Nick Clegg cornered by Oxford graduate over soaring tuition fees
Posted by Ellee on Nov 17, 2010 in Blog, university | 9 commentsA week after violent protests by students over the proposed tripling of university tuition fees, Nick Clegg was cornered by Oxford graduate Portia Murray who asked him to defend the promise Liberal Democrats made not to increase fees in their 2010 election manifesto.
He gives his answer on this video, appearing uncomfortable at times, and states that as his party is not in power, they are unable to keep their pledge, and that Lord Browne’s proposal is the fairest option after considering all other possibilities.
At the end of the video, Portia explains that she felt compelled to ask Nick Clegg about tuition fees as he had failed to turn up to two planned meetings in the last month with students in Oxford to discuss this, as had Vince Cable.
Nick Clegg was speaking at an event for the Political Studies Association/Hansard Society where he gave the annual lecture on parliamentary reform.
… and a considerable number of the indigenous students too, Ellee.
I wonder how many times that excuse of “we didn’t win” will be used to dodge questions. @Sally I graduated about four years ago and I can assure you if I had spent most of my time partying I would not have a 1st Class Honours degree. I lived with a few students who did go out at lot and they spent the next few years repeating the modules they failed.
Why should free edcation for all our children be something we should prize and pay for? Well why should we pay for illegal wars when our men are dying for nothing? Why should the poor hurt when the government could simply make Vodaphone pay it’s tax bill? Why have our EU contributions increased? Why was the cap on our EU contributions ever surrendered and Cameron give the EU even MORE money? Why should we bail Ireland out? Why should the Olympics come to Britain? Why does Cameron want to host the World Cup? It’s a mystery.
NC should stick to his principles
The problem was caused by the insistance that as many people should go to university as possible.
University was meant to be intellectually elitist. Only the top few percent able to get in. The rest were then offered vocational courses and apprenticeships.
well said diaffected, why should just the unemployed, the sick the single parents and the low paid take all the misery lets face it students seem to spend most of there time partying
Sally,
You seem to forget that the coalition has cut the EMA allowance which encouraged millions of 16-18 year olds to stay on in education. Will you be happy now that they are more likely to enter the (un)employment market with fewer skills? As for university students your rose tinted view is far from the truth. Granted on any given night you will see groups of students partying but an increasing number are from poorer families and have to work in low paid jobs to feed the education habbit. Your support for this policy shows your opposition to self-improvement.
Nick should have told little Portia the realities of life when a country owes SO much money we all have to take a share of the misery , even little students .
why on earth do these politicials have to look so sheepish, just give people the straight facts and then get on with the job in hand ie sorting out this diabolical bl–dy mess we are in thanks to both 13 years of New Labour and the banks .
Agreed on problems in part created by the banks and deregulation under New Labour/Tories.
But it is also due to the excessive borrowing, lust for house sale profits and general consumerism that most middle classes revelled in during the 90s and 00s. Of which, most of the these middle class debt merchants went to Uni, and most went for free. Our generation must take the blame too.
Why should these students take the hit for something they did not cause and could not vote against?