Uncle C
Well-known member
Semantics.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
How thick are students...
- Thread starter Rookie
- Start date
Semantics.
Sam Ovett
The New Manager Bus
Oh Gawd. One of my old best friends was there with her. Bad times he got arrested too :/
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
Nick Clegg was attacked by Labour MPs in the Commons over his party's U-turn on university tuition fees, as crowds of students protested outside.
Standing in for David Cameron at prime minister's questions, he was bombarded with Labour MPs' questions about plans to raise the annual fees cap to £9,000.
Harriet Harman said he had been "led astray" by Tories who wanted to "shove the cost" of degrees onto students.
The deputy PM said graduates who earned the least will pay less than currently.
The Lib Dem leader came under fire over his own party's about-turn on tuition fees at English universities- as Labour MPs asked him 12 questions on the topic in the half-hour session and he was accused of broken promises and a "shameful" policy.
Before joining the Conservatives in a coalition after the general election, the Lib Dems had pledged to phase out tuition fees altogether over six years. Many of the party's MPs signed a National Union of Students (NUS) pledge not to vote for higher fees if re-elected in May.
Funding 'consensus'
But responding to a review of university funding by Lord Browne, the government has announced plans to allow some universities in England to charge up to £9,000 a year from 2012 - the current cap is £3,290.
Ms Harman urged him to go outside, where thousands of protesting students were marching through Westminster, and explain how "fair" the government's plan was.
She also quoted him as having said that increasing tuition fees to £7,000 a year would be "a disaster".
"What word would he use to describe fees of £9,000?," she asked.
As Mr Clegg told her there was a "consensus" across the parties about the need to reform university funding, Ms Harman hit back: "None of us agree with tuition fees of £9,000 a year."
She suggested Mr Clegg had been "led astray" by the Conservatives, who had plans "to shove the cost of higher education on to students and their families".
A series of Labour MPs also got up to press Mr Clegg on the plans - which several of his own MPs, including former leaders Charles Kennedy and Sir Menzies Campbell, have said they will oppose.
But Mr Clegg said the government had come up with a "fair and progressive solution to a very difficult problem".
"The proposals we have put forward will mean that those who earn the least will pay much less than they do at the moment, those who earn the most will pay over the odds to provide a subsidy to allow people from poor backgrounds to go to university," he said.
He said the Lib Dems had to change policy because of the financial situation and compromises made in the coalition agreement.
"This is an extraordinarily difficult issue and I have been entirely open about the fact that we have not been able to deliver the policy that we held in opposition," he said.
Graduate tax
He attacked Labour's record on university funding, saying they had opposed tuition fees in 1997 - then introduced them "a few months later" and had commissioned Lord Browne's review which they were now "trashing".
He said Labour's policy to tax graduates was one "half the frontbench doesn't even believe in" and pressed Ms Harman to explain "what on earth her policy is".
Ms Harman said the government's policy was not about reducing the deficit but about "pulling the plug on public funding and dumping the cost on to students".
The previous Labour government introduced tuition fees, but during the Labour leadership campaign, Ed Miliband said a graduate tax was "a fairer alternative", would raise more money and be linked to a graduate's ability to pay.
But the day after Mr Miliband won - and before being made shadow chancellor - Alan Johnson wrote an open letter to him in the Independent, saying: "For goodness' sake, don't pursue a graduate tax. We should be proud of our brave and correct decision to introduce tuition fees."
Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Douglas Alexander was pressed on whether Labour would push for a graduate tax on BBC 2's Daily Politics.
He said Mr Miliband had said he "wanted to move towards a graduate contribution, that is going to be our approach". "It's right to recognise that it's going to take us time to flesh out how we take forward that approach," he added.
Pressed on whether Labour would adopt a graduate tax policy, he replied: " Yes, Ed said. That was the mandate that he secured from the Labour Party."
Standing in for David Cameron at prime minister's questions, he was bombarded with Labour MPs' questions about plans to raise the annual fees cap to £9,000.
Harriet Harman said he had been "led astray" by Tories who wanted to "shove the cost" of degrees onto students.
The deputy PM said graduates who earned the least will pay less than currently.
The Lib Dem leader came under fire over his own party's about-turn on tuition fees at English universities- as Labour MPs asked him 12 questions on the topic in the half-hour session and he was accused of broken promises and a "shameful" policy.
Before joining the Conservatives in a coalition after the general election, the Lib Dems had pledged to phase out tuition fees altogether over six years. Many of the party's MPs signed a National Union of Students (NUS) pledge not to vote for higher fees if re-elected in May.
Funding 'consensus'
But responding to a review of university funding by Lord Browne, the government has announced plans to allow some universities in England to charge up to £9,000 a year from 2012 - the current cap is £3,290.
