They think it's all over...

Vince Cable has just said that "by no means all" students oppose the fee rises. LOL. Less than half of MP's voted for the fee hike. The majority of MP's do not support it.

How did Simon Hughes vote, anybody know? He's been suffering agonies of conscience over this issue for quite some time now.

@2

Apparently he abstained.
https://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/09/tuition-fees-vote-how-mps-voted

Nice irony from Miliband refusing to fall into the Libdem trap by promising to reverse the fees. I suspect they will be here to stay.

Wimp!

Could this possibly be a Tory orchestrated plot to undo their Coalition Partners in the longer term?

This was obviously such an Achilles Heel for the Lib Dems and the Tories knew that. They know it was going to cause outrage amongst those who had voted LibDem purely because of the pledge they made.

Did they have to take this to a vote now or could they have had more debate on the whole issue and looked at alternatives or did they feel they should do it now to cause maximum embarrassment to the Lib Dems. If the Lib Dems walked away so early from their Coalitions agreement and caused a new General Election they know they would be blamed for causing instablity, so had no alternative but to go with it.

The Tories now know that AV stands no chance, as people are not going to support the Lib Dems after this, even if they wanted AV.

So next election Tories will only have one party to fight against

Job done!!

Nick Clegg, Danny Alexander, Norman Baker, Sir Alan Beith, Gordon Birtwistle, Jeremy Browne, Malcolm Bruce, Paul Burstow, Vince Cable,
Alistair Carmichael, Edward Davey, Lynne Featherstone, Stephen Gilbert,
Duncan Hames, Nick Harvey, David Heath, John Hemming, Dr Julian Huppert,
Norman Lamb, David Laws, Michael Moore, Andrew Stunell, Jo Swinson,
Sarah Teather, David Ward, Steve Webb

These are the Lib Dems who voted for the tuition fee rise. They pledged not to do so in order to get elected. They should be dragged from their offices and kicked out of the country.

Cable thinks its all over, well it is for him and Clegg now.

Hughes - truly pathetic.

Laws - used to telling porkies so happy to vote for it so he can nip back into govt soon.

#4
Is that Hughes or Miliband?

6. RedandYellowandGreennotBlue

Fair point. Those MPs lied. But if they are to be banished to another land, as you suggest, surely for the sake of consistency we must also banish all the Labour MPs who denied us a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and committed numerous other betrayals?

Breaking promises is not the preserve of any one political party. Sadly it's common in all of them. It just so happens that this one is particularly egregious, what with the very public plegges and all.

Re post no.7, @ , RedandYellowandGreennotBlue

A politician gets into office and then breaks an election promise - Wow that really is a shocker......

my apologies should have been re post no. 6

When the tuition fee rise being a consequence of an 80% budget cut was put to Vince Cable he actually asked where that figure came from.

The interviewer had to remind him that BIS was cutting the university teaching budget by 80%, that students go to university to be taught, that tuition fees and teaching budget pay for teaching, and that the tuition fees are going up because of the aforementioned coalition cut to the teaching budget.

Cable has very clearly lost his way when he needs that simple matter explained to him.

I don't hear anyone bleating or crowing about the West Lothian question here.

Middle England voted Tory...Middle England just saw its tuition fees for going to University upped to 6-9 k a year.

How long will it be before the focus is turned to the Celtic Nations and the sour grapes and grumbling start over the the NO or reduced fees that Scottish Welsh and Northern Irish students have to pay. Certainly I feel for the students concerned but the English voters and the English Press have no just cause or reason for doing it because English MP's voted this policy through, Not Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MP's.

For their part the English press has whipped up the issue of Scottish MP's voting on English matters and the need for an English Parliament stirring up nationalism. In theory England (and the rest of the UK) now has an English run parliament ... and this policy is a product of that

If you voted Conservative or Lib Dem in England you now have a Government devoid of a large Scottish or Welsh presence if you don't like the policy then The old adage be careful what you wish for comes to mind


The Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish assemblies take their own decisions on this issue and have assessed that they cannot saddle their young people with this level of debt and although fees may come to Scotland the arithmetic of the Scottish Parliament means that a responsible and proportionates decision will be made or it will be voted down, as a result there is no dissent in Scotland over this policy.

The majority of English MP's voted for this English policy and we have to respect that decision.

No6 RedandYellow.
I am not sure about them being kicked out of the country, but I am fairly convinced that decent people the length and breadth of the UK will hound most of them out of office. The British people will never forget or forgive the supreme lying and barefaced treachery we have observed from the Lib/Dem leadership.

We are talking about paying off the banks here. They will taxing children soon. Can't wait for the year end banking bonuses to be announced, probably exceed the rise in tuition, one shouldn't expect the banks to participate in solving the problems they caused...that is what taxpayers are for.

Cameron master stroke Tory policy (but not alien to New Labour) Lib Dems take the wrap and crap. Clegg having a whale of a time sounding all Churchillian and pious but wait until the by-election results start rolling in.

No9 One-Lars,
You seem a little confused. As far as I am aware the last government never promised a referendum on The Lisbon Treaty. However, I do recall the'cast iron guarantee' given by 'The Old Etonian Clown' on the issue.

coats @ 8

Very much meant S. Hughes. Ed Mil may well turn out to be a wimp but insufficient evidence to date. Certainly he's wise not to "pledge" to reduce tuition fees if and when he gets to number 10. We might have a serious economic crisis on by that point.

Such is the Westminster system. It is practically designed to seperate MPs from the immediate consequences of their actions. In 4 years time I have no doubt that a lot of current Lib Dem MPs would be defeated, I would expect a lot of new Lib Dem candidates at that point.

But to be fair what were people expecting??? That the Lib Dems could join any government and not get tainted in some way? They were largely a protest vote against both parties which were 'Establishment' The student vote is upset because the Lib Dems chose their favoured policy to ditch to get others through.

Is sacrificing the student vote fatal to the Lib Dems? Probably not in 4 years time. Is it fatal to specific Lib Dem MPs? Quite possibly. Is it fatal to the coalition? Not in the slightest.

