It doesn't add up: Where Ed Miliband's gone wrong on tuition fees

 

Editorial
Friday 27 February 2015 21:14 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

It bodes ill that Ed Miliband should have deliberated so long over his policy on tuition fees and still come up with the wrong answer. One of the purposes of yesterday’s promise to cut fees from £9,000 a year to £6,000 a year is to capitalise on Liberal Democrat defectors who were dismayed by Nick Clegg’s breaking of his promise to oppose tuition fees.

Yet Mr Miliband is making a similar mistake. The Labour leader knows perfectly well, because Ed Balls, the shadow Chancellor, has told him, that the cut would benefit mainly those students who go on to well-paid jobs – because those in lower-paid jobs will never pay off their debts. But Mr Miliband has obviously decided that he does not care for this inconvenient truth, and that the symbolic value of being seen to cut student debt outweighs that of good progressive policy.

It would seem that Mr Balls has done what he can to rescue the situation, by imposing a higher interest rate on higher-paid graduates, but this cannot compensate for the basic unfairness of the pledge.

Mr Clegg went into the last election knowing that it was unrealistic to abolish tuition fees. Everyone who has looked at the main alternative, a graduate tax, has come away from meeting the reality-based universe rather worse for wear. He went ahead and paid the price.

Mr Miliband’s quest for the youth vote makes sense, but now he wants to take advantage of the Lib Dems’ embarrassment by promising something he knows perfectly well is a bad idea. Spending £2bn a year on future bankers is a poor priority for public spending. All that matters to the Labour leader, however, is that this promise, like Mr Clegg’s, looks good superficially, and, unlike Mr Clegg’s, can be delivered. Mr Miliband’s decision is a regressive step in both senses of the word.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in