Browse > Home / UK Politics / Ed Miliband’s mickey mouse degree plan

| Subcribe via RSS

Ed Miliband’s mickey mouse degree plan

June 27th, 2010 Posted in UK Politics by

Labour leadership candidate Ed Miliband has joined his more improbable rival Ed Balls in backing a National Union of Students campaign that seeks to replace Labour’s tuition fees policy with a 20 year graduated graduate supplement on income tax.

NUS graduate tax

If adopted and supported by a future Labour government this would be a highly retrograd step, moving Labour back towards the economics of punitive socialism and away from the economically liberal centre-ground.

Graduate taxes per se are not automatically an entirely awful proposal. If proportional and used as a mechanism of loan repayment, i.e. the actual cost of your tuition, there is little difference between them and the current loans for fees. In that context the argument is about which system is more efficient to administer, and how you maintain university funding in the transition between them. The difference is so slight that most people consider it not worth bothering.

That though is not the NUS/Miliband proposal. They instead would seek to impose a unknowable future cost of education on students based on future earnings. Their proposal is an attack on aspiration and success.

These graduate taxes create perverse incentives. If for example you are bright, ambitious and want to work in medicine you have a fair expectation you will be in the top quintile for wage earners very soon after university.

For you the grad tax is very likely to be much more expensive than fees and loans today. You would be wise then to consider study outside England. And that doesn’t just mean going to the US or mainland Europe. An England-only grad-tax would create incentives for a massive boom in elite education in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

Labour’s scheme would incentivise a flight of self-assured, self-financed talent from English universities. That talent would then pay less for their education than late developers, or those with few resources up front. Hardly a progressive outcome, nor one good for the English economy and universities.

Worse, after university the scheme incentivises working abroad for twenty years out of the reach of the Revenue.

The NUS have entirely failed to model the impact of tax avoidance on their scheme.

It also begs the question why a bright American should be able to go to Oxford at cost via loans, then work in the UK without a tax bill whilst a native is denied that option. Surely this is discrimination?

But if you address that by making the scheme an option versus real cost loans, rates at the bottom would need to be raised or the scheme would fail to finance universities. Either way, unless the NUS are proposing to put a wall around England the price and market for university education will still exist, it will just be denied to the English.

At the other end of the scale, those with limited income expectations either through lack of ability or an ambition to work in low paid employment, are incentivised. Their demand for university education would go up.

Ed Miliband’splanwould then unwittingly create comparative advantage for the English university sector in providing mickey mouse degrees to marginal candidates.

And this the man that until recently was leading plans to encourage UK green-tech through building the science base. Good luck with that when the engineers are studying in Germany, and Cambridge is leading the world in homeopathy.

In the middle throughout the 20 year life of the ‘loan’ the bands in the tax would create small disincentives through high marginal tax rates. In recessions people might find themselves paying a higher graduate tax if their wages fall less than the average. It’s a crazily complex system, and this is before arguments about credit-based allocations of cost, employer contributions, and what counts as qualifying education as opposed to vocational training.

The advantage of fees, other than transparency and simplicity is that they encourage people to seriously consider the value of higher education.

It is precisely that cold market-discipline that enrages the left. They believe those capable of going to university are incapable of making a financial judgement no more complex than taking out a mortgage. Or rather the NUS think students shouldn’t have to think. Patronising, authoritarian and quaint, but somewhat self-defeating in an education system.

Their main worry, worth considering, is that some people who might be capable of benefiting from university choose not to due to their fear of debt. This is not an empty worry. Financial risk-aversion is more prevalent amonst thosefrom lower income backgrounds and at the margins can mean able children choose not to go to university.

But this is an education not system issue, and one that can be narrowly targeted at the small group in question for very little cost. We need to ensure people have the tools to make sensible investment decisions by the time they leave school, not continue to treat them like children throughout their lifetimes. Particularly not potential graduates.

Making an entire system, overwhelming used by those that can afford to pay free at the point of use to combat a marginal disincentive at the margins is ridiculous and wasteful. A criticism that applies equally to the Liberal Democrat’s current opposition to any fees or repayment at all.

The NUS has always been a clique of trainee Labour politicians unrepresentative of either student or public opinion. If this is the kind of interest group Ed Miliband feels will help win him the Leadership of the Labour Party you must wonder just how far left they have gone and will continue to drift during this Parliament. It can only bode well for the longevity of the Coalition.

13 Responses to “Ed Miliband’s mickey mouse degree plan”

  1. tim leunig Says:

    Loans allow univs to charge different amounts, either per year, or in total, by having courses of different lengths.
    Loans give a stronger connection between student and univ, since the money goes to the univ, not the state.
    Loans and fees give univs money now, when it can be used to improve the student’s tuition, rather than long after the student has left.
    Grad tax means that European students would pay nothing – which is a pretty costly thing for the exchequer.

    A big q is how we should finance MSc degrees, for which there is currently very little finance available of any sort.

  2. bajimba Says:

    furthermore it is likely that those attending an FE college would continue to pay fees in the same way as before. A plumber working in london who does lots of anti-social hours could easily earn more than plenty of graduates. Why should they not contribute to the cost of their education in the same way as university graduates if this was the case? A graduate tax would create lots of illogical outcomes like this.

    How would the government tax uk citizens who settle in another country after graduating? This will surely become more and more common in the future

  3. Tom Papworth Says:

    Good article, Andy.

    Tim makes some good comments, but his final question (“how we should finance MSc degrees”) interests me. I paid my own fees for my MA, though I suspect that these were still massivly subsidised. Post-Graduate qualificaitons should not be subsidised by the State at all (though employers and others might wish to do so).

    Bajimba makes an equally good point about FE. There is no reason why FE and HE should be funded differently.

  4. Charlie Says:

    There is a shortage of engineers and scientists. Free tuition for all those who achieve 4 Grade A “A” levels in Maths, Further Maths, Physics, Chemistry , Biology and Geology who read a science or engineering at university and become charteredor a medical doctor Move 75% of expenditure from arts and humanities to science and engineering. India and china are spending far more money on science and engineering than humanities.

  5. tim leunig Says:

    What is the evidence that we are short of engineers and scientists, as opposed to (say) economists? People often say it, but I would like to see the evidence.

  6. Charlie Says:

    tim leunig – talk to employers .

  7. Roger Says:

    Charlie it is the first time that I have seen this in print and it is something that I have long thought was a good idea. A modern economy like ours must be based on innovation and the ability to exploit those ideas.The two sectors that can do this are the Engineers and Scientists. I would charge no fees for anyone wishing to do a Degree in one of these subjects, but they must be genuine intelectually challenging not mickey mouse ones. If we are to reset our economy with a real manafacturing base then this is the road to go. If you want to read Angl-Saxon great, but you will have to pay for the privelege.We cannot afford in the real world to keep turning out the volume of Graduates in certain subjects when we as a Country only need a few every year.

  8. Slip ring Says:

    What is the evidence that we are short of engineers and scientists, as opposed to (say) economists? People often say it, but I would like to see the evidence.

  9. srmsofttech28 Says:

    How about GUTS? Nah, just kidding. You really don’t need unbridled courage to be a successful online income affiliate. But, how about SKILL?
    Yep! That’s your absolute BIGGIE, the one affiliate program income attribute you cannot do without, because, more than
    anything else today, online income acquisition demands that you have specific attack plans for your advertising campaigns.
    Keywords are the life blood of online income affiliate advertising and sales.SMARTS – that’s the name of today’s online income affiliate game.
    You already have “smarts?” Good, that gives you a head start. Yet, the catch is, knowing exactly when, how, where, and what strategies to implement
    with the God-given smarts you possess.You can look in the author’s box for free tips and tools to get yourself lined up for a proper start or continuance
    in your online income affiliate endeavors.

    a href=””click here/a

  10. slip ring Says:

    What is the evidence that we are short of engineers and scientists, as opposed to (say) economists? People often say it, but I would like to see the evidence.
    I think so!

  11. army mos Says:

    Great blog, I’m going to spend more time learning about this topic

  12. slip ring connector Says:

    write well, from slip ring connector

  13. notch filter Says:

    I was examining some of your blog posts on this site and I believe this internet site is really instructive! Retain putting up.