience (which can ranges from 6months to 3years) & the degree some time they even want masters or Phd in the subject too. So charging students about £2,300 is only adding to the amount the student already owe through there student loan which all students in Scotland need to apply for because their no grants (or few grants available of small insignificant amounts of money). The interst on student loans is really high and can equal a couple of hundreds pound in 1 year. It's better to tax us graduate fairly (at a larger %) after we're reciving the finatial benfit. And NOT thaeing a large student loan permently hanging over your head apparently it can go against you if you want a morgage.
24

democrate,

central Scotland 14/12/2007 01:17:10
Can we now have a statement from ms Karen Whitefield on her educational qualifications? She claims to have a degree gained in 1991 from a Uni which came into being in 1993. Sounds like a fib to me.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.