Ms Harman urged him to go outside, where thousands of protesting students were marching through Westminster, and explain how "fair" the government's plan was.
She also quoted him as having said that increasing tuition fees to £7,000 a year would be "a disaster".
"What word would he use to describe fees of £9,000?," she asked.
As Mr Clegg told her there was a "consensus" across the parties about the need to reform university funding, Ms Harman hit back: "None of us agree with tuition fees of £9,000 a year."
She suggested Mr Clegg had been "led astray" by the Conservatives, who had plans "to shove the cost of higher education on to students and their families".
A series of Labour MPs also got up to press Mr Clegg on the plans - which several of his own MPs, including former leaders Charles Kennedy and Sir Menzies Campbell, have said they will oppose.
But Mr Clegg said the government had come up with a "fair and progressive solution to a very difficult problem".
"The proposals we have put forward will mean that those who earn the least will pay much less than they do at the moment, those who earn the most will pay over the odds to provide a subsidy to allow people from poor backgrounds to go to university," he said.
He said the Lib Dems had to change policy because of the financial situation and compromises made in the coalition agreement.
"This is an extraordinarily difficult issue and I have been entirely open about the fact that we have not been able to deliver the policy that we held in opposition," he said.
Graduate tax
He attacked Labour's record on university funding, saying they had opposed tuition fees in 1997 - then introduced them "a few months later" and had commissioned Lord Browne's review which they were now "trashing".
He said Labour's policy to tax graduates was one "half the frontbench doesn't even believe in" and pressed Ms Harman to explain "what on earth her policy is".
Ms Harman said the government's policy was not about reducing the deficit but about "pulling the plug on public funding and dumping the cost on to students".
The previous Labour government introduced tuition fees, but during the Labour leadership campaign, Ed Miliband said a graduate tax was "a fairer alternative", would raise more money and be linked to a graduate's ability to pay.
But the day after Mr Miliband won - and before being made shadow chancellor - Alan Johnson wrote an open letter to him in the Independent, saying: "For goodness' sake, don't pursue a graduate tax. We should be proud of our brave and correct decision to introduce tuition fees."
Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Douglas Alexander was pressed on whether Labour would push for a graduate tax on BBC 2's Daily Politics.
He said Mr Miliband had said he "wanted to move towards a graduate contribution, that is going to be our approach". "It's right to recognise that it's going to take us time to flesh out how we take forward that approach," he added.
Pressed on whether Labour would adopt a graduate tax policy, he replied: " Yes, Ed said. That was the mandate that he secured from the Labour Party."
Joey Deacon's Disco Suit
It's a THUG life
- Apr 19, 2010
- 854
i'm not in the NUS. Our college has f*** all in the way of things like that.
Let me get this straight, students are unmotivated and unwilling to do anything yet as soon as we do we're moaning twats who should get a job? How many people who say that went to Uni, and how many have a profession? How many are faced with unprecidened debts post uni?
Yes, some people decided to riot where we were. And i'm OBVIOUSLY subjective about my female friend getting punched while we get a tiny 16 year old girl who was dragged through a surge of rioters, subsequently injured and then getting pushed about for looking after her and trying to get her out.
Call me passionate, but i'm very subjective about these changes. Because well... how to put this. I'm a student.
You cannot tell me any of you would be happy if this was happening to you when you were my age?
If you backtracked anymore you'd be time travelling. Your first post told me all I needed to know. You thought it was all jolly good fun and you got to bully some nasty Tories until the beastly plod give you and your mates a thoroughly deserved kicking.
Still buzzing from all this you come on here giving it Billy Big Bollocks. You think you're f***ing Che Guevera. Realising that you've dropped yourself in it completely with your tales of rebel bravado you then start to retreat "it wasn't intimidation it was...umm...I'm not sure but we certainly didn't say anything to those Milbank Tower workers. Not me, sir."
Bollocks. I hope you and your friends get identified by the police and get the full weight of the law thrown at you. This is a democracy and you and your silly mates have no right to bully people or cause criminal damage. Like I said, I was neutral until today. Having read the news and posts like yours I now have no sympathy for your position.
Sorry Kneeon, but as a student and one who's certainly looking at going to Uni, i'm going to have to agree with you.
I wanted to attend the protests, but i had important lessons at college which I couldnt miss, as well as a lack of funds thanks to bloody driving lessons. The protests had my full support, given the Lib Dems pre-election policies and promises which have been broken. But to partake in violence (apologies i havent time to read all your posts, so this is from skimming over them) and then complain about the police reaction is wrong IMO. There was no need for violence, its done more harm than good, and only supports the stereotype that most sad old men on herefishing
Everyone's entitled to an opinion, but personally I feel that Lincoln Imps post suggesting its fair that all students pay the price for some taking pointless courses is completely unfair. I want to go to Uni, I dont feel I must be allowed to go, I feel i've worked hard and thats the next step to obtaining what I want to do. I've looked and found a course that both interests me, and leaves a worthwhile career path afterwards, with other options if that doesnt materialise (seeing as the Police force arent hiring).
