Reflections on the NUS “day of action” and the student movement

The following post is an opinion article by a Merseyside Network Activist. We endeavor to publish a a wide range of views from the student movement. If you want to have something published on the blog, then get in touch!

On Wednesday education activists attempted organise a rally outside the guild of students in opposition to privatisation, as called by the NUS nationally. A relatively high profile for the event was built on campus through lecture shoutouts, student media, thousands of leaflets and ring-rounds of known activists.

However the action itself was an unmitigated flop. Very few students turned up, apart from election candidates and student activists. Even most of the ‘usual suspects’ at demonstrations were conspicuous by their absence. In lieu of the rally, signatures were collected on the VC pledge petition, and a planned panel discussion afterwards became more of an open meeting about how to build the movement, with around 20 in attendance.

While some of the blame for this can be laid at the door of the NUS for failing to raise much national profile for the event or on the low number of activists involved in building the action, the event clearly calls for a reassessment of tactics and strategy in education activism on campus.

The strength of the week of action was the exercise of communicating with students via lecture shout outs, leaflets and petitions, the politics of which were widely very well received. The weakness was the attempt force street action into existence, when plainly the political climate was not suitable for such action.

The day demonstrates the need for a radical strategy to combat the government’s vision of education, instead of reproducing the “day of action” or occupation tactics repeatedly in hope that something can grow from that. The effectiveness of these tactics, when executed in isolation, decreases with each reproduction, and students know this.

Student action has a history of rapid escalation, followed just as quickly by collapse of that action. The struggles around fees and cuts have been no exception.

The key moving forward is organisation. The free education / anti-cuts /anti-privatisation group on campus needs to be invigorated and plan its tactics to suit the political context. The current government attacks require a more nuanced response than just telling students that x is bad and they need to come stand outside the guild to oppose x.

In discussion after the aborted rally, two main action points were brought up. The first is that the campaign must be as accessible as possible. Leaflets, facebook events and posters must be openly worded, to bring in the widest layers of students. It must be remembered that coming up to a meeting in the guild on your own can be daunting, and that people may feel they need some prior knowledge of the subject if the meeting flyer is poorly worded.

The group can should aim to enter a dialogue with students on the situation with government policy, and build political consciousness. One suggestion was lunchtime meetings/talks on government policy, in a similar manner to other societies on campus.

Secondly, the complex and sprawling nature of government reforms need to kept tabs on. Activists must be able to get a firm handle on the exact details of government and university level policy, which is changing every month seemingly. It has been suggested a reading group of student activists and journalists be formed to look over policy documents and university financial reports, to avoid ‘flying blind’.

A final consideration is that activism around the politics of higher education has been increasingly divided into the top-down ‘come clean’ action of NUS activists on the one hand, and increasingly isolated and self contained bands of the radicalised left on the other. Both camps struggle to attain even the most basic grass roots engagement with broader layers of students, despite the political messages of both receiving high levels of sympathy with students. Part of this is due to the wider political context we find ourselves in, but I contend there is no reason why the student left cannot organise with Labour students, NUS activists and liberal students hostile to the government reforms.

If some of the above action points can be carried out by activists to some extent, it will mean next time there is a call to action, the organisation is in place for that action to be as broad, radical and effective as it can be. This is particularly pertinent  given that the NUS has  just voted for another national demonstration in London against the government’s policy in HE. The London march will be futile and poorly attended unless we can dramatically improve campus organisation. In my judgement, this should be started with a big presence of campus during freshers week and an open well planned event at the beginning of the year that opens a dialogue with students, as opposed to subjecting attendees to speeches from a panel.

The next semester is a critical point. Either we reinvigorate the struggle for free education open to all and improve participation, or we may as well not bother with the 5 hour coach ride down to London.

- James Margeson, 3rd year Geology Student

What do you think? Let us know in the comments.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Justice for Alfie Meadows, drop the charges!

 

Alfie Meadows was part of the 9th December 2010 student demonstration against the tripling of tuition fees after becoming passionately involved in the campaign at Middlesex University to save his Philsophy department (now closed down). When Alfie protested on 9th December he recieved a life threatening injury, he was struck so hard on the head with a Police baton that he needed emergency brain surgery. Not only has Alfie had to go through the ordeal of nearly dying after demonstrating, as well as having to transfer universities once his department is closed at the end of this year, but now Alfie is being charged with violent disorder.

