Suella Braverman, Reform UK’s education spokesperson, says today, Reform UK would stop foreign students who are resident in the UK accessing student loans.
In recent years universities have become increasingly dependent on foreign students. They can charge them much higher fees, and the income from foreign students helps to fund the teaching for students from Britain, whose fees are capped.
The Reform UK policy would not affect these foreign students – because they cannot access the UK student loan system anyway. Instead, the policy would apply to UK resident foreign students – e.g. EU nationals with settled status (permission to live in the UK granted as part of the Brexit settlement, because they were here before) and foreigners with indefinite leave to remain in the UK.
Explaining the policy, Reform UK said: "Currently, 270,000 - 300,000 UK resident foreign nationals access £4bn worth of taxpayer-backed student loans each year, many of which are unlikely ever to be repaid. At the same time, British graduates face long-term debt and rising living costs. This measure will save approximately £2bn annually." The party said resident foreign students from Hong Kong and Ukraine would not be covered by this policy.
As the Reform UK party acknowledges in its news release, stopping people with EU settled status living in the UK from accessing the UK student loan system would require a renegotiation of the UK’s Brexit deal with the EU. The EU would not give up this concession lightly, and any attempt to renege on the agreement could lead to Brussels imposing retaliatory measures of its own.
I wouldn’t be tempted to vote for Reform, but in the event of them power sharing with the Conservatives ( the only way they could get the numbers to form a government) and this policy was enacted then I wouldn’t grumble about it.
Sueinkent
Anything to prevent them having to tax the rich.
The rich are taxed.
kjmpde
My understanding is that foreign students actually help fund universities and the restriction on the numbers has meant that
educational establishments are struggling
Most importantly for those who are tempted by voting for Reform - if GB is taken out of the ECHR and Reform follows through with its policy of cancelling the Equalities Act that the most vulnerable in society will suffer. You have been warned
The former Polytechnics that taught- wait for it - Technical Skills, moved up market and became second rate universities, teaching whatever the student fancied at whatever level because it meant bums on seats.
It was a big increase in status and obviously funding, the government of the day got that badly wrong, because jobs did not follow the qualifications. Instead to fill skill shortages overseas workers were recruited, because the courses chosen were not wanted by employers
Don't understand the bit about 'foreign students from other countries'.
Don't all foreign people come from other countries?
Oreo
Feeback? I simply don’t agree with you.Shop work is what a lot of graduates from former Poly’s end up doing, no need for a degree or A levels.
From the Blair years onwards too many teenagers have been badly advised and let down by being encouraged into University when they simply weren’t up to it.It was one of Blair’s ideas that 50% of school leavers should go onto Uni’s.
A ridiculous percentage.
In this Oreo I completely agree! I thought the old system of having specific colleges teaching skills for work and then Universities for those wanting or able to have more academic teaching, worked extremely well, as did the old “technical colleges”. I just find it amazing frankly that no govts appear to forward plan for professionals, surely they must have 5 & 10 year plans for ensuring we have enough nurses/doctors/teachers/dentists/plumbers/electricians and other required skill sets? It’s seems not!
Btw my DS attended Oxford Brooks (a former poly) and studied a combined degree of Law & Psychology and luckily he’s never had to work in a shop! (Not that’s there’s anything at all wrong with working in a shop, we’d be in a bad way if there were no shops!)
I do think you’re a little harsh about what you consider “wasted” degrees, lots of very academic people do degrees, not knowing what jobs they finally want to do, and I don’t think education, at whatever level is wasted, and it’s no longer really much funded by the state, so why not!
3 out 5, of our adult children chose not to carry on into higher education, all of them have work, ironically the two with good degrees earn less than two of their siblings who went straight into work at 18, one into banking and one into the Civil Service, our youngest has his own band and is living his best life at 23, he’s very creative and not at all academic. Horses for courses. (He will never make “good money”), but I think he’ll make enough to get by!
"I do think you’re a little harsh about what you consider “wasted” degrees, lots of very academic people do degrees, not knowing what jobs they finally want to do, and I don’t think education, at whatever level is wasted, and it’s no longer really much funded by the state, so why not!"
Why Not ?
Because it's a waste of time and money for the student and a dreadful waste of money for the government, the plan never did work and never will.
.
Oreo
4 billion that could be used towards better things?I see nothing wrong with this policy at all.
Loans for students cost a fortune and very many are never paid back even from British students.
Freebies in very many areas are a big part of the draw towards our shores.
Quite right. (I usually find myself agreeing with you Oreo.)
Where exactly does the £4billion pound saving a year come from?
Students loans are only paid back when the ex student is earning a particular amount. My daughter has paid her student loan back already. Younger son who went on to do a Masters and a PhD only recently started paying his undergraduate degree loan back. Incidentally, daughter’s degree is in Theology - she works for NHS England. Younger son’s first degree was in Art History, his doctorate in Psychosocial Studies. He is a Civil Servant. However, elder son was entirely self-funding and his Masters suits his profession.
When I worked as an Oxford university administrator, one of my responsibilities at the College where I worked was to keeps tabs on overseas students and ensure they attended a certain number of tutorials and lectures each term.
Gran22boys
Oreo
4 billion that could be used towards better things?I see nothing wrong with this policy at all.
Loans for students cost a fortune and very many are never paid back even from British students.
Freebies in very many areas are a big part of the draw towards our shores.Quite right. (I usually find myself agreeing with you Oreo.)