Perhaps a subsequent and calmer post would be needed to explain what and why i'm proud of today.
As it happens I want to go in to Computing, one of if not the fastest emerging market, with solutions being required all over every single industry. I chose to protest outside the Tory HQ peacfully along with 2 other members of my college. One got taken away with a surge and was knocked out. Police picked her up, and held her inside the building. Me and my other friend pushed in to get her. On our way out, we were told to get back. We complied and were not in anyway being intimidating to any officer. it was two people helping a tiny 16 year old girl out of the way of danger.
Subjectivly at teh time, and just after: I was f***ed off at being manhandled while complying with the officers requests.
Objectivly now, of course they are going to push us about, there was a f***ing riot. I'm not (now that i'm calm) bothered about being pushed out of the way by some one doing his job with 200-300(?) students smashing windows. We got out, and went home.
At the time it seemed the right thing to do to protest on the Tory's doorstep. I DO NOT condone the violence. It was scarey. I'm not representative (thank god!) of all students. I'm not the next Sir Alan Turing. But i exercised my right to protest today against cuts that I feel (subjectivally and passionately) are unfair on students, who are being lumped with the Bankers, MP's and those far older than us's mistakes. Yes we need to tighten our belts but how many of you adults are tightening it by 20 grand?
I'm proud that I was there, that I particpated in teh march and in the chanting outside the Millbank building. I'm not proud of seeing the violence that happened after although at the time it did seem to be effective (its called being human and getting carried away - I didn't condone the violence in its entirety AT THE TIMEbut I did not condem it overly either and i'm happy to admit that was a mistake because i've got hindsight now, and it was a really really stupid decision for those who took it to make).
I would suggest driving lessons are a luxury rather than a necessity. So as well as students with the latest and greatest mobiles they can also afford driving lessons but cry foul when they're asked to contribute more to their education ?
I did have some sympathy .... until today. I would imagine there are many others like me that will no longer sympathise with "the cause".
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
The sad thing is that this will change nothing. They will use this as an example of how students need to be brought into line and will put the fees in place (which Labour were going to do but call it a Graduate Tax instead). We will have an influx of foreign students who can get greater help with funding but who will bring nothing to the country.
Do we have too many Unis? Yes.
Do we have some really silly degrees? Yes.
Perhaps this will make competition for courses harder and will allow the really able to rise to the top (life is not an even playing field, no matter what all the equality and diversity people tell you). Those who need the money should be looking at sponsorship (this happens a lot anyway). Those who are borderline students should be looking at the debt they may accrue against the value of the qualification they are aiming at.
Not everyone needs a degree. Not everyone needs to go to College. We have students who are at College "because Mum gets benefits and I get EMA". Or "because my friends are here." Or "if I don't come here or get a job Mum will kick me out." None of them valid reasons for wanting to spend time gaining a qualification.
Do we have too many Unis? Yes.
Do we have some really silly degrees? Yes.
Perhaps this will make competition for courses harder and will allow the really able to rise to the top (life is not an even playing field, no matter what all the equality and diversity people tell you). Those who need the money should be looking at sponsorship (this happens a lot anyway). Those who are borderline students should be looking at the debt they may accrue against the value of the qualification they are aiming at.
Not everyone needs a degree. Not everyone needs to go to College. We have students who are at College "because Mum gets benefits and I get EMA". Or "because my friends are here." Or "if I don't come here or get a job Mum will kick me out." None of them valid reasons for wanting to spend time gaining a qualification.
Yes, entirely. I've been to my first protest march. I'm an impressionable teenager. I'm so so sorry that I stood outside the Millbank, chanting things like "Tory Scum" :sarcasm:
I'm also sorry for being human and having a subjective view on an event (my friend and getting shoved about) :sarcasm:
Yes i'm back tracking! I'll admit my first post was wrong, i have egg on my face. I've dropped my self in it with a tale of bravado that wasn't. :notsarcasm:
However this is utter shit. The only time went inside the Millbank building was to get our just come around friend out. The only violent act I took part in was flipping off conservative workers through the window and shouting angrily in a group. At the time I was pissed off by the police's reaction.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing as a teacher I used to have said multiple times.
I wasn't directly involved with the smashing of the building.
Last edited:
Perhaps a subsequent and calmer post would be needed to explain what and why i'm proud of today.
As it happens I want to go in to Computing, one of if not the fastest emerging market, with solutions being required all over every single industry. I chose to protest outside the Tory HQ peacfully along with 2 other members of my college. One got taken away with a surge and was knocked out. Police picked her up, and held her inside the building. Me and my other friend pushed in to get her. On our way out, we were told to get back. We complied and were not in anyway being intimidating to any officer. it was two people helping a tiny 16 year old girl out of the way of danger.
