The government surely cannot expect students to take on such high levels of debt, at such an early age. As a student myself I regularly feel the pressure that the current £3000+ fees entail. Surely dissuading potential graduates in this way will not help the economy- especially in its current credit crunch crisis.

But Professor Malcolm Grant, provost of University College London says the issue is about ensuring high-quality education, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7947758.stm

The government has promised a review of the current £3,145 fees cap this year, at the moment almost all universities charge the maximum and the only “market” is in bursaries.

Is the current scheme really a good deal?

The current loans scheme is –apparently- an extremely good deal; so good in fact that the government can’t afford to expand university numbers in line with the population.

Alarmist talk of student debt tends to lump together bank loans and credit card debt with student loans which are repaid only when a graduate’s salary reaches £15,000. On the average graduate salary of £18,000, repayments are £5.19 a week so the current loans scheme with all interest subsidised is an excellent arrangement in comparison with the new deal.

In fact, the deal is ‘so good,’ that the government cannot afford to expand university numbers in line with the population or its former dream of increasing participation.

The universities secretary, John Denham has cut back on student numbers when the logic of recession points to encouraging more people into higher education. Shouldn’t young people (and not so young) be doing something useful instead of claiming job seekers allowance?

It is clear we are going to need graduates more than ever in the post-recession economy, something the government should be considering rather than putting more people off by increasing fees.