Maintenance grants only for priority courses ‘deeply concerning’

Well do you know, I read these comments by these RG spokespeople etc and I really wonder if they are especially worried about the reduction in choice for students from a certain background etc and if their opposition to the policy is mainly determined by the financial imerarives for their own institutions as they see them? Maybe I am being a bit cynical but they do seem to be producing arguments for the nonce as it were. Of course, that does not invalidate the merit or otherwise of the arguments put forward. But so often (as with the international levy for example) the arguments deployed do seem to be strategic and self-interested rather than genuinely addressing the issues. Whatever the impacts of the international levy, the RG will oppose it because they see it as disadvantageous to them and they have some very high salaries to fund and justify! But maybe I am just too cynical?