Subjectivly at teh time, and just after: I was f***ed off at being manhandled while complying with the officers requests.
Objectivly now, of course they are going to push us about, there was a f***ing riot. I'm not (now that i'm calm) bothered about being pushed out of the way by some one doing his job with 200-300(?) students smashing windows. We got out, and went home.
At the time it seemed the right thing to do to protest on the Tory's doorstep. I DO NOT condone the violence. It was scarey. I'm not representative (thank god!) of all students. I'm not the next Sir Alan Turing. But i exercised my right to protest today against cuts that I feel (subjectivally and passionately) are unfair on students, who are being lumped with the Bankers, MP's and those far older than us's mistakes. Yes we need to tighten our belts but how many of you adults are tightening it by 20 grand?
I'm proud that I was there, that I particpated in teh march and in the chanting outside the Millbank building. I'm not proud of seeing the violence that happened after although at the time it did seem to be effective (its called being human and getting carried away - I didn't condone the violence in its entirety AT THE TIMEbut I did not condem it overly either and i'm happy to admit that was a mistake because i've got hindsight now, and it was a really really stupid decision for those who took it to make).
Knee on you dont need to justify yourself in anyway. You committed no crimes and showed true passion. Understand your critics here will never agree with you until you vote tory and nod docilely in agreement.
To be honest listening to the students who were there on the news, I heard more articulate and thoughtful responses to the issue than from the bitter merchants of hate on here.
Uncle C
Well-known member
Has it even occurred to you that the police may have dragged your tiny friend out of the crowd to stop her being injured in the mêlée?
Grow up.
I dont know if you're looking for a reaction, because i fail to see any sense in your post. I work, which enables ME (not my parents) to pay for my driving lessons, because its something I wanted to do, and something i'll need to do at somepoint in my life anyway (personally). Oh, and the dig about mobile phones, I'd hardly say i've got a great mobile phone, far from it.
But its fine, lets make people who want to achieve their ambitions pay for them, and not just pay but pay well over the odds, and live the first 20-30 years paying back the debt for doing so. Then lets add a house onto that, and the idea of trying to get a mortgage, and so on. By increasing fee's less and less people will be applying, only those who can afford to do so will be going to University, which defies the point of it being for all sections of society. The economy is dependant on certain jobs, which require university eductation, so why put people off doing these courses.
Have'nt a f***ing clue what your on about bringing driving lessons into this.
OK - I'll retract the venom in my first post although I believe people normally say what they really feel and mean first time so I think the back tracking is a face saving exercise.
Lots of us have lost considerably more than £20k thanks to the economic climate - some in being made unemployed, some in lost salary / bonuses, some on the value of property portfolios, some in pension funds. I would suggest an extra £3k per year - i.e. £9k on the average course wasn't really that much given how long you get to pay it back.
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
And I dont do sitting at home threaatening people over the internet.
I could always come and discuss this at your place of work? Housing Support Worker with a wide red stripe then?
Let's hope you lose your job in the cuts (like in your avatar) and end up needing your own services.
Bring on the revolution, eh Che?
Dandyman
In London village.
How about the 19 millionaires in the present cabinet and all those earning over 100K a year paying a fair share in tax, closing down the opportunities for tax avoidance by big business and refusing to support so called tax havens (in reality boltholes for the those who wish to take all the benefits of this country and refuse to give something back).
taxjustice network
The current cap is just over £3k, being raised to £9k, thats 6k a year, leading to an 18k debt.
Yeah, thankfully!
It was at the time. AT THE TIME. That the manhandelling after we got her that pissed us off. AT THE TIME.
Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
Sorry essbee - I genuinely didn't realise that most of the lecturers at, say, the University of Brighton, were doctors. If you say that that is the case then I won't argue. (Although would be good to have some evidence, he added, churlishly.)
The body of my argument was against the standard of the courses though. My daughter gained a degree (in spite of the lecturers going on strike during her final year) but I then had to employ her for six months so that she could learn the things she needed to get a job in the career of her choice.
If i wanted to save face i'd just stop posting on this thread
I said some stupid things, that I half meant but didn't word propperly or said with a burst of adrenaline. I want to clarify the difference between an emotionally charged, ill thought out and slightly "Billy Big Bollocks" style post and rectify the mistakes in that post.
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
Nice and patronising there Mr Sanctimonius. If it wasn't a public board I would suggest that was a 7/10 attempt at grooming!
It's nothing to do with voting Tory, it's more to do with how the protest was handled and the damage done to the argument. However, if you want to turn this into the Great Class War that never was, then carry on. I will dig out the words to the "Red Flag" and have them ready to hand when the call comes.