I’ve been feeling decidedly nostalgic over the past couple of weeks. The TV images of students rioting over tuition fees and occupying university offices took me right back to the golden days of the late 60s. There was even one bizarre moment when the BBC News showed the University of Birmingham, then interviewed the vice-chancellor in his office. At this point, I turned to my family and said: ‘I used to live in that room.’ which was absolutely true, albeit only for the week of the great sit-in of 1969.
Of course, there are differences. We 60s students rioted for high-minded, selfless and ethical reasons. We were against the war in Vietnam and we sat-in to protest against a lack of student representation on the ruling councils of the university. Our protests were pretty impressive. Next time the History Channel or Yesterday feature the Grosvenor Square riot, look out for the student wearing a fluorescent yellow and green paisley pattern PVC jacket – that’s me! The jacket was visible from a mile away and I got whistled at by a whole coach load of Liverpool coppers parked in a side street, waiting to crack a few heads.
The Birmingham student sit-in involved about 5,000 students at its height, but both of these protests were completely ineffective. Okay, the Vietnam War did end, when the North overwhelmed the South, and not because the US President was worried by student protest. The University listened, negotiated, made conciliatory noises and did absolutely nothing about student representation. A year later, a group of us achieved this goal, not by mass direct action, but by researching the University’s regulations, taking over the Guild of Graduates then quite legally electing graduate students to sit on the decision-making bodies.
Today’s riots seem to be entirely about money, but I don’t believe that all the rioting students were motivated by self-interest. Presumably, Cambridge student Charlie Gilmour was acting entirely ethically when he climbed the Cenotaph and swung on the flagpole. Charlie is the stepson of Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour (CBE), who, according to The Sun, ‘has a £78million fortune’. Since Dad had previously been forking out £27,000 a year for young Charlie to attend Lancing College, whatever university tuition fees Charlie is now charged are small change by comparison and can probably be taken from the petty cash in the kitchen drawer of the Gilmour household.
Still, even protesting on behalf of others can be a bit suspect. It’s fine to protest on behalf of those who cannot protest themselves, like the people of Burma, or Iranian women, but protesting on behalf of your fellow citizens seems a bit odd to me. All through the miners, strike of 1984-85 I was working in the heart of the West Yorkshire coalfields. Local support for the miners was almost total, but even at the time it struck me as bizarre when local miners’ leaders made speeches proclaiming that they were striking not just to protect their own jobs, but also to ensure jobs for their children and their children’s children. I do feel guilt that most of today’s students graduate with a huge debt because I was one of the lucky generation to go to university not just with tuition fees paid by my local authority, but with a generous maintenance grant. But guilt won’t solve the problem and neither would higher taxes.
The main factor underlying tuition fees is the growth in numbers. Today around 40 per cent of school-leavers go to university or, if you believe the old joke, around 20 per cent, as the rest are still in bed. At the start of the 1960s, the figure was just four per cent. After the publication in 1963 of an influential report by Lord Robbins recommending an increase, the figure rose to around 14 per cent during the 1970s. The last government’s target was 50 per cent and some university vice-chancellors have suggested that a target of 70 per cent is not unreasonable. Have standards been maintained with growing numbers? The arguments are complex, but it’s pretty hard to justify the fact that the average degree award today is a 2.1 – when back in 1960, with one tenth of the number of students, the average degree was a 2.2.
Maybe the real answer is part-time or shorter degree courses. Certainly, undergraduate courses comprising just four hours a week of lectures and seminars do little to justify the value of a degree. Like generous pensions and comprehensive care for the elderly, free university education is simply not a sustainable option.
I do think my generation will have to accept a less well-funded retirement. I’m afraid the younger generation still has to learn one of the simplest lessons – if it costs money, then someone has to pay for it.
Keith Gaines is a freelance writer, a former Head of Special Needs in a large comprehensive school and a governor of a primary school.