CT

17. IPGABP1

Nope, not in the slightest bit confused thanks.

I'm aware of the semantic distinction between the EU Constitution (on which we were promised a referendum) and the Liston Treaty. But I prefer substance over form and fervently believe that we should have been allowed our referendum on the latter.

Of course I could have pointed to other policy betrayals over thirteen years of Labour government, but just chose one example.

The point I was making, as I'm sure you're well aware, is that politicians of all parties have form for breaking promises. It just amuses me that Labour supporters are throwing large stones from glass houses on this.

(P.S. Please don't read my post as a defence of the Lib Dems. They got themselves in this mess by making pledges never believing in their wildest dreams that they'd get near enough the wheels of power to be found out. I've got no sympathy. What I will say for them, however, is that at least their support has aided the passage of a bill which should kill off any hopes of a horribly unfair and impractical graduate tax).

All kicking off in london tonight. Do the lib dems not understand. U-turn, prop up the conservative party and.... commit political suicide.

Oh, I should also respond to the other part of your post, IPGABP1. Sorry I temporarily forgot.

Yes, I do recall Cameron saying something abour cast-iron guarantees. I think, however, that he meant that he would guarantee a referendum if the Treaty hadn't been passed by the time he came into office. I could well be wrong on that of course; besides, I don't hold out any hope that Cameron will be a much stronger defender of British interests in Europe than any of his predecessors.

But like I said: politicians of all parties tell porkies. I certainly wasn't attempting to exonerate the Conservatives. That really would be pathetic partisanship.

The state supports around 450,000 new undergraduates annually, about 1,350,000 in total. Each of them has parents, grandparents; an extended family. Higher education has become commonplace. So how many votes does the government believe are to be won by this measure?

It wont be on the streets of Westminster that attitudes will be formed and support for the government won or lost.

It will be round the kitchen tables of Basildon, Bournemouth,Bury and Bloxwich; a quiet, considered 'why are they doing this to Jemma, John or Sam?'

Why our kids? Why did they deserve this.........somewhere around October 2011 as the applications for 2012 university entry are submitted.

God punishes us by granting our prayers. The colition may have got more than it bargained for tonight.

Nick,

surely somebody ought to complain about those liberals who signed the pledge and then voted in favour of the new fees. What happened to Phil Woollas surely is precedent for making statements in a manifesto which have resulted in him losing his seat. I would have thought that the liberals will not be sleeping well tonight.

They have unleashed the dogs of war, they might not have intended to but the attack on the future king and his wife are beyond the pale. Somebody is going to have to pay for this, there must be a statement by the Home Secretary in parliament tomorrow to explain with all the expensive resources allocated to protect the Royal family that these shocking events were allowed to happen.

No20 One-Lars,
Can I now assume that you accept that the last government made no promise of a referendum on The Lisbon Treaty?
'Labour supporters' 'Stones' Glass Houses'? I hope you understand that it is not compulsory to be a Labour or Tory supporter to make a contribution on here.

Utterly disgusting that these silly students can act in such irresponsible and stupid ways. Disrupting Londoners in such a way. Why don't they just sign a big petition and give it in and why don't they just keep in their own cities and protest there - if they must?

I am ashamed to think that this once great land is disgraced by this disgruntled lot of opportunists, many of whom are just Labour thugs. They are not clever or respectable enough to be at university. They need to be put into normal jobs with older people to keep them in check.

Why do the looney liberalist lefties think we should bend over backwards to support and listen to this bunch of children? They should go away and grow up.

Put the water hoses on them and let us go about our normal business without them hindering us all.

It’s amazing the amount of deeply ingrained prejudices expressed by some when it comes to education related matters!

I write here because in this society one of the key pathways, that’s been so highly promoted until recently, towards a better standard of living is through high quality education/ qualifications and, ideally, progression thereafter into active participation in the labour market so as to earn enough reward, financial or otherwise(!), to enjoy life as fully as possible.

However if further and higher education becomes too expensive and, perhaps, significantly less accessible to large sections of the community then the whole society becomes liable to suffer, in my opinion. (What effect will current developments have upon the so called ‘aspirational’ middle classes?..)

Some further thoughts/ observations: -

- How some people still view ‘academic’ versus ‘vocational’ learning. Our society still tends to look down on the vocational learner as being ‘inferior’ to the academic. It would appear this is a throw back to the mindset of the industrial work place structure of the 19th century? (The divide between labour whereby the worker needed ‘vocational’ skills and the professional employees/ ‘management’ required ‘academic’ skills…)
- Education – formal or informal, academic or vocational is always worthwhile in its own right no matter what. However formal education qualifications effectively determine a person’s chances of success when it comes to their entry in to the labour market. Therefore choices made, and actions taken, in that respect will have an enormous bearing upon the kind life a person will lead. If you find you need to get a degree to gain entry to the career of your choice, eg: teacher or doctor, then it has just gotten a whole lot more expensive for you it appears.
- The following is where I find the current system to be exploitative. Some of the most important decisions a person will ever make actually occurs when they are an adolescent at around 15/16 years old. What to choose? A Levels? Btec? NVQ’s? Apprenticeship? International Baccalaureate? Academic learning? Vocational learning? Are they going to aim for University or not? Have other members of their family benefited from University education? Or not? Do they wish to take on the debt associated with gaining higher education and qualifications? Do they understand the difference in the concept of the nature of student debt versus commercial debt? Do they need a degree for entry to their job choice, eg: lawyer, teacher, doctor, or do they simply wish to gain a degree to improve their overall career options/ educational levels? Question – Could you cope effectively with decision making of that magnitude as a teenager?!.. This is vitally important because it’s at that age young people are really beginning their journey towards the sort of career/ job roles they will eventually progress into later. What further/ higher education qualifications will they need to get to have chance to enter the profession of their choice?
- All this means making excellent quality decisions while, often time, coming from a background, at that age, of never having had to make anything like such momentous decisions before (for some, perhaps, parents/ carers will still want to decide your choices for you too!).
- Add to all that the significant internal changes going on through features such as puberty too and you aren’t exactly in the ideal position to be making good quality choices/ decisions are you?..
- Choice. This is, and can be, a wonderful thing to have but is, alas, almost always a most difficult and elusive skill to master. In a market driven society, like this one, making good choices is one thing you’ll need to learn and master consistently over your whole lifetime. Never the less your choice making skills could come to nought if… You don’t have access to the necessary financial funds to gain access to your choices!
- Future employed graduates will be rewarded for their entry into the employment market by paying their standard income tax, through PAYE, plus their payments towards their student loan/ tuition fees for decades after graduation…
Meanwhile highly wealthy individuals and global corporations are skilled in successfully arguing to have their tax burdens removed or diminished! Graduates need to set up more effective and ‘influential’ think tanks and lobby groups I think!
- Ultimately the thing I find most difficult to ignore in modern education is the huge ‘elephant sitting in the room’! Namely the class stratification system that’s alive and well and living here in the UK…The formal education system provided in this country, private or public, is as ridden as ever with ‘class’ structures and the associated hierarchy that persists in such an environment. Yet no one ever mentions it! No one dare speak its name! And yet all through secondary school it’s happening… People are being ‘classified’ and it’s not up for open discussion! It’s truly remarkable to be able to witness this taking place in the school environment. What effect does such an experience have on a person to then proceed to make ‘choices’ about what direction they will progress towards in future? Will they think themselves 'worthy' of progression into high status career options? Or will they worry instead about the high costs involved, even if they're bright and able enough to achieve successful outcomes they desire?

24.
Unfortunately the royals are part of the problem. I don’t condone violence but im afraid its a natural reaction and conclusion to the consistent and worsening mugging of the masses being brought to a climax by this coalition. It was very symbolic that while rioting was going on all around the future king and queen of england were on there way to a lovely night out. Subconsciously comforted and assured in the knowledge they will never understand poverty,cuts or austerity.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

catch 22

"They have unleashed the dogs of war, they might not have intended to but the attack on the future king and his wife are beyond the pale. Somebody is going to have to pay for this, there must be a statement by the Home Secretary in parliament tomorrow to explain with all the expensive resources allocated to protect the Royal family that these shocking events were allowed to happen."

Mob violence is to be detested whoever it is used against from the future king of England to a newspaper seller in Cheapside.Unfortunately Charles and Camilla are symbols of state power in a society which is now seen as unjust.We hope they will be better protected in future as the sense of outrage grows.

20. IPGABP1

You can take comfort in the semantic distinction if you like. I have explained my view on Labour's promise in my last post. If I recall correctly, there was the promise of a referendum on the EU Constitution. When this morphed into Lisbon Treaty, the leadership took comfort in the name change in the same way you do now. So, if it makes you happy, then yes: I admit that there was no promise of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (that specific wording).

I know it is not compulsory to be a Labour or Tory supporter to post on here. I'm tolerant of a plurality of views, which is more than can be said of many contributors. I was merely pointing out that there seems to be a disproportionate amount of criticism directed at parties other than Labour. All have form for lying and it's only right to attack all, for the sake of balance.

22.

LibDems did not break an election promise. Their manifesto policy was to phase out fees in six years...that is if they gained a majority.

What they did break was personal pledges to vote against any increase in fees...that was entirely separate from the manifesto policy, and not dependent on them being in a majority...or indeed coalition.

So they are indeed contemptable....

But hey,lets be thankful. We are witnessing a rare political phenomena. Every 40/50 years the party not known as the LibDems emerge from the luxury of opposition (where they promise things they know they could never carry out)...gain some influence...make an almighty hash of things...and promptly disappear into the wilderness for the next 40/50 years...

Its a bit like one of those flu pandemics...but obviously a lot less welcome...

why delay payment till £21,000. it will be inevitable. so where is the incentive?
if all graduates will earn more because of their degree and will pay when they graduate, then why discriminate FOR 'poorer' students when no one pays until the playing field is equal?
I don't understand.

I have just listened to your report on the 10 p.m. news and was driven to register on this website and respond. You would think that the streets of London were a hot bed of anarchy rather than a few streets carefully targeted. I find this very irresponsible reporting rather than setting a context set for people who live outside of London. My trust in the integrity of the reporting of the BBC is being eroded. There appears to be an indulgence by the media and the political classes which is not set in the realms of the average working person. Please get a grip on reality and think about who the audience is and the level of analysis and honesty that is expected of an institution such as the BBC.

I am so ashamed. I have taught for 31 years. why didn't I go out to support education. because they've made me compliant. sorry

26. Flame

Very well said.

Peaceful protest is perfectly fine. No-one in their right mind would dispute that. But we have to draw a line at this thuggery, which is clearly politically motivated.

Even if the protesters weren't rampaging, I would still be curious as to why there are placards about Iraq, literature from The Socialist Worker, chants about Clegg 'turning blue' with the odd CND badge thrown in for good measure. I was under the impression that this was a protest against a rise in tuition fees, not simply an excuse for assorted anarchists and disgruntled leftists to rail violently against a government they didn't want.

I can't help but get the impression that there wouldn't be such a commotion had Labour won the election (yes, we must temporarily suspend disbelief...) and decided to implement the Browne review. After all, wasn't it Labour that introduced tuition fees in the first place? I don't remember party HQ being ransacked. It's the same kind of partisan hypocrisy which sees protests outside Topshop and Vodafone but tumbleweed outside The Guardian's offices.

23. At 9:43pm on 09 Dec 2010, Dan Howard wrote:

The state supports around 450,000 new undergraduates annually, about 1,350,000 in total. Each of them has parents, grandparents; an extended family. Higher education has become commonplace. So how many votes does the government believe are to be won by this measure?

It wont be on the streets of Westminster that attitudes will be formed and support for the government won or lost.

It will be round the kitchen tables of Basildon, Bournemouth,Bury and Bloxwich; a quiet, considered 'why are they doing this to Jemma, John or Sam?'

Why our kids? Why did they deserve this.........somewhere around October 2011 as the applications for 2012 university entry are submitted.

God punishes us by granting our prayers. The colition may have got more than it bargained for tonight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the focus has been on the LibDems but I reckon the people it will hurt most are Tory activists and Tory voters in the shires, but not the well paid ones, the ones who earn £25K-£40K.

Assuming the Coalition get to survive to 2015, a few months before the Election, we will be getting the stats for how many grads paying the higher fees have found jobs and how many at £21K and above. Before that election they will have also filled in their first tax return and will have an idea of what they will be paying back in the following year. On top of that the pile of debt HMG is piling up from October 2011 will be fully totalled for the first time. And it is just possible that one or two Unis may have closed or fallen on hard times.

All just before the 2015 Election.

Does Dave realise what he has done?

Hey! Let's be careful out there tomorrow ...

26. flame.
So there you are flame, on the floor and someone has their foot on your head (its hurting). You ask him nicely to get off...its really hurting. He ignores you. You ask him several times. He ignores you. You organise a petition and give it to him. He ignores you. Your friends and family march with banners. He ignores you. Eventually you gather the strength and as a last resort hit him where it hurts. I wouldn’t blame you flame. What else could you have done. The pain was just too much and you didnt do anything to deserve it....
comprende.

Comment 26 - Why is Nick Clegg using Flame as a pseudonym?

Or maybe its Danny Alexander with his lovely flowing flame locks?

27. At 10:11pm on 09 Dec 2010, Politicalgoose2 wrote:

However if further and higher education becomes too expensive and, perhaps, significantly less accessible to large sections of the community then the whole society becomes liable to suffer, in my opinion. (What effect will current developments have upon the so called ‘aspirational’ middle classes?..)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Prejudices? Including not being willing to add a few pence to each of the higher rate bands of income tax?

Shortsighted. Blinkered.

36 One_Lars_Melvang

It's the same kind of partisan hypocrisy which sees protests outside Topshop and Vodafone but tumbleweed outside The Guardian's offices.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

..Or the kind of hypocrisy seen on this blog by those who complain about Topshop and Vodafone but seem silent on Guardian Media Group.

From the point of view of British democracy, it is a terrible shame that the Government didn't lose the vote on this issue. If they had, young people might have felt that getting involved in political debate actually achieved something and politics might have been rejuvenated in this country. As it is all they have to reflect on is that politicians can't be trusted and that all the parties are the same (it was after all a LABOUR policy - from Lord Browne's review - that was being voted on). Nick Clegg has a lot to answer for - far more than just destroying his own party.

There appear to be a number of errors on the list above of Lib Dem MPs who voted for the changes. Julian Huppert voted against not for and others like, for example, Don Foster are missing. The list is:

Danny Alexander (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey), Norman Baker (Lewes), Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed), Gordon Birtwistle (Burnley), Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington), Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane), Malcolm Bruce (Gordon), Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam), Vincent Cable (Twickenham), Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland), Nick Clegg (Sheffield Hallam), Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton), Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green), Don Foster (Bath), Stephen Gilbert (St Austell and Newquay), Duncan Hames (Chippenham), Nick Harvey (Devon North), David Heath (Somerton & Frome), John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley), Norman Lamb (Norfolk North), David Laws (Yeovil), Michael Moore (Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk), Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove), Jo Swinson (Dunbartonshire East), Sarah Teather (Brent Central), David Ward (Bradford East), and Steve Webb (Thornbury and Yate).

Abstainers were: Lorely Burt (Solihull), Martin Horwood (Cheltenham), Simon Hughes (Bermondsey & Old Southwark), Chris Huhne (Eastleigh), Tessa Munt (Wells), Sir Robert Smith (Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine), John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross), and Stephen Williams (Bristol West).

People in these constituencies should take note. Personally, I'm especially distressed about Simon "conscience of the party" Hughes. I'd have expected better from him than just an abstention.

Mr. Robinson, Most of the time you look more like a Labour spokesman than an unbiased journalist. Your latest comment today that the coalition might have won a vote but lost the street??? Did you have a good look at the hooded and masked demonstrators? If these are genuine students, than goodnight England. With all respect for your lovely country, you are a the perfect example of a man with an Island mentality and a tunnel vision. Please look a bit further than your BBC office than you would see that in other countries students pay fees up front and work to pay for their studies. This topic should not be a national debate, England has much more serious problems with infrastructure, roads, public transport, health and last but not least massive debts due to 20 years over national overspending. And by the way, coalitions are the best form of democratic governement and they work under most difficult circumstances and are only possible with compromises. So please widen your horizon and than make political comments. All the best, Theo

36. vang
It's the same kind of partisan hypocrisy which sees protests outside Topshop and Vodafone but tumbleweed outside The Guardian's offices.
------------------------
why dont you state the amounts that we are talking about.
a. vodafone.
b. mr green.
c.the gaurdian.


Then lets compare A, B AND C individually to the cost of cuts in public services.
All rather tame deflection im afraid melvang.

It seems this protest may have been just a little more than grievances over the student fees. The joys of being young today ... this policy can only act as a deterrent to people bettering themselves. Perhaps Messrs Cameron, Clegg and Cable can explain to people interested in education what the Plan B is because I can't see a glaringly obvious one. Where are the new jobs for these people to move into now coming from? We have less focus today on apprenticeships and need to provide a rewarding path to working life with an educational link to these new jobs and clear welfare/return to work agendas

Well done British democracy
My child is £36K worst off, today,
At least Government is looking after future rich pensioners ,
from today , they will not have to buy annuities,
they can cash in,
Rich get richer, poor get poorer.

The really sad thing about this is that so many (most?) students take degree courses not because they really want to but because they have to. They spend three years getting into debt, studying a subject they are not really interested in, learning things they will never use for the rest of thir lives, because if they don't get that degree certificate at the end they will be excluded from half the jobs in the country. Employers stick "must have degree" on application forms just to cut down the number of applicants - I know, I've done it myself.

Vince Cable said on Newsnight* that the level of student debt student take on will NOT affect the mortgages people will be able to obtain - and to pay back. ALREADY mortgage companies ask about this. In the future it will have MUCH more impact. When they are paying tax of 22% plus 9% NI plus 9% student loan... It is worrying that he doesn't understand this. How can 15 yr old school students and their parents understand what their MPS are voting on if senior MPs don't understand what the consequences are. (The wealthy will avoid this by paying outside of the system). *"...people who want to borrow mortgages are not affectied in any way".)

So the Lib Dems have consigned themselves to the political dustbin of history (again) by their muddled voting today. Not exactly a surprise that those of them that have had a taste of government were prepared to sacrifice their own future political careers and those of their fellow Lib Dem MPs on the back of it, but it was probably an inevitable consequence of the empty and unprincipled nature of modern politics. Clegg's apparent political Stockholm Syndrome as shown through his eagerness to support the Tory agenda and inability to be able to criticise the glaring faults of their programme is now revealed to be that ultimate reflection of his emptiness as a politician.

And still no mention of mature students. How many mature students are there - 10-20% ?

30-40k dent for a 21 year old is unbearable to swallow with 45 years of work left in them (assuming they are permanently in employment!). A mature student of 35-40, 30-35 years to pay off that amount is not worth doing.

Why has the media not even recognised this? - Notobody above 25 will even consider university if these proposals go ahead

26. At 10:04pm on 09 Dec 2010, Flame wrote:

Utterly disgusting that these silly students can act in such irresponsible and stupid ways. Disrupting Londoners in such a way. Why don't they just sign a big petition and give it in and why don't they just keep in their own cities and protest there - if they must?

----------------------------------------------
Because petitions are a waste of time and have no effect. Do you have no knowledge of history or politics at all Flame? Your post suggests that you are either entirely ignorant of political history or you think that any protest is a jolly bad thing and we ought to let politicians do whatever they like completely unhindered by any consequences or protests no matter what they get up to or whatever the negative impact of their actions on our lives.

The silly person acting in a stupid way is you, and not those students. Catch yourself on or get trampled on by either government or protesters.

Leeches that's how I describe Libs!

They targeted students for electioneering purposes. They will lie and cheat to trade their own conscious for power.

They will be remembered and the show ain't over.

OLM 36

" I can't help but get the impression that there wouldn't be such a commotion had Labour won the election (yes, we must temporarily suspend disbelief...) and decided to implement the Browne review. After all, wasn't it Labour that introduced tuition fees in the first place? I don't remember party HQ being ransacked. It's the same kind of partisan hypocrisy which sees protests outside Topshop and Vodafone but tumbleweed outside The Guardian's offices."

I shouldn`t concern yourself too much about partisan hypocrisy,one finds it everywhere.If Labour had won the election and implemented coalition policies on tuition fees, the protests would have been if anything greater because expectations for a socially just policy would have been higher.The job of the coalition is to reduce public expectations in a short period over a wide area of policy.They have not yet succeeded in doing this,an area in which Lady Thatcher was brilliantly succesful.

As for protest,Labour had its share in government.You may remember the opposition to the Iraq war.The attacks tonight on state property we can put down to the age of the protesters who are not yet inured to being lied to.

As for the "Guardian",escaping protest, perhaps it has escaped your notice they support the coalition.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

45. lefty11

So it's only the amounts of tax avoidance that concern you? Fine, so be it.

If the principle itself doesn't bother you then that's a defensible standpoint and perfectly consistent. Philip Green, Vodafone and The Guardian are all tax dodgers together and that's fine, both morally and legally.

If, however, the principle troubles you as much as those who have made harrassing Christmas shoppers a hobby recently, then the only coherent viewpoint you can have is that they are all tax dodgers together and that all of them deserve the full wrath of protesters.

Incidentally, given that you seem more concerned by the amounts than the principle, I have to confess I don't know how much tax The Guardian has managed to avoid paying. Curiously, the paper tends to keep its affairs secret. I can't imagine why; surely it has nothing to hide...

It is funny that if you take 'lib DEM' and 'liAR' and take away the DREAM, you are left with I BILL, which is what the coalition will be doing to future generations of students.

#47 Zoran wrote:
"At least Government is looking after future rich pensioners."

For the record, my wife (who is not rich) is exactly the worst possible age to suffer the government's change to the state pension age. She has to wait a further 3 years to receive a state pension (so at a stroke we are over £15,000 worse off).

She doesn't intend to attack Oxford Street.

I am surprised by the blog: The Lib Dems would need to systematically execute about 10 years of deliberate lies and deceit before getting to Labour and deserving some of this ire. In reality, they are acting as Coalition partner, making a pragmatic decision on one policy area, based on our country's extra-orindary need to repair the carnage Labour created in the economy.

Perhaps the Tories are the only honest party left, but the Lib Dems have shown at least some pragmatism and sense here, that's all.

@49 - lauracaroline

So very very true.

Yet another burning day in the name of a party emerging from the past already making history. There are different faces to today’s events which cannot completely be termed as unreasonable on the part of the government but what fired up the violence was the manner and pace it has been applied the policy, something which has become a trade mark of this government. Earlier the implementation of large scale immigration cap and now the sudden increase in student fees at the universities. But irrespective of all these reasoning’s and logic, the primary catalyst that flared up the students anger is the happy go lucky Libdems who have been out rightly breaking one promise after another, ones that they has made as signed pledges to make it into the government.
In my opinion the government needs to do slow down a bit and analyze the consequences of their actions on the nation in the long run, something any intelligent person usually does in a crisis situation
Signing Off
@HighlySkilledAnyWhere

36 One_Lars_Melvang

Peaceful protest is perfectly fine. No-one in their right mind would dispute that. But we have to draw a line at this thuggery, which is clearly politically motivated.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I'm not sure what is happening with the policing of these demonstrations at the moment. Has someone been slipping valium into the tea down at the station?

