The battle over battels
Margaret Hodge, recently stated that the option of charging students top-up fees is being considered by the Government. She is the minister repsonsible for Universities. The Government ordered a review of student finance after it proved the most controversial policy of the last parliament. It is due to report this summer. The threat of top-up fees is of particular concern to students at Oxford. The Russell Group universities, to which Oxford belongs, although is often ignored by, are quick to point out the funding gap they sustain at present. Many leaders of the Russell Group have called for introduction of such fees and, in some cases, a free market of higher education.
But what does 'funding gap' actually mean? In Oxford, the funding gap has particular relevance to the activities of the Joint Committee on Fees and Charges. Basically, college income comes from four main sources: endowments income, fees, charges and outside money ('donations' and the like). The general mindset behind the expenditure decisions of a college is that education cost should be covered by fees, and accommodation by charges. The JCFC forecasts what's needed to ensure that fees and charges go up to meet inflation as it affects Oxford colleges and so continue to cover the cost of accommodation and education. The committee sets the Van Noorden index, which is different for fees and charges. It is basically there so that colleges break even.
The University no longer negotiates directly with the Government over the amount by which fees should be increased. Van Noorden is no more than a pointer for the government to know where the University should be at. It also serves to regulate the overseas (top-up) fee. This fee is, at present, about 15% higher than the per capita fee that the colleges receive for each student from the block grant Oxford gets from the government. In addition, the college fee is now also meant to be covered by the per capita amount of money to each home/EU student, and this too has been squeezed. And this is the funding gap. It's only overseas fees which actually render the colleges self sufficient.
Often, to break even fees-wise, colleges plunder their endowment income. For the poorer colleges there's another avenue for greater revenue to cover this funding gap. The Van Noorden index on charges concerns accomodation. Would it not be reasonable to expect colleges to raise charges by more than Van Noorden not just to improve their facilities but also if the funding from home/EU students is insufficient? St Hugh's, LMH, Wadham - all have recently had to protest against increases to student rents this year. Colleges may not be able to set fees at market rates, but they are free to vary charges as they wish. Students must live within six miles of Carfax and so have to endure extortionate rent rises. What is this if not top-up fees by stealth?
The Government's student finance review should really look at whether they legitimate this system through market fees or do the honourable thing and stamp it out. Colleges are slapping on massive increases to cover the funding gap because of the government's own failure to cough up where it should. Oxford, like London, has greater wage increas pressure. But loans and parental income do not go up by Van Noorden's 4.55%, let alone by 16% (St Hughs' projected rent rise). Top up fees are a grave concern for the future, but the strains of the missing buck are already being passed on to students.
Helena Puig-Larrauri is co-chair of the OUSU finance and funding committee
13th Jun 2002