Higher education now has its own story in the well-established ¡°bungling official photographed walking into Downing Street with confidential papers on show¡± genre of political reporting. A handy checklist for anyone running the gauntlet of photographers in Downing Street could be: check your skirt isn¡¯t tucked into your tights/your flies aren¡¯t undone, don¡¯t fall over like Michael Gove did once and place all your documents in a non-transparent file.

The document was helpfully displayed by an ¡°unnamed official¡±, . It is a briefing (seemingly one for Number 10) on the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills¡¯ forthcoming higher education White Paper. While the Telegraph focused on the document¡¯s suggestion that institutions including ¡°some in the Russell Group¡­do not offer the quality and intensity of teaching we expect for ?9K¡±, other elements of the paper will be more interesting to the sector.

The document confirms that BIS is scheduled to publish the White Paper ¡°alongside the Queen¡¯s Speech¡± with a bill planned ¡°shortly afterwards¡± for the second session of Parliament. The Queen¡¯s Speech is on 18 May. So this has been a pretty tight timescale, given that BIS had more than 600 responses to November¡¯s Green Paper to plough through.

This timing fits with what I have reported in a news story today ¨C that the White Paper has reached the ¡°write round¡± stage in which members of the Cabinet are asked for their department¡¯s views, and that Theresa May wants it to protect a UK-wide system of quality assurance.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°BIS are trying to solve real problems of quality and regulation. But it is not clear they have figured out how and there is a risk that the bodies and rules they will establish in legislation will not solve teaching quality, while creating poor quality provision for marginal students,¡± says the document.

This will be embarrassing for BIS ¨C friendly fire shooting at the teaching excellence framework and regulatory changes ¨C and offers easy material for Labour should they choose to oppose parts of a bill.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

One definition of marginal is ¡°of interest to only a few people¡±. Do people in government really think that some students are ¡°marginal¡±? If so, it would be worrying.

The document also says that ¡°price competition hasn¡¯t emerged¡± ¨C always a goal for any believer in the idea that a market should be created in higher education.

And it references the recent Institute for Fiscal Studies research, saying this shows that ¡°some degrees, and entire universities, have a negative return¡± in terms of graduate earnings. While observers on the left have taken the message from the IFS research that graduate earnings mainly reflect pre-university social background, those on the Right have taken a message about ¡°underperforming¡± universities.

On private providers, the document notes that the National Audit Office found evidence of ¡°fraudulent claims at the student and institutional level¡± and ¡°very high dropout rates¡±. BIS would like to ¡°hand over regulation to an organisation that knows how to allow good ones to offer ?9K in loans and expand¡±, it adds.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

On David Cameron¡¯s goal to double the proportion of disadvantaged young people entering higher education between 2009 and 2020, the document says: ¡°BIS think we will never achieve this from the established sector alone (probably because of a combination of high entry requirements and reluctance to expand too fast) ¨C and the extra boost in access could come from growth by alternative providers.¡±

Perhaps this is what prompted the official to warn that BIS¡¯ plans risked ¡°creating poor quality provision¡± for those so-called ¡°marginal students¡±?

It seems that BIS is trying to tell the PM that he risks the embarrassment of missing his access targets unless there is a further expansion of private provision. And it seems from this document that Number 10 is yet to be convinced.

john.morgan@tesglobal.com