I understand why people might object to tuition fees on a matter of principle, but

[Ash]

when people talk about them “saddling young people with a lifetime of debt", isn’t this patently b*llocks?

They only have to start paying it off when they can afford to do so and only then at a level commensurate with their earnings.

That’s leaving aside the other benefits, such as it discouraging people from going to Uni for a jolly.

The problem, imo, started with Tony Blair sitting on his sofa with his chums and they were saying "Now look, we've all done ok for ourselves. What is it about us? We went to university, of course! So if everyone goes to university, everyone will get nice middle class jobs. Woohoo!"

What this policy of HE expansion failed to address is that thousands more people getting utterly pointless and valueless qualifications in shít subjects at considerable expense doesn't actually create any jobs at all. It just means that you are now expected to have a degree to do almost any job above a building site.

[World's End Stella]

The problem, imo, started with Tony Blair sitting on his sofa with his chums and they were saying "Now look, we've all done ok for ourselves. What is it about us? We went to university, of course! So if everyone goes to university, everyone will get nice middle class jobs. Woohoo!"

What this policy of HE expansion failed to address is that thousands more people getting utterly pointless and valueless qualifications in shít subjects at considerable expense doesn't actually create any jobs at all. It just means that you are now expected to have a degree to do almost any job above a building site.

Exactly. The cost of university would be a lot easier to fund if we were only sending the top 15% of students to university as in days gone by. The rest is just a PR exercise which has wasted a lot of people's time and money.