Nice 😊
David49
"I do think you’re a little harsh about what you consider “wasted” degrees, lots of very academic people do degrees, not knowing what jobs they finally want to do, and I don’t think education, at whatever level is wasted, and it’s no longer really much funded by the state, so why not!"
Why Not ?
Because it's a waste of time and money for the student and a dreadful waste of money for the government, the plan never did work and never will.
.
I was about to answer the ‘why not’ but see that you got there before me.
LemonJam
Where exactly does the £4billion pound saving a year come from?
I've been trying to work that one out. The figures don't add up.
I don’t think that matters twaddle it would be less money spent which is paid for by the tax payers here, the government doesn’t have any money of its own.
Oreo
I don’t think that matters twaddle it would be less money spent which is paid for by the tax payers here, the government doesn’t have any money of its own.
Well, no it wouldn't. The Students Loan Company makes a profit. There are two possible outcomes. Firstly, the university places might be taken up by other applicants - people who had been born in the UK - who would apply for loans and be granted them, so there would be no "saving". The second possibility is that nobody applied for the excess places. In that case, the eventual income of the Students Loan Company would decrease, as fewer people would owe it money.
It's a daft idea, designed to appeal to xenophobic bigots, which wouldn't even achieve anything. (Surprised it hasn't been plastered on the side of a red bus somewhere!)
.. the government doesn’t have any money of its own ...
The goverment can and does create whatever money it wants to. It owns the Bank of England.
Once you can undertand this you no longer get bogged down in this notion that one person's tax is paying for another person's free ride.
As Richard Murphy says: The question is never can we afford it. The question is why aren't we chosing to do it?
www.youtube.com/shorts/A_K6VoaZdlw
And the answer in Reform's case is always rooted in their deep xenophobia this time being uttered by Braverman, daughter of migrants and herself a beneficiary of the Erasmus programme.
Reform type parties hate
intellectuals don't they?
If you loan money, then claim it back with interest, then that is profit, not loss.
I understand that some loans are not paid back, for a variety of reasons,, but that applies to all loans, not merely student ones.
"When I worked as an Oxford university administrator, one of my responsibilities at the College where I worked was to keeps tabs on overseas students and ensure they attended a certain number of tutorials and lectures each term."
You and your children had all the advantages, you know people you know the system, most children dont have that advantage, great well done you.
Many dont have parents that are good role models, schools do not prepare children for the adult world where you have to justify your wages by work done.
Somewhat patronising reply, methinks.
Goodness, David, you do seem to have negative views about about schools and universities. I do not share your views on this, as a retired teacher, university lecturer, school governor, parent and grandparent. I see these establishments as working with the next generation of parents, citizens, voters, and workers.
The "adult world" is a broad church, and surely should not be defined purely as a place " where you have to justify your wages by work alone ".
Chocolatelovinggran
Goodness, David, you do seem to have negative views about about schools and universities. I do not share your views on this, as a retired teacher, university lecturer, school governor, parent and grandparent. I see these establishments as working with the next generation of parents, citizens, voters, and workers.
The "adult world" is a broad church, and surely should not be defined purely as a place " where you have to justify your wages by work alone ".
If you don't have a positive attitude to work you are a burden to someone else or the state. Everyone should contribute to society, if that means doing work that you think is beneath you should do it. Maybe you think that everybody should have the RIGHT to be a sponger on society, with no RESPONSIBILITY
If you are defending a system that is failing so many shame on you,
I made no reference to spongers. I suggested that education is more than preparing for work. I feel no need to use capital letters to remind you of that fact.
Sending so many students to Universities and making Polytechnics into ‘Universities’ to fit has been the worst thing for the country and for young people.It was a social experiment thought up by Blair and Brown which hasn’t done anyone any favours.
And on the government creating money, yes of course it can print any amount of it but that won’t help in the long run.
twaddle
Oreo
I don’t think that matters twaddle it would be less money spent which is paid for by the tax payers here, the government doesn’t have any money of its own.
Well, no it wouldn't. The Students Loan Company makes a profit. There are two possible outcomes. Firstly, the university places might be taken up by other applicants - people who had been born in the UK - who would apply for loans and be granted them, so there would be no "saving". The second possibility is that nobody applied for the excess places. In that case, the eventual income of the Students Loan Company would decrease, as fewer people would owe it money.
It's a daft idea, designed to appeal to xenophobic bigots, which wouldn't even achieve anything. (Surprised it hasn't been plastered on the side of a red bus somewhere!)
I suspect, the £4million sum came from some kind of back of a fag packet calculation and has no real substance. It has no basis in reality. Similar to the lies printed on the sides of buses during the Brexit campaign about £350 million a week going to the NHS.
It's clear that Reform also does not understand the asset management process that supports student loans. The government treats student loans as a massive, long term asset, sometimes selling portions of the loan book to private investors to raise immediate cash.
Not forgetting that it is currently illegal for Reform to stop EU nationals with settled status from accessing student loans.
I don't think sending a lot of sixteen or eighteen year olds out onto the job market would work either. The jobs are no longer there for them. Just more people claiming benefit.
We live in a different world. The jobs that were available when I was young for those with few qualifications don't exist. Apprenticeships are rare.
I think university is more than just about work. Education is never a bad thing.
I don't like the term 'spongers'. It's derogatory and unfair to those who try very hard to get work. I know some young people who, although having good degrees, are doing 'lowly' jobs while searching.
Tarring them all with the same brush is very wrong.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
