Student visa plans rushed - MPs

26 July 2011 Last updated at 00:01 GMT Visa cuts: Ministers say there are too many bogus students who are working in the UK MPs have accused the government of rushing plans to curb student visas, saying they could harm the economy.

The Home Affairs Committee said that it was concerned that official figures indicated the restrictions could cost the economy ?3.4bn.

Officials estimate the measures will cut net migration by 230,000 by the end of the current parliament.

Immigration minister Damian Green said the changes were introduced after full and extensive consultation.

Ministers announced earlier this year they would cut the number of students visas as part of their target to bring net immigration down to tens of thousands by the end of the Parliament.

The plan involves tougher English language tests, greater scrutiny of private colleges and restrictions on when students and their dependents can work. Officials estimate that the plans will eventually reduce the number of students by 75,000 a year, down from roughly 250,000 a year at present.

Continue reading the main story Education: ?407m Health: ?339m Crime: ?92m UKBA investigations: ?44m Public services total: ?840m (Source: Home Office; Savings estimated over four years)The government's "impact assessment", an official document detailing the predicted financial effects of the changes, was published 12 weeks after the proposals were revealed.

That document said that the total costs of cutting student numbers could be ?3.5bn, but that would be partially offset by savings of ?1.1bn. MPs said they were concerned the policy was going ahead as planned, despite the potential economic costs.

Keith Vaz, chairman of the home affairs committee, said: "The Home Secretary's dismissal of the impact assessment is very disappointing. The government appears to be not only making policy without adequate immigration statistics, but also ignoring its own evidence. We reiterate the need for an immigration policy which is both evidence-based and does not adversely affect the British economy."

Immigration minister Damian Green said: "The changes were introduced after full and extensive consultation. The extent of the crisis which this government inherited in the immigration system meant that tough early action was necessary."

In a separate report, MPs on the Scottish Affairs Committee said that the student visa changes would "adversely and unduly" affect Scotland.

The Scottish Affairs Committee said: "These proposals will have a disproportionate effect in Scotland, both because of the disproportionate size of the sector in Scotland and as they are primarily designed to address a problem which is largely insignificant in Scotland.

"In doing so, these proposals risk compromising and diminishing not only the high standard of education provided by higher education institutions in Scotland but also threaten the valuable contribution of the international students who study at these institutions, to Scottish society."

View the original article here

Student choice

28 June 2011 Last updated at 20:01 GMT By Sean Coughlan BBC News education correspondent Students have been promised more consumer rights in the White Paper on universities After the thunder and lightning of the tuition fees battle, this future vision of higher education in England is an attempt to change the mood music.

Instead of images of riot police and pitched battles in Westminster, this higher education White Paper puts the government on the side of the student.

It's a way of turning the searchlights away from the political difficulties of tuition fees and budget cuts and training them on universities instead.

Consumer rights are being showcased. The market economy in higher education will mean students have to be treated as valued customers. Because, after all, they're paying the bill. As it says in the White Paper's title: Students at the Heart of the System.

If universities insist on charging the ?9,000 maximum tuition fees, the government is saying, students can demand value for money. What are the job prospects? Where is the new gym equipment?

And if the traditional universities are too expensive or too inflexible, then the government is ready to usher in a new breed of private providers, ready to break up the cosy insularity of the old order.

Even the title of "university", long guarded as an academic crown jewel, is going to be put under review.

Instability

But is the "customer is always right" the best starting point for a university system?

Extra places will be available for students getting grades AAB at A-level

University leaders are sounding underwhelmed about the way competition is going to work for student places.

They've already had to accept that the withdrawal of teaching budgets will mean the future viability of courses will depend on the fees paid by students.

This has raised concerns about instilling instability rather than competitive energy. If a subject falls out of fashion for a couple of years, should be it be abandoned? University departments can't be turned on and off like a tap.

And now they've been told that a quarter of places will be up for grabs.

Those at the top will be fighting for the high-flying students with grades AAB at A-level. And there will be another bidding war based on price - with about 8% of the remaining places to be for institutions charging less than ?7,500 per year.

Both the Russell Group, representing the most prestigious universities, and the Million+ group representing the new universities, are warning of unintended consequences from these attempts to push down prices and make universities compete.

Rather than wanting to compete for extra places, some university leaders talk privately about retreating to a smaller number of subject areas where they know they can attract a reliable number of students.

It's a move from the supermarket to the boutique.

There is also disquiet that pressure to encourage cheaper providers into the market, and lower the average fee cost, will have a disproportionate impact on some universities.

The overall number of places is going to remain constant, but opening up a quarter to competition means that someone is going to lose out.

Labour politicians have argued that the undeclared driving force of the White Paper is the need to create a mechanism that pushes down fee prices, when so many universities want to charge the maximum - which Labour says the government can't afford.

Social mobility

The 1994 Group, representing research-intensive universities, warned that the emphasis on student choice and lower-price providers left universities still uncertain about the future of much of their work.

Universities will have to compete for places, including with private providers

The group wanted to know where the details were on research and postgraduate students.

After the political train crash of the tuition fees for the Liberal Democrats, the coalition partners have been keen to emphasise the importance of social mobility.

It's a phrase that seems to get tagged onto every official statement about universities.

But in this White Paper, the balance seems to have been firmly tilted away from the social mobility side of the debate. Apart from a possible strengthening of the Office for Fair Access, there is little that's new.

Even the prospect of students applying after they receive their grades - once expected to be part of this White Paper - has been kicked into the long grass for future discussion.

The Bridge Group think-tank, which recently launched its campaign for social mobility through higher education with a speech from Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg, warned that the plans would have a "negative impact" on social mobility.

Meanwhile, a couple of free-market touchstones - allowing students to make early repayments on loans and extra places for individuals sponsored by private businesses and charities - both make an appearance in the White Paper.

Lifestyle experience

But what will it mean for students?

Universities will be keener than ever to attract their applications - and students will have much clearer information to help guide them through their decisions.

The freeing up of places also begins the process of questioning the idea that places at top institutions should be rationed.

It challenges the idea, deep-rooted in schools and universities, that good things are only ever available in small measures.

Why shouldn't talented youngsters be able to learn in institutions that reflect their potential and ability?

But these students will also be acutely aware that they will be paying three times as much as those studying at the same universities in the years before them. As student leaders have observed, it's consumer power with a hefty price tag.

There is also another often unspoken cultural change accompanying the idea of a consumer-driven university system.

Universities want to be places of ideas, ideals and academic excellence, but they also need to attract young people willing and able to pay up to ?9,000 per year, plus accommodation and living expenses.

Are universities going to be selling lifestyle and leisure experiences as much as the old-fashioned currency of learning? No one wants to see universities end up as expensive academic theme parks.

This White Paper promises to put the students into the driving seat of higher education - but it can't control where they are going to take it.

View the original article here

Student visa curbs could cost £2.4bn

13 June 2011 Last updated at 16:47 GMT Visa cuts: Ministers say there are too many bogus students who are working in the UK Plans to cut the number of foreign students arriving in the UK could cost ?2.4bn more than they save, according to Home Office estimates.

The figures show the total costs could be ?3.5bn, but that would be partially offset by savings of ?1.1bn.

Officials estimate the measures will cut net migration by 230,000 by the end of the current parliament.

A Home Office spokesman said the measures are aimed at cutting immigration abuse by bogus students.

In the detailed figures on the plan's impact, Home Office officials estimate that the plans could cost the economy between ?2.2bn and ?4.8bn before taking into account savings. They say their best estimate of the net effect is ?2.4bn.

The main costs would be an estimated ?3.2bn loss from fewer students arriving and working in the UK either during or after their course, and a further loss of ?170m in fees to educational institutions.

Savings would include an estimated ?840m saving to public services, such as the NHS, by having to deal with fewer immigrants and a further ?150m at the UK Border Agency.

Restrictions on numbers

Earlier this year, ministers said they would cut the number of student visas through greater scrutiny of private colleges and courses and tougher English language tests. There will also be restrictions on when students and their dependents can work.

Continue reading the main story Education: ?407m Health: ?339m Crime: ?92m UKBA investigations: ?44m Public services total: ?840m (Source: Home Office; Savings estimated over four years)The proposals are expected to eventually reduce the number of students by 75,000 a year, down from roughly 250,000 a year at present.

Officials say the figures are based on a worst-case scenario and it would be reasonable to assume that British workers would take jobs not being held by foreign students.

'Sledgehammer'

Immigration Minister Damian Green said: "We are radically reforming the immigration system to tackle abuse and bring net migration down to sustainable levels.

"These changes to the student visa system will create a system where every student coming to the UK attends a legitimate course at a legitimate institution.