Essentially, Alfie Meadows has to clear his name through the courts before he can continue charges against the police for their actions on 9th December.

Aliz Alizadeh, a friend of Alfie’s from Middlesex University writes, “What happened to Alfie could have happened to each one of us who said no to the commercialisation of education, to shutting down of philosophy departments and giving their resources to Finance and Management departments, to a future of £70,000 debt for a BA degree. The outcome of Alfie’s trial will have consequences for the future of protesting in this country as a whole. Stand shoulder by shoulder with Alfie. He is the generic name of today’s “protestor”. We are all Alfie Meadows.”

Read more on Defend the Right to Protest blog

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

National Day of Action to Defend Education

Image
Meet 11am in University Square for rally

12-1.30pm Panel discussion:
How can we respond to the HE White Paper?
International Lounge

————————————————————————————-

What is it all about?

Everyone knows that last year the government voted to increase tuition fees to £9,000. However, this does not mean there will be any more money being spent on education, because at the same time they cut the central teaching funding by 80%, and in Arts and Humanities, 100%. All the new fees are doing are making up for the cut. Anyone who thinks that this means that this is the end of the story is wrong. The government is not just making Higher Education far more expensive for students, it is drastically altering the way it works:

Had you heard…

That to avoid having to lend out the huge new tuition fees, the government is placing huge pressure on most institutions to reduce the fees they are charging, because they don’t want to have to lend them out. This might sound like something good for students, but actually means, now that central government funding has been slashed, less being spent on education.

For the same reason, they are encouraging universities to cut their bursary programmes and instead put the money into ‘fee waivers’ – which means no money which actually helps you fund yourself while you are studying, and only a fractional reduction in the colossal debt you graduate with.

Did you have any idea…

That the new system of recruitment quotas is going to make it much more difficult for students who don’t fit the standard ‘straight out of sixth form with A-levels’ mould to get onto degree programmes at ‘top’ institutions. Many of our students have come to university from access courses, vocational qualifications, foundation programmes and do just as well as those from more ‘traditional’ university-going backgrounds. The changes to university recruitment pose a massive threat to that kind of route into HE.

The Guild are taking part in the day of action to try and kick-start the discussion as to how the student movement can respond to these changes

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Student loans – campaign

This post is from Andrew McGettigan’s “Critical Education” blog. The campaign is backed by Education Activist Network and Campaign for the Public University.

Later this month (March), I will finally pay off the student loans I took out in the 1990s.  These were maintenance loans: I graduated before the introduction of what were called ‘topup’ fees (at first £1 000 per year), and amounted to just under £5 000 when I finished.  It has taken me nearly 14 years to repay that debt.

I enjoyed the protection of the Consumer Credit Act, a low interest rate set in statute, and a generous repayment threshold.  In 2009/10, my interest rate was -0.4% – that’s right, I received credit on my outstanding balance.  This is because interest was calculated at RPI minus 1 percentage point and RPI had been 0.6% in September 2008.

In 2001, the repayment threshold was £20 696, by 2005 it was £22 764.  I was thus able to defer repayment.  Once the threshold was crossed, 60 equal monthly repayments were made to clear the outstanding balance.  Repayments were tied directly to the amount borrowed.

The advantages and protections of these pre-98 loans persisted even after the balances were sold to the company that became Thesis Servicing.

Since 1998, we have seen many changes in the loan scheme – all affecting new cohorts.  The most obvious is the introduction of income contingent repayment loans which means that the monthly repayments are relative to income, rather than initial amount borrowed.  The original debt taken can limit the total amount repaid, though it is more likely for most that the debt will be written off (after 25 years after graduation for those with recent loans, 30 years for those taking out the new loans in 2012/13).

What concerns me is not simply the complexity of income contingent repayment loans, but that many of the protections I enjoyed have been removed.

The new loans are not covered by the Consumer Credit Act and interest rates can be set at the discretion of the relevant Secretary of State using secondary instruments, as can the other details of the scheme, such as the repayment threshold (and percentage determining level of repayment).  Although the current government has stated its intention to set real rates of interest (ie above inflation) it has given itself powers to set rates much higher than that.

