Before the 2010 changes in the tuition fees regime, you openly argued for a switch to a graduate tax. Do you regret introducing a tuition fee system which is effectively a graduate tax in all but name, but which is almost as costly as the old system (and may well prove in the next few years to be more costly - either way, it will be borderline) when the stated objective of the new system was to cut costs & make savings which have patently not been made; and which massively underestimated repayment levels, which will already necessitate further changes to the system, probably early in the next parliament? As such, do you accept that if and when further changes are made to the system of student fees (probably involving students paying yet more money, and involving less favourable terms for repayments, with the various "progressive" concessions eliminated), it will be as a result of your failure to have come up with a system that is both sustainable and fair?

Showing 7 reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Galen, if that is your response then I’m afraid you’ve missed the point entirely and haven’t read the question from Seth. This is about the fact that the system cannot be sustained through its current funding model.
  • Just like the climb down over the privatisation of the student loan book, I hope one day to see a climb down over this disastrous policy!
  • Joshua Dixon
    tagged this with good question 2015-01-15 23:50:08 +0000
  • Simon Radford
    tagged this with good question 2015-01-14 22:50:04 +0000
  • Naomi Smith
    tagged this with good question 2015-01-14 21:56:46 +0000
  • Seth R A Thevoz
    published this page in Question and Answer With Vince Cable 2015-01-14 21:12:16 +0000