"They will work alongside our other reforms of the work route and changes being planned for the settlement and the family routes."

But Pam Tatlow, chief executive of the Million+ think tank that represents new universities, said "the system did not need the government to take a sledgehammer to it", although it was necessary to crack down on bogus universities.

She said university leaders had been warning "for months" about the likely cost of the visa changes.

"At a time of economic difficulty, we should not be introducing reforms that will damage the UK or stop us attracting the talent and skills we need to rebuild our economy," she said.

Shadow home office minister Shabana Mahmood said the government's immigration policy was in "disarray".

The government had "succeeded in damaging the reputation of UK universities" and was not providing the UK Borders Agency with sufficient resources, she said.

"At the heart of Tory immigration policy is chaos, confusion and a failure to protect both the UK border and the economy," she said.

Taking action'

On Monday the government also released figures showing it had revoked the licences of 33 education providers since May 2010, saying they had failed to comply with the government's requirements.

These included Rockfield College, Torquay, which the Home Office said had claimed to be offering University of London degrees but could produce no evidence to prove it - although Martin Beech, the former principle of the college, told the BBC the claims were incorrect and the licence had been granted just two weeks before it was revoked.

In another case, the licence was revoked from St Georges College UK Ltd, which the Home Office said was unable to account for a "high proportion" of students who had applied for visas to study there, and the Waterloo School of English, which it said was "operating without premises".

Neither organisation could be reached for comment at the time of publication.

Another 32 providers have had their licences suspended.

Mr Green said the figures showed "that this government will not hesitate in taking action against educational providers who do not abide by our rules".

The government has long been trying to clamp down on so-called bogus colleges set up to get around visa rules under the pretence of offering courses.

View the original article here

Student places 'flea market' fear

12 May 2011 Last updated at 15:27 GMT By Sean Coughlan BBC News education correspondent Pricing and access to places are coming under scrutiny in the shift to a market-based university system Student leaders have warned that cut-price fees to fill empty university places could turn the admissions process into a "flea market".

It follows reports Universities Minister David Willetts had suggested some universities could reduce tuition fees in clearing.

The Office for Fair Access has warned against "unfair" late discounts.

The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills says any discount would have to be given to all students.

The department said if any last-minute tuition fee reduction were offered in clearing, it would also have to be retrospectively applied to all students with a place on the same course, to avoid a financial incentive to delay applications.

The forthcoming White Paper on higher education would "include proposals to prevent unfair discounting", the department added.

'Confusing messages'

Mr Willetts had told the Independent newspaper some universities could reduce tuition fees to attract students during clearing, when students who have missed out on A-level grades or who are making late applications are matched up with the vacancies remaining on degree courses.

Most universities in England want to charge the maximum ?9,000 for some or all courses, but the minister's comments suggest this could be revised down if there is a lack of demand for places.

The NUS president, Aaron Porter, said: "Ministers are at risk of turning the university application process into a flea market, exposing students and their families to unnecessary panic and grotesque unfairness.

"Efforts to force an unworkable market on higher education are already backfiring."

Pam Tatlow, chief executive of the Million+ group of new universities, said: "Ministers are giving out confusing messages that fees may change at clearing.

"Of course adjusting prices is common in a market, but universities will be very cautious about adopting this approach which is counter to the guidance issued by the the Office of Fair Access [Offa]."

Offa, the watchdog for fair access to university, has told universities "to bear in mind that discounting late in the application cycle is unfair to applicants who chose not to apply to you on the basis of the fee and support package you advertised earlier".

It added late discounts could work against poorer applicants, who would be more likely to wait for a price cut, with the risk of limited choices and of missing out altogether.

A Department for Business, Innovation and Skills spokesman said: "The government agrees with Offa that late discounting, including during clearing, must not lead to unfairness.

"As the Offa guidance makes clear, any late fee discounts or improved financial support would have to be offered to all eligible applicants, including those who already have an offer, so that the system is fair."

Shadow universities minister, Gareth Thomas, said: "This is another back of an envelope policy from David Willetts - students should be able to choose the course which is right for them, not the one that comes at the right price. You can't treat university like a lastminute.com holiday."

The White Paper setting out how this market-based university system will operate is expected next month.

Earlier this week Mr Willetts was embroiled in a row about whether the creation of extra university places, not publicly-funded, could provide a backdoor for wealthy students.

View the original article here