62. At 00:21am on 10 Dec 2010, AS71 wrote:
.......I'm not sure what is happening with the policing of these demonstrations at the moment. Has someone been slipping valium into the tea down at the station?

Maybe the police budget has been cut.

45 lefty11

why dont you state the amounts that we are talking about.
a. vodafone.
b. mr green.
c.the gaurdian.


Then lets compare A, B AND C individually to the cost of cuts in public services.
All rather tame deflection im afraid melvang.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am confused.

You have regularly claimed that tax planning is morally indefensible.

Now it is OK if:

A. Done in moderation?
B. Done by the beard and sandal brigade?
C. Both?

Best wishes to your country during these protests. Violence will hardly accomplish any positive goal.

Just 20 more Lib Dem MP's back in May and this would not have been an issue!

Reasonably, Lib Dem's can argue that they did not actually get a mandate from students for their opposition to a fees rise let alone their policy to abolish fees over 6 years.

Only 50% of students voted. Only 15% of eligible students voted Lib Dem. Most students voted for parties who supported student fees and the inevitable rises that come with that policy.

The Lib Dem's have made a bad policy fairer, and that's all they had the mandate to do really.

I don't know why the Tories would be so smug about the Lib Dems loss of popularity.
As an avid (previous)Lib Dem supporter and voter, I don't know one single Lib Dem who is going to move from Lib Dem to Tory. No it is pretty much a move to Labour (which I never thought I would do, but I actually quite like Ed Miliband).
This is bad news for the coalition government (both parties).
Who wants to bet how soon a vote of no confidence will be called?

No one seems prepared to mention the fact there are plenty of poor quality universities, offering poor quality degrees (media studies anyone?) that churn out an end product no better for the experience than if they'd had 3 years of working experience. Why not narrow the field and offer support to excellent candidates, studying beneficial degrees, regardless of their wealth?

As for the issue in hand, I opted to study a professional course (qualifying as an airline pilot) which cost in excess of £50k (borrowed!). I am now at an earning threshold where I can repay that money (with none of the breaks offered to graduates). Surely this is fair? Let everyone improve themselves under the proviso of repaying the cost when earning a decent salary.

By all means dismiss me as elitist if you will. Having worked from a council estate to a jet cockpit, I wonder why more people don't aspire to join an elite.

67. At 06:35am on 10 Dec 2010, meljomur wrote:
I don't know why the Tories would be so smug about the Lib Dems loss of popularity.
As an avid (previous)Lib Dem supporter and voter, I don't know one single Lib Dem who is going to move from Lib Dem to Tory. No it is pretty much a move to Labour

-----

Labour? Were you seriously in a coma for about the last 8 years?

Yes Labour. I am NEVER voting Tory, and my faith in the Lib Dems is gone.
Have you looked at the latest polls. Labour is leading by 5 points (Lib Dems are down to 8%), and this was BEFORE the tuition fee vote.
Do you honestly believe disheartened Lib Dems are going to move to the Conservatives?

What, Nick, no mention of the public disorder last night on the streets of the Capital? Does the mention of such wanton violence by overly self indugent youngsters not suit the agenda?

I don't think the protests are over. Students will continue to protest until the bitter end and the next protest could well be over the linking of second state pensions to the totally inappropriate CPI which excludes council tax, a major issue for most pensioners. According to the pensions minister, the change is being made as few pensioners have mortgages. True, but then the relevant index is RPIX which excludes mortgages.

64. AS71
Vodafone....... 6billion.
Green.......300 million
the gaurdian...?

Of course everyone should pay tax they owe. Although some amounts are so large it affects society in a very damaging way when it is not paid in full. Especially in this time of austerity when finance to public services IS being slashed and people are struggling to make ends meet. Also its quite sickening that some of these individuals/companies have so much money , they would still be rolling in it if they didn’t use all measures to avoid paying all of it. The right thing to do when we are all supposed to be mucking in together...the big society?....
Like i said before, i have no problem with profit. But where we are now is in the upper echelons of greed and exploitation.

23. At 9:43pm on 09 Dec 2010, Dan Howard wrote:

The state supports around 450,000 new undergraduates annually, about 1,350,000 in total. Each of them has parents, grandparents; an extended family. Higher education has become commonplace. So how many votes does the government believe are to be won by this measure?

It wont be on the streets of Westminster that attitudes will be formed and support for the government won or lost.

It will be round the kitchen tables of Basildon, Bournemouth,Bury and Bloxwich; a quiet, considered 'why are they doing this to Jemma, John or Sam?'

Why our kids? Why did they deserve this.........somewhere around October 2011 as the applications for 2012 university entry are submitted.

God punishes us by granting our prayers. The colition may have got more than it bargained for tonight.


================================

Indeed I remember all to well the discussions and statements about the deficit and financial crisis during the election - a Mr Clegg was very appealing about having to sort out the mess so that we did not leave our debts to the next generations.

First opportunity what does his party conspire to do - cut funding to education and pass the costs of it onto the next generations.

Well what is fair about passing on a debt cost to the next generations, people who did not vote in past governments and bear no responsibility for their collective excesses and careless administration.
I am thoroughly ashamed of my generation of politicians, on all sides of the political divides.

Reading many of these posts I see the same problems that I see every time I catch a parliamentary "debate" on the TV or radio. Two side slinging mud and insults at each other and repeating the same arguments over and over without actually reaching any kind of compromise.

I do not want to see a rise in fees. £9000 is a lot of money and could put people of going to University and make life hard for poorer students from poorer families, something the Coalition has stupidly not considered. As far as I can se though I doubt it is going to be as simple as go to Uni for 4 years and you owe £36,000. Those decisions are yet to be made as far as I understand. But the hypocrisy of the students is unreal. "No fees, no cuts". Yes but unfortunately we appear to be in the midst of a financial crisis, and have a national debt which if left unchecked means we could in the future face the kind of real harsh, horrific cuts that Ireland and Greece face. The Coalition is being forced to make cuts to ease the pressure on the economy, and correct me if I am wrong but Labour's plan was to increase taxes?? Same effect on the poor and middle classes I would bet, because no Government as the guts to increase higher rate tax bands. And I seem to remember Labour put us here in the first place.

