Higher education
Lords revolt over plans for ‘free-market’ universities

Labour and Lib Dems unite to halt bill that would make it easier for new profit-making colleges to become universities
There is concern at plans for ‘a shot of entrepreneurial vim’ at Britain’s universities.
There is concern at plans for ‘a shot of entrepreneurial vim’ at Britain’s universities. Photograph: Chris
Toby Helm Observer political editor
The Guardian, Saturday 31 December 2016 21.00 GMT
The government faces a huge cross-party revolt next week over controversial reforms of higher education that would make it easier for new colleges to award degrees, become universities and make profits from teaching students.

The Guardian view on the higher education white paper: the customer is always ripe – for fleecing
Editorial: The government wants colleges and universities to work for the economy by filling the skills gap and for society by promoting social mobility. But it’s the student who is expected to pay
Read more
Labour, the Liberal Democrats and crossbench peers in the House of Lords have joined forces in an attempt to scupper what they believe is an attempt at full-scale “marketisation” of the sector – a move they say would lower standards and damage the UK’s reputation for running many of the best universities in the world.

The peers – and university leaders – also say the reforms would destroy the cherished autonomy of UK universities and allow political interference by ministers into how they are run, teach courses and conduct research.

On Sunday, in a further blow to the higher education and research bill, Lord (Chris) Patten, the former Tory party chairman and now chancellor of Oxford University, described the reforms as “hamfisted”, coming at a time when universities were already facing massive challenges as a result of the Brexit vote and changes to immigration policy.

Referring to attempts to turn the sector into a marketplace, being championed by universities minister Jo Johnson, Patten says ministers appear to have little regard for, or knowledge of, the university system.
“To give the impression that one goal is to inject a shot of entrepreneurial vim, so that universities can replicate the energy and outlook of – who shall we say, [former BHS owner] Philip Green? – seems unlikely to convince those who work in and study at our universities that ministers understand and care much about what they are doing,” Patten writes in an article for the Observer.
The peers – who are likely to be joined by a number of Tories when the bill begins its committee stage in the Lords on Monday 9 January, have tabled amendments which they will force to a vote – demanding that universities remain “autonomous” bodies working for the public good, that they must remain free to criticise government wherever and whenever they see fit, and that they be barred from striving for profit.

The last time peers pushed for votes at committee stage in the Lords was the highly contentious and much amended Health and Social Care Act, which had a torrid passage through parliament in 2011-12.

Labour’s shadow higher education minister Lord Stevenson told the Observer: “This bill is an attempt from the government to run a market experiment through the bloodstream of our university system, and a classic case of understanding the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

“There is far more to higher education than financial transactions and bottom lines, including the ongoing contribution made to society and business through the application of new knowledge and expertise. Our amendment calls on ministers to recognise all of this and enshrine in law the principles of academic freedom and freedom of speech, alongside protecting the sector’s ability to act as society’s conscience.”

Ministers say the bill is designed to widen choice for students and to deliver value for money in the age of tuition fees. They argue that it will “increase competition and choice in the higher education sector, raise standards and strengthen the United Kingdom’s capabilities in research and innovation”. New entrants will be encouraged “by making it easier for new high-quality providers to start up and achieve degree-awarding powers, and subsequently secure university status”.

So-called “new providers” will be able to acquire degree-awarding powers without having to build a track record by teaching another university’s degrees first. This will reduce the time taken to acquire the title of university.

The peers – and many university leaders – say this will risk lowering quality in the sector, and the reputation of the UK for excellence in higher education.
Universities UK has cited the lower requirement for new entrants as a major worry. “In particular, the intention to significantly relax requirements before institutions are granted the power to award degrees, or are allowed to call themselves universities, may damage the reputation of the sector and increase risks to students,” it said in a submission on the bill.

Patten says the bill would also give a new body – the Office for Students – the power to strip Oxford and Cambridge or other universities of their ancient royal charters. “Worst of all is the power given to the Office for Students to revoke the acts of parliament or royal charters that have established our universities. How can it be right to allow institutions, some of very ancient standing, to be abolished with only weak parliamentary scrutiny? Did Thomas Cromwell write this part of the bill?”

Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said opposition to the bill also centred upon the creation of the Office for Students, and plans to link tuition fees to teaching quality and changes to research funding.

Hillman said the university sector felt it was under threat, but he maintained there was a need for some change. “The battle is nothing like as one-sided as it appears. Ministers have some inarguable points of their own. There has been a crying need for a new regulatory framework ever since tuition fees became the main means of funding university teaching. This has taken on extra urgency given the rapid increase in students at alternative providers. There has long been considerable disquiet over the workload of undergraduates at some of our most famous institutions, so shining a spotlight on the issue may enjoy public support.

“Ministers have proposed some bold reforms and parliamentarians are seeking to improve them. So long as Jo Johnson keeps his eyes on the big prize of a new legal framework and is willing to provide concessions when he loses the argument on side issues, the bill will become law.”

The Department for Education said: “We want more young people to have the opportunity to access a high-quality university education, and the measures proposed in the higher education and research bill are critical to making this possible.

“The bill does not take away the royal charters of any of our higher education institutions. What it does do is protect and enshrine the autonomy and academic freedom of these institutions in law. And it puts students at the heart of the system, with the Office for Students making universities rightly more accountable to their students so they get the best value for money.”