Many arguments against the higher education bill have been ignored. By the time of a 2009 review, the "higher education market" will be regulated by the World Trade Organisation. Besides the appearance of private finance initatives and public-private partnership deals, we have the rules on what qualifies as a university being relaxed and a seamless mechanism for university mergers, or is that asset-stripping takeovers?
While the National Union of Students is right to focus on top-up fees, because variability will make the crucial distinction that qualifies higher education as a "market", to miss the point that the wider ramifications of the higher education bill mean the permanent privatisation of higher education is inexcusable.
Joe Rukin
NUS National Executive member
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to °Õ±á·¡¡¯²õ university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber? Login