The behavior of the students (I do not believe they were all students) in London yesterday was an utter disgrace to protest. Don't debate the right to protest but that in many cases was thuggery, goading and attacking police officers. Police were heavy handed, yes. Call me old fashioned but if you are behaving in a provocative manner, and the "old bill" smack you with a truncheon you got what is coming to you. As long as it is not excessive, it's justified. I saw in one incident a police officer surrounded and separated, fists and feet flying into him. 2 years ago Rangers fans went on a rampage in Manchester and a very similar incident happened to an officer, and it's was rightly condemned. Although the Rangers fans were not fighting a political cause, the violence and behavior was similar and deserves the same condemnation.

Ok, the CONS have a part of their get out clause in place for the CONDEM's. Not over yet? please don't be silly, the other house will rubber stamp! I'm quite sure a lot of the proverbial skeletons in ones cupboards were and will be rattled by those in the know, to ensure further safe passages! The direct action of the protesters will be slighted by the usual brigade, unfortunate to have that one particular car caught up in the protest but perhaps HRH's got a taste of the real world that surrounds them. It's at this juncture I ask the question, there will be more protests at more cuts most will fall into line with what the police / opposite side politicians want, indeed we have seen millions on the streets aka Iraq war, that achieved pretty much nothing! Some will argue on this recent protest it did influence the vote? So is this a template to follow, some will argue for! I'd prefer that all opposition should concentrate time / effort / money in finding the inevitable chinks in the CONDEM's armour, if you like find the skeletons first for sure you'll get some high profile cases and lots of minnows. The media fall-out will keep the satirists in work for decades...

The students are like a load of sheep being herded by left wing trouble makers. Where the attacks from the Left when Labour bought in the policy of fee paying? and will the Labour Party have as their policy the removal of the fees. Of course they won't. They are spineless, that is why they could never have sorted out the mess they left the country in.

The real issue that you lot should be worrying/rioting about is unemployment. The capitalist system loves unemployment, it drives down wages and conditions for all levels of employee. Capitalism purposely creates a pool of 1-3 million unemployed people to achieve this, and uses immigration to keep the pool topped up and there fore wages and conditions low. Yes its a shame that you will now have to pay for your higher education but most of us people in the real world do have to pay for the things that we use, where we can make a differnce is in forcing which ever government is in power to have a policy of zero unemployment, this will drive up wages and better allow you to pay off your debt rather than spend 3 years to get a degree to earn less than £25k pa. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0

58. At 11:57pm on 09 Dec 2010, johnharris66 wrote:
#47 Zoran wrote:
"At least Government is looking after future rich pensioners."

For the record, my wife (who is not rich) is exactly the worst possible age to suffer the government's change to the state pension age. She has to wait a further 3 years to receive a state pension (so at a stroke we are over £15,000 worse off).

She doesn't intend to attack Oxford Street.

*************************************************************

and that's why she isn't listened to. I don't condemn the violence, but they had to do more than a quiet protest. I would have though intelligent students would have come up with more than destruction. There are peacuful ways to disrupt the country. The french pensioners come to mind? I do agree that they need to do something, but it doesn't have to be criminal and why attack police officers? Most of them will be on their side, as they also have kids and don't earn enough to pay this kind of money.

This is typical left wing extremism. Hijacking a valid protest and using it for their own purposes. They don't like democracy. If they lose at the ballot box, they attempt to de-stabilize the government of the day. This has been a repeating pattern for the last 40 years, why are we surprised by it now?

If my arithmetic is correct? that's 5 Scottish DEM's MP's that voted for. Repeat 5 Scottish MP's, will probably do the same for defense cuts that will affect mainland / island communities.............

Your habit of ending your reports with a punch line is well established but take care young man that your desire to catch the listeners’ attention is not done at the expense of fact as yesterday’s one liner suggesting that the police had lost control of the streets of London so clearly did.

Oops!

And this is just the children.

The 1 million jobs losses really start to kick in next year.

Thats a million angry grown ups to head the marches that the professional protesters and angry youfs piggy back onto.

Million people being deliberately put out of work, massive wealth being transferred to the private sector, daily riots. It all reminds me of something .... the last time the tories were lording over us.

Nick,

I compare the reaction of the student demonstrations over the last few weeks, and the violence, as against the peaceful demonstrations over the Iraq war.

If any demos were going to end in violence then surely it would have been the Stop the War, where many tens of thousands congregated in Trafalgar Square, and yet, nothing. Yet we ended up defeated and running with our tails between our legs from Basra, and we will do the same in Afghanistan.

So, does violence work, I don't know the answer, but compare the student protests yesterday, to the earlier demos over war in the killing fields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

73 lefty11

Vodafone....... 6billion.
Green.......300 million
the gaurdian...?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You have no basis for your £6bn figure for Vodafone, both the company and HMRC describe this figure as an urban myth.

Grauniad made £300m profit a couple of years ago and paid no tax at all. A very crude 28%*£300m = £84m.

re #37
Had Dave & GO added a few p to each of the Higher Tax Rate bands to pay for free tertiary education for UK nationals, the pips would have squeaked loudly for a few weeks but the bulk of the country, including the Labour Party, would have told them to shut up.

In five years time, if the Coalition Government had achieved a full term AND the economy had recovered significantly, Dave & GO might have been able to hint at future tax cuts for all, including higher rate taxpayers.

Now, which scenario would have been better for 1. The Tories, 2. The LibDems, 3. The Coalition, 4. The UK as a whole, 5. Young graduates from June 2014 onwards, and 6. The wealthy and high earners who directly or indirectly need that pool of well educated young people to maintain their income streams and prosperity.

