Site disruption

We are doing some essential maintenance work and you will not be able to register or update your profile setting until we've finished, which should be at about 9pm this evening.

We apologise for any inconvenience - you will be able to register shortly. In the mean time you will still be able to log in as usual.

Letter: Dearing, do... (2)

Published on
October 12, 2001
Last updated
May 22, 2015

Peter Lampl contends that "rich students should pay the full cost of tuition fees to subsidise poor undergraduates" ("Lampl: fee system is rigged", THES , October 5), but there are few rich students, even if their parents are wealthy.

The error lies in the failure to accept that a student is an adult and, as such, must be treated on their own standing, not their parents'. No student would want to be patronised in the way Lampl proposes.

Eighteen-year-olds only become adults when the government wants them for cannon-fodder. Earlier governments recognised - or were properly informed by civil servants - that money paid out through grant and tuition fees was amply returned via general taxation, usually many times over. The loans plus up-front tuition fees model has worked perfectly to preserve higher education and the higher-paid professions for the well-off.

The government must grasp a simple truth - that higher education is no more a luxury than primary education. A society that does not ensure that anyone capable and willing should gain the opportunity of higher studies will face economic collapse.

Andrew Morgan
Swansea

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT