Universities in England have been warned that the fees and teaching funding freeze may be?continued by?the next government given the political difficulty of?raising tuition fees, despite increasing agitation over the issue.

Lord Johnson of Marylebone, the Conservative former universities minister, tabled an?amendment to?the Lifelong Learning (Higher Education Fee Limits)?Bill that would allow the ?9,250 tuition fee cap to?rise in?line with inflation, warning that the freeze was ¡°creating a?situation in?which we?are systematically defunding our universities¡± and could lead to?them ¡°falling over one by?one¡±.

With Labour sending signals that some interpret as an acceptance of tuition fees ¨C the party has so far confined itself to talking about making graduates¡¯ loan repayments fairer and enhancing maintenance support ¨C there are big questions about where any reversal of the decline in university funding, which is being eroded by inflation, will come from.

The government has said the fee cap will be frozen until at least 2024-25, which would mean the fee will have been static for at least seven years since its last increase, to ?9,250 in 2017, and will have moved little since trebling to ?9,000 in 2012 to make up for the slashing of direct public funding.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Sir David Bell, vice-chancellor of the University of Sunderland, said Lord Johnson was ¡°correct to point to the unsustainability of the current system in the medium to long term¡±.

¡°If that is not addressed, then universities across the sector will be faced with increasingly unpalatable choices if they cannot make up their income from other sources,¡± Sir David said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

A move to raise the fee cap for 2025-26 would need to come in summer 2024. But if that is before a?general election, the Conservative government would seem unlikely to risk further unpopularity with such a move ¨C and some think a fee freeze could continue beyond then.

¡°I don¡¯t think it¡¯s a given that [the fee cap] will rise in 2026-27 or 2027-28 because I?think universities are some way behind in the queue for any extra money, whoever forms the next government,¡± said GuildHE chief executive Gordon McKenzie.

¡°Look at Scotland ¨C the unit of funding has been frozen for as long as it has in England but starting at a lower base. And however bad it is for Scottish universities¡­no Scottish university has fallen over yet.

¡°While the sector can make a strong case for investment in teaching funding, I?suspect that a more likely result in the spending review that follows the election is small increases in OfS [Office for Students] grant targeted on the things the incoming government likes. And if it¡¯s Labour in government, then the bulk of additional spending in HE is likely to be on students [or] graduates ¨C better maintenance and changes to the repayment terms.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Andy Westwood, professor of government practice at the University of Manchester, said Lord Johnson was ¡°under a?common ex-ministerial illusion¡­that if only his successors had stuck to his policy then everything would be just fine¡±.

¡°I don¡¯t think any future government is going to ¨C or going to want to ¨C raise the headline fee in England,¡± he went on. ¡°It¡¯s just too politically toxic either side of an election¡­That¡¯s also because of the spending implications it generates for the loan book as a whole [with higher fees meaning increased government outlay via loan subsidies].¡±

The upshot is that ¡°the best bets for driving any additional resource into higher education are more likely to be via new sources of funding and tied to specific activities¡±, Professor Westwood added.

john.morgan@timeshighereducation.com