What choice did our Government make on our behalf yesterday?





Oops!

77 Arthur

The students are like a load of sheep being herded by left wing trouble makers. Where the attacks from the Left when Labour bought in the policy of fee paying? and will the Labour Party have as their policy the removal of the fees. Of course they won't. They are spineless, that is why they could never have sorted out the mess they left the country

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The Labour Party is incapable of tackling excessive public spending because it is so reliant on public sector votes and funding from public sector unions. He who pays the piper...

This is simply the next generation saying they're no longer prepared to pay for the current working generation's mistakes.
The current administration has mortgaged the future of the youth while continuing to pump up the extortionate residential property market.
And now they want to handicap youngsters before they even start working to pay off this mountain of debt taken out in their name?

How did they think this was going to pan.

I'm ashamed I wasted my vote on these charlatans and I'm not in any way affected by these plans as I've graduated years ago and have no kids.

While Maggie Thatcher managed to alienate a large demographic area, Clegg has managed to alienate an entire generation, a generation that will one day be voting and a generation that is unlikely to forget in much the same way that the North has never forgotten what Thatcher did to them.
I marvel at the lack of judgement shown.
LibDems had the opportunity of a lifetime to turn around their fortunes and champion the cause of those they sought to represent in the lead-up to the election. All Clegg had to do was show a bit of backbone and draw a line in the sand on this one solitary issue. Yet he opted for the self-destruct button.

I reckon that 99.9% of all students protesting don’t really understand how the system works.

With all money (notes and coins excepted) being created as debt bearing interest, and more debt being needed to satisfy repayment of existing debt + interest, either there has to be more debt or deflation and debt default must occur.

The system is inflationary and requires an increasing level of debt to survive in its present form, but there’s a problem:

The hopelessly indebted will borrow till the cows come home, but can’t pay it back.
The modestly indebted could borrow, but are nervous of their economic future.
And the prudent won’t borrow per-se because they see it as the road to ruin.

Enter the student, the hopelessly naïve.

The system needs new debtors, and what better way to get them than sucking in the young with student loans. And if the system needs more money (debt), then raise tuition fees.

85. AS71

My thoughts exactly. Lefty11's response at 74 was telling.

If it's immoral then it's immoral, whatever the amount. And if the protests were genuinely caused by righteous indignation at tax avoidance then surely The Guardian was and remains a prime target.

Even if we are debasing the argument by referring purely to amounts of money rather than the principle, avoidance of corporation tax where a business makes hundreds or, a more conservative estimate, tens of millions of pounds leads to a serious shortfall for the Treasury's coffers.

I wonder how many students/nurses/prison places the government could fund were it not for the unscrupulous, morally indefensible Guardian newspaper?

I also cant understand why anybody is surprised by this.
Students raised their concerns over and over again yet it seems nobody was listening and they voted in the plans anyway, albeit with a few cosmetic changes.
This along with kettling (by its very definition raising the pressure of the crowd) and the result yesterday was inevitable. Not condoned by me but inevitable nevertheless.

#56

It has not paid corporation tax on profits of 300M GBP+ since 2008 and is controlled by a group in that well known tax haven, the Cayman Islands.

No less legal than what the other players are doing, but if they are the target's for the useful idiots, then it should also be on principle that GMG should be as well.

Kinda funny that they're not...

85#

And it was the Labour controlled Treasury that wrote it off as well. Now if Gordon hadnt been so bloody busy turning the place into his own fiefdom and making it unfit for purpose whilst he was busy stabbing the democratically elected PM in the back for ten years, the department may just have been fit for purpose in this day and age. As it happens now, they absolutely are not.

Would the supporters of the riot yesterday support an extreme right-wing mob that smashed up a mosque? You know. Anger, protest, that sort of thing?

If not, could anyone offer an explanation of the difference?

83#

And naturally, you're going to be leading at the front, arent you jon?

Or would you be no different to a radicalising Imam, just talking a damn good punch up from the safety of the rear? A REMF, so to speak. (google it).

I can well understand why people predict the demise of the Lib Dems. The polls must make very depressing reading for Clegg and, after breaking such a public pledge, he can hardly have expected people to be happy about it.

However, I think there's a lot of hyperbole flying around. I think it's too much of a generalisation to say that, for example, the younger generation will never again vote Lib Dem.

Not everyone under 25 is rioting at the moment. I presume that the majority of young adults are against the proposals (turkeys don't tend to vote for Christmas) but a vast number of people were against the Iraq war and yet will vote Labour again. There are a number of policy mistakes from the Conservatives as well, yet not all of them have turned voters away forever.

Some issues are so toxic to some parties that voters never ever forgive them. The question is whether, in the long term, this is one such issue for the Lib Dems. Personally, I wouldn't be so sure. They don't have the monopoly on lying. I doubt the rioters will vote Lib Dem but we shouldn't mistake these hotheads for some sort of sensible cross-section of the electorate. Only time will tell if the Lib Dems can repair the damage, but they've got several years to try, I would think.

"I marvel at the lack of judgement shown."

Yes... you probably marvel at a lot of things. Raindrops running down a window for instance. Maybe even, politics as a whole, because it seems you dont really understand it.

No77 Arthur,
Most people understand that all the main parties at the last election accepted and were committed to approximately the same level of public expenditure.If that is true, is it reasonable to expect that the deficit would have been the same regardless who won the election? Do you think the near meltdown of the international financial system, and its consequences, had anything to do with our current economic problems?

I for one hope these raised fees put the less able students off going to Univesisty . I know of several teenagers who go to University because its the thing to do not because they will go into a job which needs the qualification . I am all for people having ambitions but we have tagged these to having a degree . There are many so called Universities that should revert to being Pollytechincs and offer vocational courses .There is no shame in learning a trade not everyone needs to be an achedemic.

"While Maggie Thatcher managed to alienate a large demographic area"

Did you know that Labour got a higher percentage of the vote in 1979 when they lost to Maggie than they did in 2005 when they won? (36.9% to 35.2%).