The 2011 Education Act, which received Royal Assent last November, Education Act now allows governments to set up to market rates of interest on student loans using statutory instruments (rates must be “lower than those prevailing on the market, or no higher than those prevailing on the market, where the other terms on which such loans are provided are more favourable to borrowers than those prevailing on the market.”)

Having recognised this lack of statutory and legal protection, what do the terms and conditions of the student loan agreements say?

The clause that currently appears in the 2012/13 “STUDENT LOANS – A GUIDE TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS” allows future administrations great leeway to change terms and conditions.

“You must agree to repay your loan in line with the regulations that apply at the time the repayments are due and as they are amended. The regulations may be replaced by later regulations.” (p. 8)

It is clear that the loans are not merely income contingent, but future-policy contingent. 

With such long lifetimes, much higher debt and higher interest rates, this kind of contingency is unacceptable.

Borrowers should not face such a potential liability.  Especially when we recall that student loans can be sold they can be sold to third parties without consultation and without consent (2008 Sale of Student Loans Act).

I believe that individuals should sign up to loan agreements where the terms and conditions are fixed for the lifetime of the loans (interest rate taper, repayment threshold and percentage of income repaid above the threshold).  Future governments may be required to change the terms of the scheme for new cohorts, but those who have taken out already loans should not face the risk of a future government extracting additional levels of repayment.

Who can say what the economy will look like in 15-20 years’ time?  With such high levels of government, corporate and household debt in the UK, it is difficult to be confident. Might we in future face problems similar to that of Italy and Greece?  If so, we should avoid having a class of citizens, graduates, from whom a technocratic administration can tap extra cash.

Whether such a scenario is likely or unlikely is beside the point – the possibility should be excluded as far as practicable.  It would be too easy for a future government, faced with pressing financial difficulties, to return to this group of citizens and extract more repayments from them without the need for primary legislation.

Providing additional protection is the right and proper approach to a generation who now face much higher fees and much higher loan debts.

If you agree, please sign the e-petition here, Set fixed repayment terms in student loan agreements.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Posters for UoL against fees and cuts meetings

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UoL Occupation 2011 Part 3 – Update

The occupation of the university has finished.

Thanks for all messages of solidarity, congratulations to all those who participated in yesterday’s strike, and good luck to all ongoing occupations around the country.

After occupying part of the ULT building overnight, we were unable to secure access to the occupation. This meant that the occupation was unable to be sustained.

We made the decision to end the occupation on the condition that our initial 10 demands will be responded to in writing by the Vice Chancellor on Monday. This response will be published as soon as it is recieved.

Everyone is invited to a meeting on Wednesday 7th December at 5.30pm in the Guild Courtyard, where we will discuss the lessons learned from this action and where the student movement should go from here.

NO TO CUTS! FREE EDUCATION! NO TO PRIVATISATION! FAIR PENSIONS FOR ALL!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UoL Occupation 2011 Part 2 – Update

 University of Liverpool Occupation 2011 Part 2 SOLIDARITY NEEDED TOMORROW (THURSDAY) MORNING 9 TO 10AM OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSITY LECTURE THEATRE BUILDING!

Hi Everyone!

This is an update on our Student Occupation of the University of Liverpool, the 2nd one of the year.

We are in the University Lecture Theatre Building – on the top floor. We have spoken to security and the facilities manager about our stay tonight – they know we are here, have acknowledged our demands and are accommodating us this evening.

The Vice Chancellor and the Chief Operating Officer (who we spoke to the last time) are in China, visiting the UoL campus over there. We have been informed that our demands are being passed on to them by e-mail this evening.

Guild President Maev joined us earlier to show her support and contribute to the discussion with management.

Thank you for all messages of support and solidarity, as well as various food parcels to keep us going!

We have been having a discussion on the purpose of the occupation as well as our next step. As the building is closed no one else is able to join at the present moment. We would ask that everyone come down to the building at 10am (or earlier) tomorrow morning as we have been informed that there is a careers fair for prospective students. This would be a great opportunity to talk about our aims and actions with others, and as a show of support for the occupation. All welcome!

We have also arranged a meeting with the facilities manger at 9.30am in the morning – another reason to come down to the building.

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments